Traditional luxury shops seem to have a natural talent in creating an atmosphere of old luxury. From a semiotic perspective, those shops use a complex texture of different signs for both creating a traditional luxury myth and addressing specific customers who are looking for this brand identity. In our study, we compile a semiotic concept for analysing a shop design which seeks to reflect old luxury and traditional heritage. While the desire for semiotic analysis in the marketing and management domain is increasing, theoretical approaches and case study analyses too often remain superficial regarding the possibilities of semiotic approaches. Our study aims to present a complex analysing concept to fill this gap and apply it to the field of luxury brand management consequently. While semiotic research discusses many different approaches up to today, Peirce’s philosophy may be still regarded as one of the most complex concepts which allows the most precise analysis and classification of meaningful signs. On the basis of his three trichotomies and their major corresponding subcategories we analysed a traditional luxury shop design, discussing the different signs that produce simple to very complex structures of meaning with respect to approaches of creating a mythical frame. The results of our study reflect the need of a shop design using different signs with a complex texture of meaning to support the idea of traditional luxury. From the perspective of communication theories, the semiotic patterns which are presented in our findings create a narrative frame which eventually leads to a specific myth of old luxury branding. While Peirce’s philosophy offers a complex approach, contemporary studies in marketing and management only use the surface of semiotics. Our study may contribute a rather distinguished methodology, though further research will be necessary to apply semiotics more reasonably not only for fashion and luxury but for several fields of interests in marketing and management research. For brand managers in companies with a traditional heritage, creating myths and classical frames must be of core interest. Our study offers several implications of using semiotic signs to create an aesthetic and old fashioned shop atmosphere. As original values, our study compiles a complex semiotic concept to analyse mythical framing in traditional luxury stores. Our results present specific possibilities of creating specific meaning with respect to the need of representing brand identity within a shop. However, the concept may be also valid for other analyses in marketing and management such as advertising and brand semiotics in general.

This study sets out to examine how status consumption and prominence of brand markings influence consumer’s desire to purchase luxury fashion goods. Significant findings include emotional value’s powerful influence over purchase intention of luxury goods, and the empirical differences observed between two levels of brand prominence.

In the advent a new market that didn’t exist a few years ago, the total sales in wearable devices could top $32.2 billion by 2019, up from $18.9 billion last year (Kharif 2015). The most anticipated new device is the Apple Smart Watch which has a function to detect pulse rate and send messages using voice commands (There is a gold version for $10,000). Further, Tag Heuer recently announces a partnership with Intel and Google to produce the world's first luxury Android Wear Smartwatch. Given that the high potential to do some research in this area (i.e., luxury brand alliances), little research examines luxury brand strategy and especially luxury ingredient branding (IB) strategy. This study explores the evaluations of and attitudes to the host luxury brand after IB alliances. An ingredient branding (IB), the incorporation of parent brand with another brand as ingredient (Desai and Keller 2002), allows two brands to have better market competitiveness (Simonin and Ruth 1998). The IB parent brand is the “host,” the main product, and the “ingredient,” a component that is integrated into the host. For example, Dell computer (the host) has a co-branding relationship with Intel as the ingredient (Intel, 2006). Both brands enjoy the benefits of the relationship that include mutual cooperation and knowledge sharing. The IB strategy has valuable benefits for both brands. For example, the host (i.e., Dell) may enjoy an enhanced market reputation, while the ingredient brand (i.e., Intel) may benefit by reducing the probability of entry by competitors. Further, Dell receives a preferential price from Intel, while Intel enjoys a stable and long-term customer. Current research on ingredient branding examines the determinants of IB success (Desai and Keller 2002) as well as the feedback effect on a parent brand subsequent to an IB alliances (Rodrigue and Biswas 2004). IB feedback effect involves changes in consumer attitudes toward the original parent brand resulting from the IB alliances. Extant research in this topic shows positive effects of IB strategy for the host (e.g., Balachander and Ghose 2003). However, some other research also shows that negative effects for the host caused by an IB alliances (e.g., Votolato and Unnava 2006). This equivocal findings suggest that there are some other conditions generating positive and negative effects of IB strategy for the host. Thus, the purpose of our study is to examine the conditions under which IB strategy influences negatively or positively to the host. We will focus uncovering this research gap on finding the conditions that influence positively or negatively to the host. Using ingredient brand strategy in luxury brand, we will examine how the fit of the host (Tag Heuer) and the ingredients (Google and Intel) influences the host’s brand attitude. We assume that the product fit (i.e., the host current product category: Tag Heuer watch vs the final product after IB alliances: Tag Heuer Android Wear Smartwatch) may positively influence the host’s brand attitude while the brand fit (i.e., luxury brand: Tag Heuer vs non-luxury brand: Google and Intel) may negatively influence the host’s brand attitude. Further, we will examine the role of Brand Engagement in Self-Concept (BESC) as a moderator in this relationship (Sprott, Czellar, and Spangenberg 2009).

Over the past decades, researchers devoted considerable attention to the impact of store environments on shopping behavior (e.g. Baker et al., 2002; Kotler, 1973; Turley & Milliman, 2000). More recent, practitioners and academics alike have argued that a greater challenge for brands is the creation and enhancement of compelling shopping experiences along, and beyond, the entire path-to-purchase (Interbrand, 2014; Shankar et al., 2011). In a luxury brand context, where the shopping experience is a significant motivator for purchases (Yoon, 2013), the interaction of multiple retail environments greatly affect consumer behavior towards the brands. Accordingly, brand experiences is created at both ends of the marketing supply chain, by brand manufacturers and retailers. Yet, although research has developed fruitful areas for new perspectives on the relationships between manufacturers and retailers (Ganesan et al., 2009), the vast majority of existing research predominantly focuses on consumer response to brand experiences with respect to manufacturer cues (Dolbec & Chebat, 2013; Tynan et al., 2010), store cues (Baker et al., 2002), or retail settings (Möller & Herm, 2013). The evolving business world needs to implement more comprehensive and holistic approaches (Choi et al., 2014), where integrated strategies must emerge. The objective of this study is to present an explanation of luxury brand experiences across manufacturer and retailer’s settings. By overviewing the literature on the interaction between brand management, store atmospherics, and consumer behavior, and applying qualitative methods, the authors provide relevant insights for academics and practitioners toward a more comprehensive understanding of the luxury brand experience. Customer experience and luxury brands In the field of contemporary marketing, customer experience has been defined as a construct which “encompasses the total experience and may involve multiple retail channels” (Verhoef et al., 2009, p. 32). It includes the search, purchase, consumption, and after-sale phases of the experience. In a holistic brand perspective, this definition enlightens the key role of luxury brands in delivering the same brand promise and brand message across each connection between the consumer and the brand. Among the characteristics of luxury brands, consumers are willing to pursue luxury products as these products provide psychological benefits rather than functional benefits (Kapferer, 1997). Further, luxury brands are associated with status, wealth, exclusion, and pride (McFerran et al., 2014). As result, strong experiences with luxury brands derive when consumers develop deep emotional bonds with brands (Grisaffe & Nguyen, 2011). From a marketing perspective, consumers that develop deep emotional relationships with a brand have a lot of positive and strong associations (Yoo et al., 2000), such as the perception of the brand uniqueness and inimitability, and loyalty to the brand. However, when it comes to analyze the brand experience, research confers a conceptually different meaning from other brand constructs. According to Brakus et al. (2009), brand experience has distinct dimensions from evaluative, affective, and associative brand constructs, such as brand attachment, brand attitudes, customer delight, and brand personality. The concept of brand experience encompasses multiple dimensions, which refer to the sensorial, affective, intellectual, and behavioral sphere (Zarantonello & Schmitt, 2009). More specifically, the intrinsic concept of luxury brands as hedonic products with high symbolic value, holistically incorporate manufactures and retailers in fulfilling these various dimensions of brand experience. By assuring consistency across the manufacturer and retailer’s settings of the luxury brand, customer experiences evoke the exclusivity of the brand and transfer the authenticity of the brand message. From a consumer’s perspective, consumers reach brand authenticity when they perceive both the internal consistency, which focuses on maintaining the luxury brand standard and style, honoring its heritage, preserving its essence, and avoiding its exploitation, and the external consistency, which pertains to appearances and claims of the brand (Choi et al., 2014). Similarly, consumers tend to perceive the exclusivity of the luxury brand when they encounter consistent experiences across multiple brand touch points. Accordingly, in the experiential view, the principle of consistency and contiguity proposes that sensations, imagery, feelings, pleasures, and other symbolic or hedonic components are paired together to create mutually evocative consumer response (Holbrook & Hirschmann, 1982). The integration between the marketing and consumer’s perspectives suggests that luxury brands create and maintain powerful customer experiences when there is consistency across the manufacturer and retailer’s environments. However, in the landscape of luxury brand management, the conceptualization of customer experience requires the understanding of how consumers respond to luxury brand messages. This investigation is particularly important when examining brand experiences emerged in the manufacturer versus retailer physical environment. Existing literature on brand experiences, retail atmospherics, and luxury brands cannot fill the gap we address. Prior studies aiming to investigate the brand experience have analyzed the phenomenon of this construct from a theoretical perspective (Verhoef et al., 2009), case study analysis (Payne et al., 2009), or focused only on the direct relationship between manufacturer and consumer (e.g. Dolbec et al., 2013; Kim, 2009). For example, Dolbec et al. (2013) have studied in-store brand experiences on consumer response to flaghship vs. brand stores, and highlighted how their study suffers from not considering the continuity between current, previous and future experiences. Regarding the impact of store atmospherics and retailer’s settings on customer experiences (e.g. Baker et al. 2002; Bloch, 1995), research has found that specific combinations of atmospherics elements influences consumers’ perceptions about merchandise, service quality, and the overall store image. More recently, Möller & Herm (2013) showed how retail settings may shape consumers interpretation and evaluation of the brand, and in-store bodily experiences transfer a metaphoric message to customers’ perceptions of the brand. However, the authors empirically tested a mono-brand fashion retail store, and stressed the importance of examining the interaction between brand and store personalities in transferring meaning “from the product to the retailer and the other way around” (Möller & Herm, 2013, p. 8). The retail landscape has dramatically changed the dynamics of consumer-brand interactions in the physical encounter. The main challenge of these interactions concerns the effective integration of multichannel brand experiences into an exciting, emotionally engaging, and coherent brand experience. However, in-depth studies on consumer perceptions to these multi-environment experiences have not yet emerged. In this paper, we aim to fill that gap. By addressing the attention to the customer’s sphere, we specifically investigate how consumers perceive luxury brands in relation to brand experiences across various retail settings. Method and studies Owing to the lack of relevant research, this study applies a direct qualitative and exploratory approach to develop deep insights of consumers response to luxury brand experiences in different retail settings (Creswell, 2012). Two sequential studies investigate consumer cues of brand experiences across various environments. Study 1 provides the identification of luxury brand elements that are pivotal in the creation of exciting shopping experiences. In study 1, respondents named a luxury brand which they had frequently experienced in the last year, and to which they felt being in a deep relationship across multiple retail touch points of the brand. Respondents were asked about what elements of the brand they were more engaged to. The authors imposed no constraints on the elicitation. Following the categorization of luxury brands (Jackson, 2004) which comprehends fashion, perfumes and cosmetics, wines and spirits, and watches and luxury, respondents chose whatever brand they wanted. One of the authors provided the instructions to respondents. This study includes in the first sample a variety of 35 consumers from various age (20 to 65 years old consumers), as well as various education levels. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and evaluated with content analysis, following quality criteria of Kassarjian (1977). The luxury brand elements emerged from Study 1 were used in Study 2 as thematic basis for investigating how these elements provide exciting experiences across multiple retail setting of the luxury brand. The same interviewer of Study 1 undertook in-depth interviews with eight of the above respondents, two from each consumer profile identified in line with the hedonic profiles of Arnold & Reynolds (2003). Each interview discussion lasted between 30 and 45 minutes, was audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The text was analyzed by the authors following the generalized sequence of steps of data reduction and transformation, data display and conclusion drawing/verification (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The code development followed thematic analysis (Boyatzis, 1998), and coding was multivariate within subjects. With multiple ideas per respondent, we extracted a large list of properties. We sorted thematic elements into logically related clusters and assigned representative headers. The authors now describe results regarding respondents’ perceptions of luxury brand experiences in multiple retail environments. Results and discussion Consumers identified a wide range of experience factors that they seek in luxury brands, and highlighted how the brand and retail environment fulfill these expectations. They considered the brand evocation to exclusivity and authenticity as the primary reason for purchasing luxury brands. One of the respondents stated: “I buy brand X because it is a nice and deeply authentic brand to have. When I use the brand X I feel I am wearing something very exclusive. And I feel exclusive”. Regarding experiencing luxury brands in the stores, respondents stressed the importance of “finding the same brand appealing in the monobrand store as well across retailers’ stores”, and added that when they did not perceive this coherence of message they often switched to other brands in the purchasing stage. Another determinant element of holistic experiences concerns the products presentation of the brand in various settings, which has to be very similar and related across the brand touch points. Respondents explained to feel confused when they visit one store and encounter “colorful display with a charming presentation of the brand Y in the store of retailer 1”, while finding in store of retailer 2 “black and white displays and an awful presentation for the brand Y”. Concerning the specific impact of the retailer’s environment on luxury experiences, we identified that the overall store setting of the retailer influences the luxury brand even when consumers do not experience the brand in the specific. For example, one respondent highlighted that “If I have to buy brand Z, I never go to retailer 3. I know that brand Z does not feel luxury at all in retailer 3 because of its very old fashioned store”. This study shows how consumers respond to luxury brand strategies across manufacturer and retailer’s brand setting. By providing deep insights on their relationship with luxury brands, consumers contributed to understand key elements for living consistent luxury brand experiences. They stresses the pivotal role of a coherent brand exclusivity. This is an evident implication to motivate consumers in purchasing the luxury brands. Retailers can also make important considerations from our study. They must create more appealing and overall exciting store images. By enhancing luxury experiences in the store, retailers can leverage opportunities of stronger connection with consumers. Simultaneously, brand manufacturers can build upon retailers enhanced in-store experience to magnify the holistic luxury brand experience. Finally, this study is one of the first explorations concerning the cross-effect of brand experiences and store atmospherics. In an empirical context, the authors investigate the conceptualization of consumer experiences in a multichannel view, and provide relevant contributions to analyze the brand and the environment as interdependent elements. Further research may test empirically our findings on the interaction between luxury brands and multi-retail experiences.

In 2010, there were approximately 38.9 million Black Americans residing in the U.S. (Waters, Kasinitz, & Asad, 2014). Caribbean and African-Americans do engage in luxury shopping (Forbes, 2013). A three part theoretical framework has been developed to present this research, including spatial diffusion theory, conspicuous consumption theory, and the Value Chain model. Although there is a vast amount of information on luxury attributes, there is a gap in research surrounding this topic in relation to ethnic groups such as Caribbean and African-American consumers. Hence, the purpose of the study is to examine the impact of luxury brand attributes on Caribbean and African-American consumers. The specific objectives of this study were to identify the main attributes of luxury goods and services; to examine these main attributes and compare Caribbean and African-American consumers; and to study the impact of those attributes on purchase intentions and word-of-mouth on purchase decisions. The study surveyed 440 consumers and interviewed 8 individuals. Participants were West Indians residing in the U.S. and in the Caribbean, and African-Americans residing in the U.S. between the ages of 18 and 64. The data was then analyzed using SPSS. A total of eight (8) interviews were conducted (7 females and 1 male). The consumers ranged from ages 20 to 33. Questions covered the following topics: demographics, lifestyle, sources of appearance, shopping patterns and preferences, and dress and appearance preferences. Texts within the interviews were coded and Cohen’s kappa was also conducted to establish reliability. The main criterion when shopping was style. There were significant differences between Ethnicity and the following: having favorite brands while shopping (Χ2 = 37.741, p = .000); whether or not the respondents’ favorite brands were high fashion (Χ2 = 19.123, p = .000); whether or not respondents liked wearing expensive clothing and/or accessories (Χ2 = 21.200, p = .000); feeling the need to invest in luxury apparel (Χ2 = 20.836, p = .000); respondents thinking that wearing luxury products convey success or accomplishment (Χ2 = 40.936, p = .000); and imitating the way celebrities dress (Χ2 = 37.006, p = .000). The survey revealed that respondents consulted family members, friends, and co-workers for fashion advice. The findings of this study support previous literature in relation to the main attributes of luxury goods. Conspicuous consumption theory explains the behavior of these consumers who may be trying to display their wealth by purchasing expensive items. Word-of-mouth played a significant role in the purchase decisions of both consumer groups. For Caribbean consumers, the main criteria were style and quality, whereas for African-Americans, the main criteria were style and price. Limitations and implications of the study are discussed.

Today’s consumers experience the brands within numerous in-store and out-of-store contexts, and tend to focus on their holistic experience with the brands across various retail scenarios. Companies, especially in the luxury industry where multiple retail settings contribute to the formation of the brand image, invest considerable funds to create entertaining, exciting, and emotionally engaging experiences. However, researchers have not yet examined how traditional luxury brand factors interplay with experiential factors across multiple retail settings of the brand. In marketing literature, researchers have devoted considerable attention to the effect of store environments on consumer behavior (e.g. Baker et al., 2002; Donovan & Rossitier, 1982; Kotler, 1973). At the same time, academic research has also been conscious of the central role of brand image in the consumer-buying process (e.g. Keller, 1993; Kwon & Lennon, 2009). More recently, these two streams are coming together. Practitioners and academics have argued that creating compelling shopping experiences across multiple environments, and along, and beyond, the entire path-to-purchase is a key challenge for maintaining a certain brand image (Interbrand, 2014; Verhoef et al., 2009). In a luxury brand context, whereas brand managers design most of the strategic implementations of the brand, retailers can increasingly craft value to the brand via the creation of multisensory retail experiences (Spence et al., 2014). Luxury brands, such as Chanel, are continuously growing their retail presence, and identifying ways to cultivate the tradition of the brand and create distinctive and unique brand experiences. However, the academic perspective of investigating luxury brand images in contemporary business contexts has been underdeveloped (Berthon et al., 2009; Miller & Mills, 2012). While this call for more comprehensive and holistic approaches to luxury brand experiences has been raised (Atwal & Williams, 2009), current research predominantly focuses on single aspects of the luxury brand experience, such as in-store multisensory factors (Möller & Herm, 2013), brand owner cues (Tynan et al., 2010), in-store environment cues (Baker et al., 2002), or luxury brand specific factors (Beverland, 2005). The evolving business world needs to implement more holistic and contemporary approaches. By employing the approach of three dimensions store atmospherics (Baker et al., 2002) to luxury brand experiences, this study investigates how consumers integrate traditional brand factors with new factors of consumption. The objective of this article is to understand how various retail settings affect emotional states, which, in turn, affect behavior toward luxury brands. This study addresses the relationship of luxury brand experiences in tight and less controlled retail scenarios, and the ways in which luxury experiences trigger effective successful brand experiences. Utilizing two qualitative studies, the authors consider the interaction between luxury brand experiences and store atmospherics. The paper concludes with relevant implications for academics and practitioners to enable new perspectives on luxury brand strategies, and consumer response to the luxury brand image in the challenging retail landscape.

Introduction The growth of the luxury goods market has seen an increased level of interest in the topic from both practitioners and academic researchers. The luxury market consists of a number of diverse categories (e.g., luxury clothing, cars, wines, jewelry, vacations) and is considerable in size, reaching €865 billion (over 1 trillion U.S. dollars) in 2014 (D’Arpizio 2014). While the topic of luxury brand marketing historically received only limited attention in the academic literature (Berthon, et al., 2009; Miller and Mills, 2012a) recent years have seen a growth of studies on the marketing of luxury products, including both goods and services). As the last half-decade has seen especially accelerated attention given to the topic, the time is right to examine the body of the overall literature on luxury brand. With the need for consolidation of findings in mind, this paper conducts a literature review of studies of luxury branding that is designed to contribute to the literature on luxury branding in multiple ways. First, the study is designed to provide guidance for researchers on luxury brands as to the definition and measurement of a “luxury brand.” While a number of studies have attempted to define the term, no single widely accepted definition of luxury brand exists and multiple measurement schemes have been put forward. This paper will review key definitions and measurement scales in an effort to help guide future researchers. A second intended contribution is to identify the most influential theories that have been used to help understand whether/why consumer behavior towards luxury brands differs from that towards other brands. A third intended contribution is to outline major sub-areas of research on luxury brands and identify key themes in the findings within these areas in order to summarize the state of knowledge of luxury brand marketing. These areas are: 1) consumer motivation for consuming luxury brands; 2) segmentation strategies for luxury brands; 3) international considerations; and 4) the role of social media in the marketing luxury brands. In conjunction with this goal we summarize how luxury brand marketing has been found to differ from the marketing of other types of brands. In other words, we identify what principles appear to be unique to luxury brand marketing. Finally, the study is designed to contribute to the literature by identifying areas especially in need of additional research in order to move this body of literature forward. Defining “Luxury Brand” Unfortunately for researchers, there is not a widely accepted definition of luxury brand. For example, the American Marketing Association’s dictionary of terms does not contain a definition of “luxury,” “luxury brand,” or “luxury marketing.” Yet, several scholars have attempted to define what constitutes a luxury brand. Prior research is characterized by, “…a lack of clarity regarding a definition, operationalization, and measurement of brand luxury” (Miller and Mills 2010, p.1471). This observation is consistent with previous calls by researchers for a more precise definition of luxury goods marketing (e.g., Berthon, et al., 2009). It has further claimed that the definition and measurement of luxury has been highly subjective (Godey et al., 2009). To the extent that it is true that definitions of luxury have been subjective, this is based on what individual researchers have put forward, as opposed to luxury being an inherently subjective construct. Thus, it is possible and desirable to define what a luxury brand is and measure the degree to which a given brand is a luxury brand. Fortunately, some researchers have made attempts to define luxury. The Miller and Mills (2012a) paper focused on fashion brands and also intentionally included several characterizations of luxury that were not designed to be formal definitions. Thus, it is not directly applicable to our purpose here, which is to identify key usable definitions of luxury brand that are generally applicable. For our purposes, a definition of a luxury brand should meet three key criteria in order to be considered viable definition. First, it should be based on a sound conceptual foundation, as is characteristic of academic definitions in general. Thus, we list here only those definitions that are logically derived from previously articulated and supported concepts. Second, the definition must be broadly applicable to luxury brands in general, and not just a subset such as only products or services, or one type of product category (e.g., fashion goods or automobiles). Finally, the theoretical definition should be capable of being operationalized in a way that allows the construct to be measured. Further, if the definition is multidimensional, it must be possible to measure all of the dimensions. We assembled a collection of definitions that meet these criteria that is displayed in table form. The literature largely defines luxury brands based on consumer perceptions (Heine 2012, Hagtvedt and Patrick 2009), managerially determined dimensions such as marketing activities and product attributes (Keller 2009, Nueno and Quelch 1998), or a combination of both (Vigneron and Johnson 2004, Berthon et al. 2009, Tynan et. al 2010, Vickers and Renand 2003). Some dimensions are present in multiple definitions such high quality (Keller 2009, Heine 2012, Dubois et al. 2001, Tynan et. al 2001, Vigneron and Johnson 2004, Nueno and Quelch 1998) rarity (Tynan et al. 2001, Heine 2012,Vigneron and Johnson 2004, Nueno and Quelch 1998), premium pricing (Keller 2009, Tynan 2010, Heine 2012, Nueno and Quelch 1998), and a high level of aesthetics (Keller 2009, Dubois et al. 2001, Heine 2012). Though the authors of many of these definitions present some explanation of the dimensions underlying the brand luxury definition, further clarification on how these dimensions should best be measured would make any definition of brand luxury more useful. Without methods to clearly measure brand luxury there exists a cacophony of definitions, all with their own grouping of necessary dimensions that lack true clarity or empirical backing. Measurement Scales for Brand Luxury Essential to a better understanding of luxury brands is availability of reliable and valid scales to measure the level of luxury a brand possesses and consumer perceptions of luxury value. There are a variety of reasons why widely accepted scale(s) for measuring luxury are necessary. First, as is evident from the numerous definitions of brand luxury, there exists considerable disagreement on what makes a luxury brand; making objective measurement necessary to clarify potential inconsistencies. Another important consideration in developing scales to measure luxury stems from the reality that amongst consumers and researchers it is acknowledged that not all luxury brands are equally luxurious (Vigneron and Johnson 2004). This suggests that it may be useful to view a brand’s relative luxury as existing on a continuum opposite another construct rather than as an absolute demarcation. The schemes developed thus far are presented with particular focus on those, which are most promising. While there is no generally accepted scale for measuring luxury, the scales that have drawn the most interest for measuring brand luxury appear to be Vigneron and Johnson’s (2004) BLI, and Dubois’ (2001) 33 item scale. Weidemann et al.’s (2009) scale also appears to warrant additional attention, while Miller and Miller and Mills’ (2012) scale appears to be promising but was designed for fashion brands only. Shukla and Purani’s(2012) effort is notable, but the real focus in on consumer motivation and not luxury. Key Theories Though a variety of theories are employed in the luxury marketing literature to explain the motivation for luxury consumption, a number of prominently used theories are summarized in Table 3. Though these various theories all add something slightly different to the understanding of what motivates luxury consumption, they all are largely social in nature. The oldest and perhaps most popular of these theories is conspicuous consumption which originates from Thorstein Veblen’s The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899). Veblen posits that individuals consume in a highly visible manner to signal wealth to others which infers status and power (Veblen 1899). More recently, Bearden and Eztel (1982) found that luxury goods consumed in public were more likely to be conspicuous in nature. Numerous measurement schemes have included conspicuousness as a key dimension of and motivation for consumption of luxury brands (e.g. Wiedmann 2009, Vigneron and Johnson 2004, Dubois et. al 2001). Social comparison theory has been used in a variety of ways to explain different types of luxury consumption motivation. For example, Wiedmann et al. (2009) proposes that since social comparison theory predicts that people tend to conform to majority opinion of their membership groups, that consumers may likely use a luxury brand to conform to social standards. Mandel and Cialindi(2006) find that social comparisons impact not only one’s feelings of self-satisfaction, but also preference for luxury brands. Researchers have also used social comparison theory as a way to understand how consumers engage in comparison between themselves and mass media outlets, Kamal et al. (2013) use this theory in the context of social media marketing and luxury goods. Self-concept theory is another lens scholars have used to examine luxury consumption. Self-concept comprises of how a person feels about his or herself (Gil et al. 2012) making one’s self-concept a potential motivator for luxury consumption. Luxury brands can appeal to self-concept by making consumers feel good about themselves through possession or gift giving (Shukla and Purani 2010). Recent findings have also suggested that one’s self-concept orientation can have an effect on preference for certain types luxury consumption. Kastakankis and Balabanis (2012) find that consumers with an interdependent self-concept are associated with bandwagon luxury consumption while an independent self-concept discourages this type of behavior. Consumer culture theory in general (see Arnould and Thompson 2005) and Belk’s (1988) concept of the extended-self in particular, have informed how many researchers understand luxury consumption motivation. The extended-self helps to explain the symbolic role luxury possessions have in the consumers’ lives (Han, Nunes, and Dreze 2010). Consumers use possessions to form and alter their identities in order to fit their projections of who they are and hope to be (Belk 1988). Value in the possession and consumption of luxury brands is held in the ability to extend one’s self (Hung et al. 2011). Extended-self also serves as one of the five factors in Vigneron and Johnson’s (2004) BLI scale and includes the items of leading, very powerful, rewarding, and successful to measure this factor. While some have argued that a characteristic of luxury brands is their uniqueness (e.g. Dubois et al. 2001), others have also suggested that an individual’s desire to be seen as unique is another important motivation for luxury consumption. Underlying this assertion is Snyder and Fromkin’s (1977) theory of uniqueness, which proposes that individuals develop the need to differentiate themselves from others when there is too much similarity in their social environment. Tian, Bearden, and Hunter’s (2001) concept of consumer’s need for uniqueness is derived from the theory of uniqueness. Consumer’s need for uniqueness suggests that consumers pursue differentness relative to others through the consumption of goods with the intention of developing and enhancing one’s self and social image (Tian et al. 2001). Luxury goods inherent scarcity due to high price and restricted distribution makes it an especially strong category for those attempting to display uniqueness to others (Bian and Forsythe 2012) Motivations and Reasons for Consuming Luxury Goods A consistent theme in the luxury goods marketing literature is that the motives for buying luxury brands differ from those of other types of brands. Numerous studies have explored a variety of potential motives for luxury brand consumption and findings consistently confirm that unique factors contribute to the consumption of luxury brands. At the broadest level, it has been found that luxury brands are attractive to consumers for multiple reasons. Central to the appeal of luxury brands are symbolic meanings consumers attach to them as opposed to specific product features (Han et al., 2010; Kastakanis and Balabanis 2012). More so than standard brands, luxury brands attempt to leverage the meanings consumers attach to them in order to increase sales. The motives underlying the attachment of meanings to luxury brands are a key to understanding why consumers purchase luxury brands. A summary of key articles aimed at exploring motivations for luxury consumption is provided in this section. Clearly, motives for purchasing luxury brands is drawing research interest and is in need of additional research. One longstanding factor that consistently comes up is the importance of social influence and comparisons to others as well as a desire to project a certain image to others due to status consciousness. The role of hedonic pleasure through the consumption of luxury goods has also been a point of emphasis in several studies. More recently, some studies focusing on promising additional factors, including luxury brand consumption as an expression of personal values and as a result of pride, or expressing self-confidence have produced key findings. It is also clear that some variation in motives for purchasing luxury brands has been found, such as differences between product categories, by gender, and culture, and that need more research in these areas. International/ Cross-Cultural Considerations A sub-topic that has been investigated by several researchers is whether international and cross-cultural factors have an impact on luxury brand marketers. It has been well documented that many luxury goods marketers have been successful in selling their products to high income/ high-status consumers around the world. As the market for luxury goods continues to grow consumer demand in Western developed markets have stalled in the face of recessionary trends while the appetite for luxury goods has grown in emerging economies such as China, India, Brazil, and Russia (Shukla and Purani 2012). After reviewing the literature in this area it seems that to date, the studies done on cross-cultural issues in luxury brand marketing appear to raise more questions than they solve. On one hand, it is clear that luxury brands have grown in many parts of the world, resulting in interest in whether there are significant cultural factors independent of income that drive to own luxury goods. On the other, some studies appear to show individualism vs. collectivism matters to consumers while others are suggestive of similar motives across countries. As a result, it is very much worthwhile for more studies attempting to uncover nuances as to the circumstances under which collectivism makes a difference. Moreover, additional study of factors that may vary across culture, such as the influence of country of origin, value consciousness and susceptibility to interpersonal influence as well as other cultural factors should be considered going forward. Market Segmentation for Luxury Brands The extant research on segmentation in luxury brand markets suggests that there are strong possibilities for cross-market segmentation. The findings of Ko et al. (2007,2012) and Wiedmann et al. (2009) are notable examples of such possibilities. However, it must be noted that the research conducted to data primarily focused on markets at high levels of economic development, so further research on the circumstances under which markets can be segmented cross-nationally. It is also notable that much of the research on this issue has been conducted on female subjects, and in light of the Stokberger-Sauer and Teichman (2013) findings of gender differences in Germany, more research is needed on this topic. Effective Use of Social Media for Luxury Brands Research related to social media marketing and luxury brands is reviewed and underlying themes are presented. Because of the evolving nature of social media promotion and the limited number of studies, it is difficult to draw sweeping conclusions from the literature. However, it is clear that social media can be used to build brand image and enhance purchase intention if done properly. Moreover, Kim and Ko’s (2010 and 2012) study provides a promising framework for better understanding the impact of social media programs on various outcome measures. Conclusion and Suggestions for Future Research Recent growth in the study of the luxury market has produced a body of literature that has addressed a number of important issues related to the subject. This literature highlights how the marketing of luxury brands is different than other products while raising even more questions. Future research suggestions on all the topics included are presented based on the findings and themes in the literature review.

This study was designed to investigate luxury brand co-value creation. A mixed method approach was used to 1) identify encounter attributes of value co-creation, consumer value and brand value and 2) examine the relationships among encounter attributes, consumer value, brand value, and purchase intention to explain the process of value co-creation.

This study aims to investigate the effects of price promotions on the perception of a brand in the mind of consumer in luxury market. This study extends the previous literature on price promotional strategy and brand equity (brand awareness, brand image, and brand loyalty) by focusing on how a consumer perceives functional value and psychological value to create brand equity in luxury products.

There is relatively little evidence on how social media marketing activities influence brand equity creation and consumers’ behavior towards the brand. We explore these relationships by analyzing pioneering brands in the luxury sector (Burberry, Dior, Gucci, Hermès, and Louis Vuitton). Based on a survey of 845 luxury brand consumers (Chinese, French, Indian and Italian) who follow the five brands studied on social media, we developed a structural equation model that helps to address gaps in prior social media branding literature. Specifically, our study demonstrates the links between social media marketing efforts – measured as a holistic concept incorporating five aspects (entertainment, interaction, trendiness, customization and word of mouth) and their consequences (brand preference, price premium and loyalty).

The authors of this research show that gender plays a role in whether public star ratings of branded content films (e.g., ratings on Rotten Tomatoes) and increased awareness of surroundings differentially affect movie viewers’ willingness to spread word-of-mouth about films. For men, no matter whether they have high or low awareness of surroundings, a higher versus lower star rating uniformly enhances the likelihood they will recommend the film to others. In contrast, for women, momentarily heightened awareness of their surroundings enhances (diminishes) the likelihood of recommending the higher (lower) star-rated film. If women have low awareness of their surroundings, however, the differences do not emerge.

As luxury brands have become a globalised phenomenon, marked with the appearance of recognizable and standardized platforms worldwide, we ask how their consumption and meanings are shaped by divergent cultural beliefs that permeate contemporary multicultural marketplaces. Cross-cultural luxury branding literature advises luxury brand managers to cultivate coherent brand identities tied to their internal ‘brand DNA’, with the aim to translate this identity into a consistent global brand image. However, this managerial commitment to a standardized approach in international marketing has meant that brand researchers often adopt an ethnocentric perspective on branding, characterized with the tendency to assess marketplaces in terms of their various degrees of ‘glocalization’. Consequently, the literature on cross-cultural luxury branding has largely focused on the effects of global positioning and local cultural influences, paying little attention to the influences of other foreign cultures that may operate within a multicultural marketplace. This paper is concerned with advancing our knowledge about how complex multicultural influences shape luxury brand markets. In particular, focusing on the interplay between local and foreign cultural meanings in a single national market, we demonstrate how the consumption of luxury brands is influenced by multiple, and at times conflicting, cultural beliefs. Luxury brands and cultural meanings are thoroughly intertwined. Throughout history, the idea of luxury has been influenced by various ideological beliefs, providing an “illuminating entrée into a basic political issue, namely, the nature of social order” (Berry, 1994: 6). For instance, since ancient civilisations, such as the Egyptians and Amerindians, luxury goods have been used as the symbol of status and power (Kapferer and Bastien, 2009). In the days of Plato and early Christianity, luxury was also perceived in a pejorative form that signified the corruption of a virtuous manly life; and with the works of Adam Smith, the idea of luxury has become a vindication of commercial society (Berry, 1994). Over the last two decades, we have witnessed unprecedented demand for luxury brands by international consumers in Japan, in East Asia, and now in the BRIC (i.e., Brazil, Russia, India, and China) and CIVETS countries (i.e., Colombia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey, and South Africa) (Kapferer, 2012). Due to the accelerated flows of consumption meanings, ideologies, and people resulting from global economic forces (Appadurai, 1997), many of these emerging marketplaces are characterized by cross-cutting cultural flows, exhibiting a high degree of inner differentiation and complexity (Craig and Douglas, 2006), mutual entanglement (Robertson, 1992; Welsh, 1999), and interpenetration (Andreasen, 1990). Consequently, there is a growing need to advance our understanding of how increasing multicultural influences shape luxury brand markets. Informed by a cultural branding approach (Bengtsson et al., 2010) and research on multicultural marketplaces (Craig and Douglas, 2006), we address this issue in cross-cultural luxury branding by offering a qualitative inquiry into luxury brand consumption in New Zealand, uncovering the interplay between two distinct cultural beliefs permeating this multicultural market – the local Kiwi ‘tall poppy syndrome’ and the foreign ‘face-saving’ orientation originating from East Asian immigrant cultures. The Kiwi tall poppy syndrome conveys a negative social attitude towards people (the ‘tall poppies’) who are conspicuously successful and whose distinction, rank, or wealth attracts envious notice or hostility (Mouly and Sankaran, 2002). Conversely, the East Asian ‘face-saving’ orientation is concerned with the social image of success that an individual projects in society (Le Monkhouse et al., 2012). We found that not only did these two local and foreign cultural beliefs convey oppositional meanings about luxury brands in New Zealand, but they also prompted consumers to adopt different luxury brand consumption styles. Furthermore, despite being oppositional in nature, our findings suggest that these beliefs could jointly influence individual consumers, adding yet increased complexity to how these individuals consumed luxury brands. In particular, we demonstrate that luxury brand consumers in New Zealand are able to hold multiple and conflicting local and foreign cultural beliefs in tension, emerging as contextual cultural shifters. While the literature on cross-national luxury branding conventionally privileges cross-national methods which tend to de-emphasise the heterogeneity within national luxury markets (Wiedmann et al., 2007), the results of our study suggest the need to consider intercultural diversity at the intra-national level. Indeed, Brewer and Venaik (2012) decry the danger of applying culture-level constructs to the level of the individual. Brubaker (2004) calls this the fallacy of groupism, where we treat ethnic groups as concrete entities instead of seeing group-making as an on-going project. This is echoed by Calhoun (2003: 547) who encourages “avoiding the illusion that plagued much earlier thoughts of ethnicity and nationalism – that there was one basic identity common to all members of a group.” Essentially, when an individual’s cultural identity is reduced to the nationality or the ethnicity that he or she declares on a survey, not only does this overlook the multidimensionality and complexity of cultural influences which shape how they consume luxury brands, but this also misses further opportunities to engage with luxury brand consumers. While some cross-national luxury consumption studies have accommodated a degree of complexity with the consideration of differences between global and local cultures (e.g., Park et al., 2008; Shukla and Purani, 2012), the results of our study show that, within multicultural marketplaces, the level of cultural complexity goes beyond the global-local dichotomy. Rather, the consumption of luxury brands is transculturally constituted and derived from multiple forms of belonging (Calhoun, 2003). In these markets, consumers find themselves negotiating the meanings and consumption styles of luxury brands at the confluence of multiple cultural beliefs. For marketers operating within multicultural markets, this means that nationality, ethnicity, and degree of glocalisation may be less useful bases for segmentation, prompting the consideration of other ways in which to understand and use cultural influences in segmenting, targeting, and positioning luxury brands. In our study, two distinct cultural belief systems, one local and one foreign, shaped luxury brand consumption in New Zealand. Furthermore, these cultural beliefs were not necessarily tied to an individual consumer’s ethnicity. Given these complexities, it may be more useful to consider other bases of segmentation such as the influence of situational factors (Douglas and Craig, 2011) and the relative salience among multiple cultural beliefs. Furthermore, this is the first study to empirically demonstrate the impact of multiculturalism on luxury brand markets, where consumers emerge as contextual cultural shifters. Our findings illustrate that contextual factors in a multicultural marketplace, like a filter, shaped which cultural influences were appropriated by individual consumers in a given consumption situation. Thus, underlying any given luxury brand consumption situation is a complex interplay between multicultural influences, situational norms, and individual factors. This prompts multiple considerations for luxury brand managers. Might it be possible to go a step further and encourage consumers to adopt culturally-constituted consumption styles which fit better with one’s brand positioning? More specifically, by questioning which cultural influences underpinning luxury brands are more dominant for them, consumers could be encouraged to reconsider their personal uses and attitudes towards luxury brands. Further research is required to find out what contexts are likely to tilt consumers’ consideration in favour of one cultural influence over another. If a luxury brand is a status symbol, might it be possible to prime both Western and Asian consumers to switch to status-conspicuous beliefs? For example, what cues and appeals might marketers present to encourage consumers to think in a more face-saving way? If a brand is understated, might it be possible to prime consumers to adhere to cultural beliefs which encourage more discreet styles of consumption? For example, what cues and appeals might marketers present to encourage consumers to consider the tall poppy syndrome? Such research would be particularly useful for marketers who have little room for repositioning their luxury brand image. Finally, rather than a glocal branding approach, which involves cultivating brand identity within the organisation and overcoming local brand image inconsistencies (Matthiesen and Phau, 2005), we posit that managers need to adopt a multicultural branding approach. We envision that such an approach would involve identifying and pursuing opportunities for the development of dynamic brand identities (da Silveira et al., 2011), where luxury brand managers can assume the role of proactive architects of luxury brand cultures which support diverse modes of luxury brand consumption. This carries implications for cross-cultural luxury branding on three levels. At the basic level, a multicultural branding approach involves paying closer attention to the contextual topography of a given marketplace and consumer receptivity to global, local, and foreign cultural beliefs. As our study showed, a luxury brand entering an emergent multicultural market like New Zealand will invariably face consumer resistance due to the influence of the dominant Kiwi ‘tall poppy’ syndrome. However, this is by no means a monolithic discourse; its influence is uneven. Because of greater diversity and intercultural exchange, consumers in cosmopolitan centres such as Auckland are more likely to be receptive to other cultural influences. As such, it would be a logical point of entry for a global luxury brand. This also suggests that, rather than cross-national differences, segmentation based on the prevalence of multiple cultural beliefs and consumption styles in major cities could be a more appropriate strategy for luxury branding. At a more advanced level, luxury brand managers can not only select, but also focus on proactively cultivating the most conducive contexts, where consumers would feel more empowered to appropriate their desired luxury brand consumption styles within a multicultural marketplace. In doing so, marketers will be able to both target the increasing buying power of ethnic consumers by appealing to their foreign consumption styles (Lisanti, 2010), as well as to find a better positioning to the mainstream consumers who are receptive to cultural shifting. For instance, several respondents in our study presented an interesting dynamic between the two cultural influences: on one hand, they have a desire to consume luxury brands in a more conspicuous way due to the influence of face-saving beliefs, but on the other hand, they feel that they must suppress this desire due to the influence of the Kiwi ‘tall poppy’ syndrome. To unlock this hidden market potential, luxury brand marketers would do well to design liminal spaces and retail spectacles (Kozinets et al., 2004). In the same way that the “Coca-Cola Telenovela Club” provided a liminal space in which Latina moms in the US could explore and perform their love of telenovelas (Lisanti 2010), luxury brand managers might design similar liminal spaces and retail spectacles where could safely circumvent the influence of the local tall poppy syndrome. In contrast to the social sanctions on conspicuous consumption in their everyday lives, liminal spaces can provide an immersive space where foreign styles of brand consumption can be affirmed and cultivated. In other words, luxury brand managers can empower consumers to appropriate their desired culturally-constituted meanings and, therefore, to endorse the particular styles of luxury brand consumption within a multicultural marketplace. Finally, at the broader strategic level, rather than cultivating brand identity entirely within the organisation and then communicating this identity to consumers, luxury brand managers can aim to collaborate with the diverse range of consumers in developing a dynamic multicultural brand identity. This strategy would involve incorporating a wider range of cultural meanings and developing the most appropriate brand positioning(s), thereby addressing tensions around the conflicting luxury brand consumption styles within a multicultural marketplace. In line with the cultural branding (Bengtsson et al., 2010) and dynamic brand identity (da Silveira et al., 2013: 31) approaches, the multicultural branding approach should view brand identity as developing over time through “mutually influencing inputs from several social constituents” that include both brand managers and consumers. Moreover, it should focus on more proactively and thoroughly intertwining the on-going social construction of brand meaning with the on-going evolution of multiculturally-informed consumption styles of luxury branding that emerge within a marketplace. In short, by assuming the role of cultural architects, luxury brand marketers must become more aware of the varying sensitivities of consumers to multiple cultural beliefs and practices across a range of contexts, proactively cultivate contexts which enhance their brand receptiveness, and strive to construct multiculturally-informed dynamic brand identities that embed the brand image more deeply within a marketplace and assist consumers in coping with dynamic cultural change.

Consumers today are not passive recipients of a constructed brand identity that is communicated towards them. Instead research suggests that the consumer is in fact an active part in constructing brand meaning. Salzer-Mörling and Strannegård (2004) held that brand managers are confronted with the fact that they are not the owners of the brand who can actively manipulate brand images in the minds of passive consumers. The importance of consumption activities and how these play a part in the development of meaning has been demonstrated by authors such as Wallendorf and Arnould (1991), who interpreted the consumption rituals of Thanksgiving and explored the linkages and cleavages between consumer ideology and consumer practice. Arnould and Price (1993) investigated the relationship between client expectations and satisfaction and concluded that the narrative of the rafting experience (multiday river rafting trips in the Colorado River basin was the empirical context for their article) rather than relationships between expectations and outcomes was central to its evaluation. Belk and Costa (1998) showed the creation of fantasy consumption enclaves through processes of inventing and mythologizing tradition, and Peñaloza (2001) investigated consumers‘ cultural production processes at different levels and concluded that consumers negotiate meanings and that business activities and specific references are significant for consumers in providing authenticity. In later research it is argued that brands belong to and are created within groups, communities or tribes (e.g. Brown, Kozinets and Sherry Jr., 2003), or that consumers are actively creating brandscapes (Thompson and Arsel, 2004) neo-tribes (Cova and Cova, 2002), the concept of brand communities (Muniz and O‘Guinn, 2001; McAlexander, Schouten and Koenig, 2002; Muniz and Schau, 2005; Algesheimer, Dholakia and Herrmann, 2005), subcultures of consumption (Schouten and McAlexander, 1995), and brand cultures (Schroeder and Salzer-Mörling, 2006). Muniz and O‘Guinn (2001) emphasized the triangular relationship between consumers and the brand and consumer relationships. McAlexander, Schouten and Koenig (2002) broadened this perspective by studying customers´ relationships with a branded product and related marketing agents, institutions as well as other customers. In their view, consumers socialize around brands, which are defined as brand objects, but they still consider brand meaning as being developed first by marketers. Related to the brand community is the concept of ‘neo-tribes‘, examined by Cova and Cova (2002), who hold that a tribe is not necessarily a brand community, since brand communities are explicitly commercial, whereas tribes are not. However, when a tribe is organized around a same passion of a cult-object it exhibits many similarities with a brand community (p. 603). Alongside the concept of brand community research has viewed the consumer-producer dichotomy in new ways of co-production: the customer as co-producer (Wikström, 1996; Vargo and Lusch, 2004), the reversal of consumption and production (Firath and Venkatesh, 1993), the consumer role in production and consumption (Firath and Venkatesh, 1995), consumers as customizers and producers (Firath, Dholakia and Venkatesh, 1995), customers as active co-creators of experience (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2000), the concept of customerization (Wind and Rangaswamy, 2000). Bendapudi and Leone (2003) viewed customer co-production in the construction of goods and ser-vices and claimed that consumer co-production extends to meanings as well and that consumers are not ―just passive receptacles of brand identity projected by marketers; they are active co-producers of brand meanings (p.26). They called for more attention to the implications of consumer co-produced marketing images given the empowerment of consumers through the Internet. Kozinets et al. further (2004) introduced the notion of ―interagency where consumer and producer interests are embedded in one another. Quinton and Harridge-March (2010) investigated relationships in online communities and the potential influence of consumer generated communication in online discussion fora on wine. This paper views consumer generated communication on luxury brands online and its impact on luxury brand image. With the growth of the Internet and brands’ use of it so has consumer initiated sites grown. Consumer communities and brand communities are today an active participant in the creation of brand value and brand meaning. However there is still a gap in the empirical research on consumer-generated communication and how this type of communication impacts brand image. A conceptual framework for consumer community communication is presented and three empirical examples of consumer-generated communication and its impact on brand image are presented. The approach is a qualitative online study. Consumer community sites show clear examples of information, distribution and conversation aspects. This study shows that information seeking is the most prevalent in the impact on brand image. The strength of this research lies in its qualitative nature with consumer interviews and online observations of consumer-generated brand communication. Given the exploratory nature of this research the online material had to be systematized during the course of the work and could not be chosen based on a set of criteria or evaluation methods already established.

Luxury industry is one of the fastest growing fields in marketing research in which many studies have examined how consumers' background affects their preference for luxury products and luxury brands. Classical theories focused on the affluent social classes and their tendency to consume luxury products to consciously or unconsciously signal their wealth. Other studies argued that the internalised culture developed during the socialisation years may influence one’s tastes and preferences for luxuries. Whereas, “costly signal theory” and “affirmation resource theory” suggest that luxury consumption extends beyond the traditional symbolic value of luxury brands and the habituated taste consumption drivers. Despite the wealth of current theoretical approaches, there is little research on the context of status rankings of luxuries and luxury brands. Thus, main objective of the present study is to develop and empirically test a conceptual framework that links consumption of at different rungs of the luxury brand ladder to a number of variables that may act as moderators which will be defined below. The key predictors are economic resources, cultural capital, perceived social status and desired status. The dependent variable is consumption of luxury brands at different rungs in the luxury ladder. A number of hypotheses are proposed and empirically tested. The dependent variable was measured by survey data collected from a sample of US consumers. The results confirm that the frequency of luxury brand purchases is significantly and positively related to consumers’ economic resources and desire for status. The hierarchy of luxury brands consumed is driven by consumers’ economic resources, cultural capital and desire for social status. Regardless of economic resources and perceived social status, consumers with high desire for social status are more likely to buy brands which represent high level of luxury. Likewise, people with higher cultural capital would buy higher luxury grading brands regardless of their economic capabilities. Moreover, results showed that perceived social status is negatively correlated with preferences for higher tier luxury brands of cars. In particular, desire for social status seems to moderates the effect of perceived social status on the hierarchy of brand of luxury car preferences. Desire for status combined with high perceived social status leads to higher preference for higher tier luxury products. It can be concluded that economic resources are responsible for the frequency people buy luxury brands, whereas cultural capital is responsible for the luxury hierarchy of the consumed brands. Frequent consumption of luxury brands reflects one’s economic status whereas the grade of luxury brands his/her cultural status. However, desire for status seems to be a key variable as it affects both frequency and the ranks of luxury brands purchased. This is an important variable as desire for status is not related with neither the actual social status (i.e., economic resources and cultural capital) nor perceived social status.

This paper attempts to develop a new more representative typology exclusively for luxury brand personalities addressing the conceptual and methodological limitations of previous works. Existing brand personality measures (e.g. Aaker, 1997; Geuens, Weijters, & Wulf, 2009; Sweeney & Brandon, 2006) are grounded on human personality taxonomies, thereby rendering their ability to accurately capture the essence of luxury brand personality doubtful. They also inherit some of the conceptual and methodological issues from Aaker’s (1997) work, for which it has been recently criticised. This evidence points towards the need for a new measurement tool for luxury brands developed from scratch. Recognising the need to provide solid foundations of the luxury brand personality traits, the present paper uses lexical approach similar to the way it was used in the human personality scale development research (Cattell, 1943; Goldberg, 1982; John, Angleitner, & Ostendorf, 1988). The main reason for using natural language as a source of luxury brand personality attributes is based on the key assumption behind the lexical approach that most important individual differences will be encrypted into the language in the course of time (John et al., 1988). Embracing this assumption, we believe that the use of luxury brand personality descriptors in the natural language will determine their importance. The first step involved doing online text mining to learn how consumers describe various luxury brands, thereby generating a pool of items. Also, in-depth interviews were undertaken with frequent luxury buyers using Kelly’s repertory grid technique to facilitate construct elicitation. Next, the list of characteristics was screened against Norman’s (1967) comprehensive list of personality traits to ensure that only personality traits were retained in the pool. Finally, a new framework was developed by means of assigning items into different dimensions based on semantic similarities of traits and was juxtaposed with existing brand personality measures. Luxury brand personality appears to comprise twelve salient personality dimensions that cannot be directly matched with existing personality measures. The new typology reveals some unique traits and dimensions that could improve the construct’s content validity and facilitate marketers’ branding decisions. Comparisons with other frameworks support the view that luxury brand personalities are different in consumers’ common parlance and require a separate measure. Some concerns related to the consistency and also content and construct validity are highlighted in this work and call for further examination.

The purpose of this study is to examine the brand image and county of manufacture(COM) effect on brand luxury index, especially when the acquirer brand is afflicted by a low brand image and the acquired brand enjoys a high brand image. There were 248 responses in Taiwan (low image differences were gathered from 119 respondents and high image differences were gathered from 129 respondents). The results indicate that brand image have a positive influence on every dimension of brand luxury, while the better the luxury brand image acquired by one with an inferior image, the more the brand luxury will increase. Regarding the COM effect, the better COM image the acquirer move to, the more the brand luxury will increase. In addition, brand image and COM have interactive effect.

This study explores relationship between social responsibility in advertising and brand attitude in luxury products. This study investgates how psychological constructs of attitude towards advertising affect brand attitude and purchase intention of luxury brand consumer and how it can lead the sustainable development of luxury products. Consumers no longer purchase products only but depend on quality and price of product. With globalization and rapid growth, corporate social responsibility becomes important issue. And the advertising represents corporate image and management concept. More recently, and coinciding with some major corporate ethical disasters, many companies have been including sections on governance, ethical practice, and social responsibility (David S. Waller & Roman Lanis, 2009). According to David S. Waller & Roman Lanis (2009), Corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure has been the subject of substantial academic accounting research (Farook and Lanis 2005; Gray, Owen, and Maunders 1987). Advertising is one of the typical means that can represent a corporate image. As defined by Lutz (1985, p. 53), attitude toward advertising in general is “a learned predisposition to respond in a consistently favorable or unfavorable manner to advertising in general.” In his framework, Lutz viewed attitude toward advertising in general as being directly influenced by general perceptions of advertising (Srinivas Durvasula et al., 1993). Authors would like to study following issues in this research. (1) How perceived social responsibility influences Attitude toward advertising. (2) How fashion consumer behavior influences Attitude toward advertising. (3) How attitude toward advertising affects brand attitude and purchase intention. (4) How proximity plays a moderating role among perceived social responsibility, attitude toward advertising and brand attitude.

This paper considers the standardisation-localisation debate and analyses qualitative data from 22 luxury fashion retailers to reveal the decision-making process for marketing strategies that support entry into China, in terms of balancing the ‘global-local dilemma’ in an emerging marketplace alongside the need to maintain exclusivity of brand image across markets.

Based on research on human personality perception, we propose that endorsers in advertisements transfer metaphoric meaning of their body postures to customers’ brand perceptions and discuss them as a neglected antecedent of brand personality. Our findings suggest that the body posture of endorsers generally enforces brand personality perceptions.