The Brand of the Distributor and the Consumer Behavior: the Influence of Price, Quality and Promotions in Buying Reports

Transcription

1 PMKT Revista Brasileira de Pesquisas de Marketing, Opinião e Mídia ISSN: (Impressa) ISSN: (On-line) Editor: Fauze Najib Mattar Sistema de avaliação: Triple Blind Review Idiomas: Português e Inglês Publicação: ABEP Associação Brasileira de Empresas de Pesquisa The Brand of the Distributor and the Consumer Behavior: the Influence of Price, Quality and Promotions in Buying Reports A Marca do Distribuidor e os Comportamentos do Consumidor: a Influência do Preço, da Qualidade e das Promoções no Relato de Compra Submission: Sept./04/ Approval: May/09/2014 Doctorate of business sciences from Universidade Fernando Pessoa - Porto and Region, Portugal. Former at Raul Dória Association (1 year) - Porto and Region, Portugal. Professional and technical education, modular Discipline: Marketing (Senior Technical Marketing Professional Course). Training in the context of work at the advertising agency of the School - Markideias (Senior Technical Marketing Professional Course). Former at Edmundo Ferreira School - EPROMAT (1 year) - Matosinhos professional and technical teaching modular, Discipline: Merchandising (10th year of window dressing). Communication (10th year of Marketing) (3 years) - Area Manager Spain Escada Group S.A.U. Head Coach Nike EMEA. maria14276gmail.com Professional Address: Rua de Galicia - P02C - Complemento - 2B San Sebastian/Salvaterra do Miño - España.

2 ABSTRACT This article analyzes the purchasing report of consumers towards the private labels brands. There are positive associations between the shopping of private labels for dimensions such as Price sensibility, Quality sensibility, and Relation price-quality sensibility, Perception of quality through price and Accession promotions. Consumers with greater Relation price-quality sensibility have a positive attitude regarding the brand of the distributor which strengthens their purchasing. KEYWORDS: Consumers attitudes, private brands, store brands. RESUMO Este artigo tem como objetivo analisar relatos de compra dos consumidores perante as marcas do distribuidor. Encontraram-se associações positivas entre o consumo de compra das marcas do distribuidor e dimensões como a sensibilidade ao preço, sensibilidade à qualidade, sensibilidade à relação preço-qualidade, Perceção da qualidade pelo preço e Adesão às promoções. Os consumidores com maior sensibilidade à relação preço-qualidade têm uma atitude positiva no que diz respeito à marca do distribuidor, o que reforça a sua compra. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Atitudes dos consumidores, marcas privadas, marcas registradas. V. 14, pp , Abril,

3 1. INTRODUCTION Distributor s brands consumption is a global phenomenon with relevant economics visibility to retailers and manufacturers. All developed countries have witnessed a steady growth of the market share of distributor s brands (LAMEY et al., 2007). In Europe distributor s brands have almost 40% of market share (PLMA, 2011). This development has become a strategic issue for retailers and manufacturers (BURTON et al., 1998). Being able to maintain an appropriate balance between distributors and manufacturers is important to retailer s profitability (AILAWADI; KELLER, 2004; AILAWADI; PAUWELS; STEENKAMP, 2008). The success of distributor's brands has been mentioned by several authors as being based on factors as: continuous improving quality (CORSTJENS; LAL, 2000; VERHOEF; FRANSES; HOEKSTRA, 2002), lower price (ASHLEY, 1998), continuous development (STEENKAMP; DEKIMPE, 1997) but also because of the increasing efforts of retailers regarding marketing programs of its own brands (ASHLEY, 1998). The main objective of this study was to analyze how some variables as price sensitivity, quality sensitivity, price-quality relationship sensitivity, perception of quality truth price and sales promotions correlate and allow consumption predictions of distributor s brands. The following specific objectives were referred: Analyzing distributor s brands consumption reports Analyse the importance and the extent of variables related to price, quality and sales promotions, capablility of determine distributors brands consumption. -Verify what extented different groups of consumers are characterized differently in their attitudes to variables as quality, price and sales promotions. To analyze these situations, was elaborated a cross-sectional research, developed through quantitative study, based on questionnaires answered by 311 persons, by which it was possible to evaluate the influence of price, quality and sales promotions in the consumption of distributor s brands. 2. DISTRIBUTOR'S BRANDS Nowadays, the brand is one of the most valuable assets of the companies. Therefore, its management is very important in business or academic levels. Manufacturers, who led the market for years, are now facing a drop in sales of its brands in favour of an increased distributor s brands sales (CARVALHO; CUNHA, 2004). In accordance with the Private Label Manufacturers Association (PLMA, 2011), distributor s brands are all the products marketed with the brands or logo name of the distributor or with other brands name created exclusively for this. These are, therefore, brands that are owned, controlled and sold exclusively by a specific distributor (ROUSSEAU, 1997). V. 14, pp , Abril,

4 2.1 VARIABLES CORRELATED WITH THE DISTRIBUTOR'S BRANDS There are several variables that can help understanding the brand s consumer behavior. Distributor s brands consumption involves various attitudes, perceptions and preferences before purchasing (MANDHACHITARA; SHANNON; HADJIAHARLANBAUS, 2007). It becomes, therefore, pertinent, to present each of these variables, reviewing studies that analyzed them and the results found. 2.2 PRICE SENSITIVITY, QUALITY SENSITIVITY AND SALES PROMOTIONS The development of distributor s brands has taken various forms and their success has been attributed in large part to the price factor. There are many studies in which the price has been shown to influence the way consumers perceive and buy (SZYMANSKI; BUSCH, 1987; PRENDERGAST; MARR, 1997; GARRETSON; FISHER; BURTON, 2002). In acordance with Cardoso and Alves (2008) the distributor's brands are priced lower than manufacturer s brands with 10% to 30%. The lowest prices in the distributor's brands can be explained by factors such as: lower production costs, cheaper packaging, and low investments in communication and lower overheads. Consequently, the lower price of these brands becomes the main reason for the purchase of these products, which justifies part of their growth (BRONNENBERG; WATHIEU, 1996; BALTAS, 1997; BURTON et al., 1998). Ashley (1998), Aggarwal and Cha (1998) think that the large price discrepancies with the manufacturer s brands and the distributors have made consumers somewhat resistant to high prices. However, the development and the success of these brands have also been attributed to other factors such as quality. There are several definitions for the term quality. According to the International Standarts Organization, quality is the totality of characteristics that a product or service has to meet to fullfill the needs of a consumer (IPQ, 2011). Obviously all consumers tend to seek quality in the products they buy and it is crucial to understand how consumers define quality. Many companies use the phrase a quality product, to indicate the excellence of the product preparation. However, quality is a very subjective concept. According to Elliot et al. (2003), when a manufacturer develops a product, takes into account the specificity quality criterion that satisfies the segment of there target customers. The quality sensitivity is therefore another important variable in the purchasing decision of distributor s brands. The distributor s brands have improved a lot, in terms of quality, and are no longer associated with the alternate and cheaper image (VERHOEF; FRANSES; HOEKSTRA, 2002). Some studies suggest that, in general terms, consumers often perceive a lower quality of distributor s brands in respect of manufacturer's brands (TELLIS; GAETH, 1990; RICHARDSON; DICK; JAIN, 1994; CHOI; SOLOMON; ENGEL, 1999; COUGHLAN, 2006). These studies differ from the blind test conducted by Wulf et al. (2005) that showed that the quality of the distributor s brands is equal to, or greater than manufacturer s brands. However, the researchers concluded that, when the distributor s brands shall be recognized, the perceived quality between the distributor and manufacturer declines (BATRA; SINHA, 2000). V. 14, pp , Abril,

5 Hoch and Banerji (1993) point out that the difference in quality between distributor s brands and manufacturer depends on technological requirements necessary for the production of the products. Nevertheless, empirical studies conducted, suggests that consumers of distributor s brands are less sensitive to quality (AILAWADI; NESLIN; GEDENK, 2001). Consumer choices are based, therefore, on perceptions of value they attach to different alternatives. According to Kotler (2003), the perceived value by consumers corresponds to the difference between the benefits and the expected total costs of an offer and the various perceived alternatives. Nevertheless for some consumers the perception of price in a given purchase that can be characterized by preoccupation with the amount of received quality relatively to the price paid, is conceptualized as the perceived value by authors as Lichtenstein, Ridgway e Netemeyer (1993). When the distributor s brands and the manufacturer have the same price, the perceived value of the manufacturer s brands is usually higher and most consumers probably will acquire them (AGGARWAL; CHA, 1998). Consumers may have a more favourable attitude in relation to the distributor s brands due to the desire to maximise the quality received in relation to the price paid (BURTON et al., 1998). The analysis of the work of Garretson, Fisher and Burton (2002) but also Jin and Suh (2005) shows the existence of a positive relationship between the demand for more value and attitude in relation to the distributor s brands. Similarly, Harcar, Kara and Kucukemiroglu (2006) concluded that the pursuit of more value contributes to a positive perception of the distributor s brands. It is visible a positive relationship between the demand for more value and purchase in these brands (BAO; MANDRIK, 2004). We can say, therefore, that consumers use price as an indicator of quality (RAO; MONROE, 1989). Kotler and Keller (2007) claims that a high price on a product, appeals to the vanity of consumers. Therefore, low price can be associated with low quality and higher prices for better quality, which leads to believe that high prices are perceived favorably by consumers as high quality products. On the other hand, several researchers claim that there is no generalized relationship between price and quality (SINHA; BATRA, 1999), but a specific relationship context, moderated by situational characteristics as, for example, the degree of knowledge about some product (PETERSON; WILSON, 1985). Thus, consumers may believe that if they pay lower prices will obtain its return in quality. For example, in the study of Lybeck, Holmlund-Rytkönen e Sääksjärvi (2006) about buying chocolates, it was found that consumers often do not believe that the lower price of the distributor s brands indicate lower quality. A sales promotion is the last variable under this study. Is one of the instruments most used by the manufacturer to fight and weaken the distributor s brands (CARDOSO; ALVES, 2008; KARRAY; HERRAN, 2008), because they are generally much disclosed (MORTON; ZETTELMEYER, 2004). Dhar and Hoch (1997), concluded in their study that the promotional activities carried out by the manufacturer s brands have little interference in sales of branded products from the distributor. However, the promotional actions of distributors branded products can have negatively influence sales on manufacturers' brands. V. 14, pp , Abril,

6 It is concluded that consumer sensitivity to sales promotions, has a positive impact on attitude toward distributer s brands and that this relationship is stronger in the case of price promotions (e.g. discount coupon and temporary reduction of direct price) than in the case of other types of promotions (for example, freebies, promotion like buy 1 get 2). The researchers justified this relationship based on usefulness of transaction that is created when the consumer pays a price below the internal reference price (BURTON et al., 1998). As verified, there are several variables that can help understanding the consumption behaviors on our brands consumers and the success of the distributor's brands has been awarded by several authors to factors such as quality, price and sales promotions (ASHLEY, 1998; CORSTJENS; LAL, 2000; VERHOEF; FRANSES; HOEKSTRA, 2002). 3. METHODOLOGY To analyze the variables proposed in this research was built a 10 point scale based on the following studies: Sales Proneness (AILAWADI; NESLIN; GEDENK, 2001), Price consciouness (AILAWADI; NESLIN; GEDENK, 2001), Quality conciousness (AILAWADI; NESLIN; GEDENK, 2001) Value Counsciousness (LICHTENSTEIN; BURTON; NETEMEYER, 2001) e Store Brand Usage Scale (AILAWADI; NESLIN; GEDENK, 2001). These scales were translated and validated for Portuguese. For example the scale Price consciouness (AILAWADI; NESLIN; GEDENK, 2001), translated as sensibilidade ao preço is composed for three items: I compare supermarket prices for at least some brands before choosing. It is important that I get the best prices on the products i buy. I check prices on small items. These affirmations should position themselves in terms of agreement on a 10 point scale, where 1 was the least agreement and 10 the maximum agreement. The processing of the data in this survey was conducted by the statistical data analysis software Statistical Package for Social Sciences - SPSS. By SPSS, the values assigned to the concordances to each of the three claims were processed, by calculating averages and their standard deviations. The survey was cross-sectional once intended to describe associations between variables. In this type of study, all measurements are made in a single moment, not existing, therefore, individual follow-up. The questionnaire used, after pre-tested with a group of 30 individuals, was sent to 350 and answered by 311 individuals of both sexes, aged between 18 and 65 years. The resulting sample was non-probability for convenience (GOLD; MALHOTRA; SEGARS, 2001). The resulting sample of research allows the inference of the results for the population or sampling error estimates and reliability level. V. 14, pp , Abril,

7 The data were collected between December 15th, 2012 to January 2nd, 2013, by phone and in person. Filling out the questionnaire lasted on average 15 minutes. 4. ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS 4.1 DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS The ages of the respondents were grouped into five age groups. The age group between 26 and 35 years composed almost half the sample (48), followed by the age group between 36 and 45 years (24). Ages between 46 and 55 years, 56 and 65 years and 18 and 25 years are represented in the sample to a lesser scale, respectively. As for the genus, about 60.45% of the respondents are females and the remaining, 39.55% males. As for the level of education, about 225 respondents have graduated, representing 72.3% of the general sample. The 27.7% rest are in secondary education. In Table 1 are showing the averages levels and standard deviations of each of the variables under study. TABLE 1 Averages and standard deviations observed in the variables. VARIABLES AVERAGE (A) STANDARD DEVIATION (SD) Price sensitivity 5,70 1,27 Sensitivity to quality 3,93 1,33 Sensitivity to price-quality relationship 5,54 1,94 Perception of the quality for the price 2,82 1,22 Adherence to promotions 5,46 1,22 Consumption of distributor brands 5,03 1,94 The variable price sensitivity has a value of Average = 5,70 e Standart Deviation = 1,27. This figure shows that the consumer values positively price, seeking, within the brand's distributor, low-priced items. The marketing literature shows that, in fact, the price has great importance in the act purchasing. In his study of supermarkets, Courtland et al. (1995) claim that articles with low prices have high importance for consumers. With respect to quality sensitivity the value is lower, A = 3,93 and a SD = 1,33 explaining that, who buys distributor s brands, not always looks for quality. Unterleider and Damacena (2006) claim that the quality is one of the positive factors that have influence the purchasing distributor s brands. In the study of Mandhachitara, Shannon and Hadjiaharlanbaus (2007) its possible to check that by not having any knowledge about the distributor s brands, the Thais people put doubts in their quality and make choices by intrinsic values as is the case with the price. Evaluating the price-quality ratio sensitivity i tis possible to affirm that the value displayed A = 5,54 and the SD = 1,94 is high. Livesey and Lennon (1978) conducted a study that found that the English serve tea with manufacturer s brands in social intercourse, preferably the most highly regarded in V. 14, pp , Abril,

8 the market, but in private situations, they use tea with distributor s brands. This study demonstrates the status passed to consumer s thruth some brands. With regards to the variable perception of the quality for the price the values presented are very low A = 2,82 and SD = 1,22. This value explains that consumers look for low prices and not for good price-quality relationships. According to the authors Rao and Monroe (1989), the consumer uses the price-quality balance as a factor in purchase review, which is not present in this case. Talking about the variable sales promotions the value is too high (A = 5,46 and SD = 1,22). This value confirms that the consumer likes to purchase products on sale. Lichtenstein, Burton and Netemeyer (2001) confirm this trend once the promotional communication has increased, such as its number of adherents. Cardoso and Alves (2008) are authors that come in a positive support for the development of distributor s brands. In this descriptive analysis concerning the averages of the variables under study, one can check a value of A = 5,03 and SD = 1,94. This value is considered high, showing that the consumer has, by habit, buy distributor s brands. In their study, Cardoso and Alves (2008) also found that the majority of surveyed uses distributer s brands which gives consistency to the present study. 4.2 INTERNAL CONSISTENCY OF THE SCALES To measure the internal consistency of the scales we used the Alpha de Cronbach (α). Alpha de Cronbach (α) is an important statistical indicator of trustworthiness, being sometimes called coefficient of trustworthiness of a scale. The higher the correlation inter items of an instrument, the higher the value of the Alpha de Cronbach. For this reason, it is known as internal consistency of the test, and α can assume values between Zero (0) and one (1). In relation to the internal consistency of the scale titled as price sensitivity can verify that it is good and accurate reporting of results α = to the Alpha de Cronbach. Actually the marketing literature shows that the price has great importance. The internal consistency of the scale on the quality sensitivity we can check that the value of α = is considered reasonable reliability. Despite being a relatively value lower than the the ranges presented above, do not cease to be a good value for the Alpha de Cronbach. Moore and McGowan (2001) present, in his study of the Polish consumer, a value of α = There is a small difference on the results presented in this study, since the relative value to the authors is a lot shorter. The internal consistency of the scale price-quality sensitivity is good and accurate reporting of results α = to the Alpha de Cronbach. These results agree with those of the study of Moore e McGowan (2001), about the Polish consumer, in which one can find an Alpha of Cronbach' with the value of α = considered good and trustworthy. Finally, as regards the internal consistency of the scale on perceptions of quality for the price, the result of α = is considered excellent and trustworthy. Consumer prefere a certain brand, because of the perceived image as it is claimed by Cardoso and Alves (2008). In the case of the internal consistency of the scale of sales promotions, the value of the Alpha of Cronbach is α = showing a value also excelente and reliability. V. 14, pp , Abril,

9 Authors such as Cardoso and Alves (2008) see disclosure a support for the distributor's brands in the sense that this serves as a way to combat the manufacturer s brands. This can be verified by supermarkets and hypermarkets advertisements that advertise both kind odd products. In these cases, the distributor's brands are highlighted and the manufacturer in some way hidden. Also authors such as Darke and Dahl (1997) and also Gilbert and Choi (2003) claim that the distributor d brands have the great advantage of disclosing the logo itself. The disclosure made on behalf of a chain store will always have as ultimate goal to attract targeted consumers to its interior, is to make purchases in general or to buy the distributor s brands. According to the classification of the reliability Alpha de Cronbach of Hill A. and Hill M. (2000), one can assess the internal consistency of the scales relating to Consumer Reporting of distributor s brands, with a value of α = 0.941, as trusted and excellent. 4.3 CORRELATION BETWEEN VARIABLES In order to understand how variables correlate was used the SPSS Pearson correlation. According to Pereira (2008), the correlation statistical procedure determines the degree of association between variables and allows the investigator to find out, for example, if there is relationship between the variable price sensitivity and purchase Reporting of distributor s brands. The correlation measures the relationship between variables (for quantitative variables) or the orders of these variables (for ordinal variables). Correlation coefficients may vary between -1 (negative Association) and 1 (perfect positive correlation). The value Zero (0) indicates that there is no linear relationship between the variables. The price sensitivity has with purchase reporting of distributor s brands a coefficient of correlation with the value of r = This value is positive and statistically significant (p = 0.000). The value of this correlation demonstrates that price is a factor with enough strength in buying branded products from the distributor. This fact is consistent with the literature review, which states that the consumer gives increasing value to the "bargain" and thus the low price, often used as a way of capturing the consumer's attention (DARKE; DAHL, 1997). We can affirm that the importance given to the price is greater the higher the consumer trend in acquiring branded products from the distributor. About the variable quality sensitivity, we can say that is one of the elements with less force in the act of acquisition of branded products from the distributor. The correlation between quality sensitivity and reporting of purchase of distributor s brands is significant and negative (r 0.579; p = 0.000) which shows that the consumer who normally acquires distributor s brands don't worry a lot about quality. On price-quality relationship sensitivity there is a positive correlation, albeit very low (r = 0.120; p = 0.035), higher values on price-quality relationship sensitivity are associated with higher consumption of distributor s brands. Evaluating the perception of quality for the price there is a negative and significant correlation (r ; p = 0.000). This result demonstrates that the consumer believes in the existence of a negative V. 14, pp , Abril,

10 relationship between the value and the quality received when purchasing products with the brand of the distributor. In the background is the idea mentioned in the literature review which states that the consumer uses the price as a sign of quality evaluation (RAO; MONROE, 1989). In this specific case, the consumer assumes the quality of a branded product distributor reflected negatively in price, and its lower price, synonymous with low quality. As regards sales promotions this presents a correlation with the account of the distributor s brands buying positive and statistically significant (r = 0.801; p = 0.000) demonstrating that the adherence to promotions is a factor to account for the purchase of distributor brands. 4.4 VARIABLES THAT PREDICT THE CONSUMER'S ACCOUNT OF THE DISTRIBUTOR'S BRANDS The Table 2 presents the results of multiple regression analysis in the linear Stepwise model containing as dependent variables: price sensitivity, quality sensitivity, price-quality relationship sensitivity, and lack of quality for the price and sales promotions. Are indicated multiple regression coefficients (R 2 ) and the standardized betas (β). In Table 2, note that all variables were retained as predictors, that is, all independent variables were significant predictive power about the dependent variable, which explains the variance reporting total 82.4% consumption vis-à-vis distributor s brands, being statistically significant model, there is at least one variable with regression coefficient other than Zero (0). In the first analysis of this regression, on the account of the distributor's brand consumption, the variable sales promotions (R ; β 0.801; p < 0.01), with a rather significant contribution explaining approximately 64% of total variance and a relationship with this positive character (β = 0.801). Such findings seem to indicate that the consumption of distributor brands is favourably influenced by the completion of promotions by retailers. Being the adherence to promotions, of the five variables, this has greater ability to influence. TABLE 2 Multiple linear Stepwise regression analysis-dependent variable: Consumer Reporting of distributor brands. VARIABLES PREDICTIVE DEPENDENTS REGRESSION COEFFICIENTR 2 β (BETAS STANDARDIZED) Adherence to promotions 0.640** 0.801** Sensitivity to quality 0.101** ** Price sensitivity 0.064** 0.347** Perception of the quality for the price 0.008** ** Sensitivity to price-quality relationship 0.011** 0.220** Secondly, the model presents the independent variable quality sensitivity, (R 2 = 0.101; β ; p < 0.01) which justifies the total variance 10% and features a negative Beta value of β 0.338, which reveals that this sensitivity negatively influence the consumption of distributor brands, demonstrating that the quality or lack thereof, can download the consumption of distributor brands. The independent variable price sensitivity enter the regression equation in 3rd place, (R 2 = 0.064; β = 0.347; p < 0.01), explains the total variance and 6.4% introduces a Beta value of β = V. 14, pp , Abril,

11 relationship indicator in a positive sense. This value seems to explain that the distributor s brands consumer appreciates the price factor, contributing to higher consumption of the same. The independent variable perception of quality for the price goes into the regression equation in 4th place, (R 2 = 0.008; β = ; p < 0.01), explains only 0.8% of the total variance, with a relationship with the account of buying distributor brands of negative character (β = ), demonstrating that this balance influences negatively the consumption of distributor brands. The independent variable price-quality relationship sensitivity enters the regression line in fifth and last place, (R 2 = 0.011; β = 0.220; p < 0.01), explains only 1.1% of the total variance and presents a value for β Beta = This Beta value indicates that this is a positive character, meaning that the sensitivity to positively influence the consumption value of distributor brands. 5. CONCLUSION One of the main conclusions of this research was the fact that all the variables under study have ability to predict consumption of distributor s brands. That is, by means of various statistical analyses performed along the research it became clear that both the price variable as the variable quality or sales promotions influence the purchase of distributor s brands. Another conclusion was that the state of art points out that lower prices of 10% to 30% in the distributor's brands, are the main reason for their purchase, justifying the growth (BRONNENBERG; WATHIEU, 1996; BALTAS, 1997; BURTON et al., 1998). These data meet the results of that research, when it shows that price is one of the strongest factors, positive and shopping influencers of brand of the Distributor. Also the quality is presented as a positive factor in both the state of the art as on the results of this research. It is important to mention that the improvements in quality of distributor s brands are highly visible (VERHOEF; FRANSES; HOEKSTRA, 2002) and often the quality is equal to or greater than the manufacturer's brands (WULF et al., 2005). The results of this research also show that the quality or lack there of, can influence the consumption, being one of the elements with less force in the act of acquisition of branded products from the distributor. It was concluded that many consumers who acquire usually distributor s brands, don't worry too much about the quality of the product, once you believe in the existence of a negative relationship between the value payable and receivable quality when buying branded products from the distributor. Finally, with regard to sales promotions, we can affirm that its impact is positive and very strong calling for an agreement with the literature in which bills itself as a high performance factor and an instrument increasingly used (CARDOSO; ALVES, 2008; KARRAY; HERRAN, 2008). V. 14, pp , Abril,

12 However, it is necessary to consider that the manufacturer s brands are usually fairly disclosed (MORTON; ZETTELMEYER, 2004), which can act as a threat to distributor s brands. All these conclusions can lead to several key implications for marketers. On the one hand, these tags can be attached to the concept of low quality at an appropriate price, which will hinder the evolution, although this is an image that appears to be the desired in strategic terms. In this context, distributors and managers should study ways to show the markets that their brands are holding as much or more quality brands of manufacturers and primarem for that. On the other hand, more than demonstrate the quality, it seems paramount to raise sales promotions. These are factors that must continue in constant development, since they are strong and can work as a responsiveness strategy on the part of consumers. 6. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH This study presents some limitations, mostly at the level of the sample, for being a non-probability sample for convenience and reduced size, because if choosing a crosscut, the use of only five variables and the type of evidence used statistics. Future studies should use broader samples and preferably probabilistic, include other variables and deepen the evidence statistics. This study constituted a contribution to the knowledge of the distributor's brands. Their importance relates to the possible help we can offer marketers, coaches and managers who work with these marks. However, given the growing importance of the subject, it is considered that there is still a long way to go in the field of research, being, therefore, a job that must be continued by other researchers. It would be interesting to continue research on this topic to the extent that the distributor's brands are increasingly present in points of sale. 7. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES AGGARWAL, P.; CHA, T. Asymmetric price competition and store vs national brand choice. Journal of Product and Brand Management, v. 7, n. 3, 1998, pp AILAWADI, K. L.; PAUWELS, K.; STEENKAMP, J. B. E. M. Private-label use and store loyalty. Journal of Marketing, v. 72, nov., 2008, pp AILAWADI, K. L.; KELLER, K. L. Understanding retail branding: conceptual insights and research priorities. Journal of Retailing, v. 80. n. 4, 2004, pp AILAWADI, K. L.; NESLIN, S. A.; GEDENK, K. Pursuing the value-conscious consumer: store brands versus national brand promotions. Journal of Marketing, v. 65, n. 1, 2001, pp ASHLEY, S. R. How to effectively compete against private-label brands. Journal of Advertising Research, v. 38, n.1, 1998, pp V. 14, pp , Abril,

13 BALTAS, G. Determinants of store brand choice: a behavioral analysis. Journal of Product & Brand Management, v. 6, n. 5, 1997, pp BAO, Y.; MANDRIK, C. A. Discerning store brand users from value consciousness consumers: the role of prestige sensitivity and need for cognition. Advances in Consumer Research, v. 31, n. 1, pp , BATRA, R.; SINHA, I. Consumer-level factors moderating the success of private label brands. Journal of Retailing, v. 76, n. 2, pp BRONNENBERG, B. J.; WATHIEU, L. Asymmetric promotion effects and brand. Marketing Science Review, University of Texas, v. 15, n. 4, BURTON, S.; LICHTENSTEIN, D. R.; NETEMEYER, R. G.; GARRETSON, J. A. A scale for measuring attitude toward private label products and an examination, In: CARDOSO, A.; ALVES P. A atitude dos consumidores relativamente à marca dos distribuidores. Revista da Faculdade de Ciências Humanas e Sociais, UFP, n. 5, pp 38-55, CARVALHO, C.; CUNHA, S. Marcas de distribuidor em Portugal. Lisboa: Aje Sociedade Editorial, CHOI, S. C.; COUGHLAN, A. T. Private label positioning: quality versus feature differentiation from the national brand, Journal of Retailing, v. 82, n.2, 2006, pp CORSTJENS, M.; LAL, R. Building store loyalty through store brands, Journal of Marketing Research, v. 37 (August), pp COURTLAND, B.; THILL, J.; DOVEL, G.; WOOD, M. Advertising Excellence, New York: McGraw Hill, DELEERSNYDER, L.; DEKIMPE, B. M. G.; STEENKAMP, J. How business cycles contribute to private-label success: evidence from the United States and Europe, Journal of Marketing, v. 71, n. 1, 2007, pp DARKE, P. R.; DAHL, D. M.; Fairness and Discounts the subjective value of bargain, Journal of consumer psycdehology, 13, 1997, pp DHAR, S. K.; HOCH, S. J. Why store brand penetration varies by retailer, Marketing Science Review, v. 16, n. 3, pp , DRAPER N. R.; SMITH H. Applied regression analysis. New York, ELLIOTT, M. W. T.; SPECK, P. S.; Consumer Perceptions of Advertising Clutter and Its Impact Across Various Media, Journal of Advertising Research, 38 (January/ February), 1998, pp FREDMAN, D. A.; A note on screening regression equations. The American Statistician, n. 37, pp , V. 14, pp , Abril,

14 FREEDMAN, J. H.; STUETZLE, W. Projection Pursuit Regression. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 76, 1981, p GARRETSON, J. A.; FISHER, D.; BURTON, S. Antecedents of private label attitude and national brand promotion attitude: similarities and differences, Journal of Retailing, v. 78, n. 1, 2002, pp GARRETSON, J. A.; BURTON, S. An examination of the economic, shoppingrelated, and psychological profiles of highly coupon and sale prone consumers, Marketing Theory and Applications Proceedings of the AMA Winter Educators Conference, GREWAL, D.; Pechmann, C. (Eds.). Chicago: American Marketing Association, 2002, pp GILBERT D.; CHOY K. C. Relationship marketing practice relation to different bank ownership, International Journal of Bank Marketing, v. 21, n. 3, 2003, pp GOLD, Andrew H.; MALHOTRA, Arvind; SEGARS, Albert H. Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, Summer 2001; 18, 1; ABI/INFORM Global, p HARCAR, T.; KARA, A.; KUCUKEMIROGLU, O. Consumer's perceived value and buying behavior of store brands: an empirical investigation, The Business Review, v. 5, n. 2, pp , HILL, A.; HILL, M. M. Investigação por questionário. Lisboa: Edições Silabo, HOCH, S. J.; BANERJI, S. When do private labels succeed? Sloan Management Review, v. 34, (Summer), pp , INSTITUTO PORTUGUÊS DA QUALIDADE - IPQ, Disponivel em: < Acessado em: 24 maio JIN, B.; SUH, Y. G. Integrating effect of consumer perception factors in predicting private brand purchase in a Korean discount store context, The Journal of Consumer Marketing, v. 22, n. 2, 2005, pp KARRAY S.; HERAN G. Investigating the relationship between advertising and pricing in a channel with private label offering, The theoretic model review of marketing Science (6), pp. 1-3, KELLER, K. L. Strategic brand management: building, measuring, and managing brand equity, International Edition, 2nd Ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, KELLER, K. L. Managing brands for the long run: brand reinforcement and revitalization strategies, California Management Review, v. 41, n. 3, pp , KEPPEL, M. Design and analysis: a researcher's handbook, 3. ed. Prentice-Hall, V. 14, pp , Abril,

15 KOTLER, P.; KELLER, K. L. Administração de marketing. São Paulo: Pearson Prentice HallLamey, KOTLER, P. Princípios de marketing. 9. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Prentice-Hall do Brasil, KOTLER, P. Marketing para o século XXI: como criar e dominar mercados. São Paulo: Futura, LICHTENSTEIN, D. R.; BURTON, S.; NETEMEYER, R. An examination of dealproneness across sales promotion types: a consumer segmentation perspective, Journal of Retailing, v. 73, n, 2, 2001, pp LIVESEY F.; LENNON, P. Factors Affecting Consumers' Choice between Manufacturer Brands and Retailer Own Labels, European Journal of Marketing, v. 12, Iss: 2, 1978, pp LYBECK, A.; HOLMLUND-RYTKÖNEN, M.; SÄÄKSJÄRVI, M. Store brands vs. manufacturer brands: consumer perceptions and buying of chocolate bars in Finland, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, v. 16, n. 4, pp , MANDHACHITARA R.; SHANNON R.; HADJIAHARLANBAUS, Why private label grocery brands have not succeded in Asia, Journal of Global Marketing, 2007, pp MAROY, C. A análise qualitativa de entrevistas, Lisboa: Gradiva, MOORE, M.; MCGOWAN, K. K. Cross-cultural equivalence of price perceptions between US and Polish consumers. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, v. 31 Iss: 5, 2001, pp MORTON, F.; ZETTELMEYER, F. The strategic positioning of store brands in retailer manufacture negotiation, Review of industrial organization, v. 24, pp , NETER, J. M. H.; KUTNER, C. J.; WASSERMAN, N. W. Applied linear statistical models. 4th ed., WCB, New York: McGraw-Hill, PEREIRA, A. SPSS Guia prático de utilização, Lisboa: Edições Silabo, PETERSON, R. A.; WILSON, W. R. Perceived risk and price reliance schema as price perceived quality mediators. In: Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Storesand Merchandise, JACOBY, J.; OLSON, J. C. (Eds.) D. C. Heath and Company, Lexington, MA, 1985, pp PRIVATE LABEL MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION - PLMA. 2011a. Private label gains in Europe. Disponível em: < Acessado em: 1 jun PRENDERGAST, G. P.; MARR, N. E. Perceptions of generic products: a macro and micro view, Journal of Product and Brand Management, v. 6, n. 2, 1997, pp V. 14, pp , Abril,

16 RAO, A. R.; MONROE, K. B. The effect of price, brand name and store name on buyers perception of products quality: an integrative review, Journal of marketing research, 26, 1989, pp RICHARDSON, P. S.; DICK, A. S.; JAIN, A. K. Extrinsic and intrinsic cue effects on perceptions of store brand quality, Journal of Marketing, v. 58, October, 1994, pp ROUSSEAU, J. A. Manual de distribuição Uma visão global e estruturante da moderna distribuição, Control Jornal Editora, SINHA, I.; BATRA, R. The effect of consumer price consciousness on private label purchase, International, Journal of Research in Marketing, v. 16, n, 3, 1999, pp SOLOMON, M.; ENGEL, S. B. Blurring the boundaries between commercial signification and popular culture, Journal of current issues and research in advertising, 1999, p. 16. STEENKAMP, J. B.; HOFSTEDE, F.; WEDEL, M. A cross-national investigation into the individual and national cultural antecedents of consumer innovativeness, Journal of Marketing, v. 63, n. 2, 1999, pp STEENKAMP, J. B.; DEKIMPE, M. G. The increasing power of store brands: building loyalty and market share, Long Range Planning, v. 30. n. 6, December, 1997, pp SZYMANSKI, D. M.; BUSCH, P. S. Identifying the generics-prone consume: a metaanalysis, Journal of Marketing Research, v. 24, n. 4, 1987, pp TABACHNICK, B. G.; FIDELL, L. S. Using multivariate statistics. New York: Harper Collins. Supplementary, TELLIS, G. J.; GAETH, G. J. Best value, price-seeking, and price-aversion: the impact of information and learning on consumer choices, Journal of Marketing, v. 54, n. 2, 1990, pp VERHOEF, C.; FRANSES, H.; HOEKSTRA, J. C. The effect of relational constructs on customer referrals and number of services purchased from a multi service provider: does age of relationship matter? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, v. 5, Summer, 2002, pp ZEITHAML, V. A. Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality and Value: A Means- End Model and Synthesis of Evidence, Journal of Marketing, v. 52, July, 1988, pp UNTERLEIDER, J.; DAMACENA, C. Estratégias de desenvolvimento de marcas próprias por supermercados no Brasil, Revista Mackenzie, v. 7, n. 3, pp , WULF, K. de; ODEKERKEN-SCHRÖDER, G.; GOEDERTIER, F. E.; OSSELL, G. V. Consumer perceptions of store brands versus national brands, Journal of Consumer Marketing, v. 22, n. 4, 2005, pp Note: Authors are solely responsible for the translation of their articles from Portuguese to English. V. 14, pp , Abril,