Vol. 13 No. 1 (2024)
Original Research Article

Measuring price sensitivity to the consumption situation

PDF
  • Teresa Candeias,
  • Hugo Alonso
Teresa Candeias
Lusófona University
Hugo Alonso
Lusófona University, University of Aveiro
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-15236

Published 2024-04-16

Keywords

  • Wine,
  • Consumption situation,
  • Willingness to pay,
  • Sensitivity measure

How to Cite

Candeias, T., & Alonso, H. (2024). Measuring price sensitivity to the consumption situation. Wine Economics and Policy, 13(1), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.36253/wep-15236

Copyright (c) 2024 Teresa Candeias, Hugo Alonso

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Consumer segmentation is very relevant in the design of wine marketing strategies. Previous studies showed that there is a relationship between the consumption situation and the willingness to pay for a bottle of wine. In this sense, the consumption situation is considered a segmentation variable. However, price sensitivity in relation to the consumption occasion was not measured. In this paper, we propose four measures of price sensitivity to the consumption occasion. We illustrate how to compute them and discuss their advantages and limitations. One of the measures only discriminates consumers that are sensitive to the consumption occasion from those who are not. In turn, the other measures are more informative and make it possible to distinguish between different degrees of sensitivity. The proposed measures can be used to classify consumers and further improve the knowledge of wine marketeers and decision makers in the wine industry about them.

PDF

References

  1. Bruwer, J., Li, E. and Reid, M. Segmentation of the Australian wine market using a wine-related lifestyle approach. Journal of Wine Research. 2002; 13(3), 217-242.
  2. Spawton, A. L. Of wine and live access: An introduction to the wine economy and state of wine marketing. European Journal of Wine Marketing. 1991; 25 (3), 1- 48.
  3. Lockshin, L. and Hall, J. Consumer purchasing behavior for wine: what we know and where we are going. Paper presented at the International Wine Marketing Colloquium, Adelaide. 2003.
  4. Belk, R. W. An exploratory assessment of situational effects in buyer behavior. Journal of marketing research. 1974; 11(2), 156-163.
  5. Quester, P. and Smart, J. G. The influence of consumption situation and product involvement over consumers’ use of product attributes. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 1998; 15(3), 220-38.
  6. Aqueveque, C. Extrinsic cues and perceived risk: the influence of consumption situation. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 2006; 23(5), 237-247.
  7. Hall, J., Lockshin, L. and O’Mahony, G. B. Exploring the links between wine choice and dining occasions: Factors of influence. International journal of wine marketing. 2001; 13(1), 36-53.
  8. Barber, N., Taylor, D.C. and Dodd, T.H. The importance of wine bottle closures in retail purchase decisions of consumers. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management. 2009; 18(6), 597-614.
  9. Hall, J. and Lockshin, L. Understanding Wine Purchasing. It’s not the Consumer, It’s the Occasion. Australian & New Zealand Wine Industry. 1999; 14(3), 69-78.
  10. Cholette, S. and Castaldi, R. Analyzing the US retail wine market using price and consumer segmentation models (refereed). Paper presented at the International Wine Marketing Symposium, San Francisco. 2005.
  11. Yu, Y., Sun, H., Goodman, S., Chen, S. and Ma, H. Chinese choices: a survey of wine consumers in Beijing. International Journal of Wine Business Research. 2009; 21(2), 155-168.
  12. Roe, D. and Bruwer, J. Self-concept, product involvement and consumption occasions: Exploring fine wine consumer behavior. British Food Journal. 2017;119(6), 1362-1377.
  13. Thach, E. C. and Olsen, J. E. Market segment analysis to target young adult wine drinkers. Agribusiness. 2006; 22 (3), 307–322.
  14. Kolyesnikova, N., Dodd, T. H. and Duhan, D. F. Consumer Attitudes towards Local Wines in an Emerging Region: A Segmentation Approach. International Journal of Wine Business Research. 2008; 20, 321-334.
  15. Rouzet, E. and Seguin, G. ll marketing del vino. Il mercato. Le strategie commerciali. La distribuzione. Bologna, Italia: Il Sole 24 OREEdagricole. 2004.
  16. Kotler, P., Keller, K., Brady, M., Goodman, M. and Hansen, T. Marketing Management. 4th European Edition. Pearson. 2019.
  17. Thach, E. C. and Olsen, J. E. The search for new wine consumers: Marketing focus on consumer lifeStyle or lifeCycle? International Journal of Wine Marketing. 2005; 16, 44-57.
  18. Lai, A.W. Consumption situation and product knowledge in the adoption of a new product. European Journal of Marketing. 1991; 25(10), 55-67.
  19. Babin, B. J., and Harris, E. G. CB Consumer Behaviour. Cengage Canada. 2023.
  20. Bonner, P. Considerations for situational research. Advances in Consumer Research. 1985; 12(1), 368-73.
  21. Hornik, J. Situational effects on the consumption of time. Journal of Marketing. 1982; 46(4), 44-55.
  22. Chow, S., Celsi, R. L. and Abel, R. The effects of situational and intrinsic sources of personal relevance on brand choice decisions. Advances in Consumer Research. 1990; 17(1), 755-60.
  23. Dubow, J. S. Occasion-based vs. user-based benefit segmentation: a case study. Journal of Advertising Research. 1992; 32(2), 11-18.
  24. Boncinelli, F., Dominici, A., Gerini, F. and Marone, E. Consumers wine preferences according to purchase occasion: Personal consumption and gift-giving. Food quality and preference. 2019; 71, 270-278.
  25. Bauman, M.J., Velikova, N., Dodd, T. and Blankenship, T. Generational differences in risk perception and situational uses of wine information sources. International Journal of Wine Business Research. 2020; 32(2), 247-265.
  26. Aqueveque, C. Consumers’ preferences for low-priced wines’ packaging alternatives: the influence of consumption occasion, gender, and age. British Food Journal. 2023; 125(3), 781-793
  27. Fountain, J. and Lamb, C. Generation Y as young wine consumers in New Zealand: how do they differ from Generation X. International Journal of Wine Business Research. 2011; 23(2), 107-24.
  28. Olsen, J. E., Thach, E. C. and Nowak, L. Wine for my generation: exploring how US wine consumers are socialized to wine. Journal of Wine Research. 2007; 18(1), 1-18.
  29. Antonelli, G. (a cura di) Marketing agroalimentare. Specificità e temi di analisi. Milano: FrancoAngeli. 2004.
  30. Onur, I., Bruwer, J. and Lockshin, L. Reducing information asymmetry in the auctioning of non-perishable experience goods: The case of online wine auctions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. 2020; 54, 1-13.
  31. Dodds, W. B. and Monroe K. B. The Effect of Branded & Price Information on Subjective Product Evaluations. Advances in Consumer Research. 1985; 12, 85-90.
  32. Keown, C. and Casey, M. Purchasing behavior in the Northern Ireland Wine Market. British Food Journal. 1995; 97(1), 17-20.
  33. Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O. and Teel, J. E. Consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence and attributional sensitivity. Psychology & Marketing; 1992; 9(5), 379-394.
  34. Solomon, M. R., Bamossy, G., Askegaard, S. and Hogg, M. K. Consumer behavior: A European perspective. Pearson. 2019.
  35. Oczkowski, E. and Doucouliagos, H. Wine prices and quality ratings: a meta‐regression analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 2015; 97(1), 103-121.
  36. Skuras, D. and Vakrou, A. Consumers’ willingness to pay for origin-labelled wine: a Greek case study. British Food Journal. 2002; 104(11), 898-912,
  37. Lange, C., Martin, C., Chabanet, C., Combris, P. and Issanchou, S. Impact of the information provided to consumers on their willingness to pay for champagne: comparison with hedonic scores. Food Quality and Preference. 2002; 13 7-8, 597-608.
  38. Veale, R. and Quester, P. Do consumer expectations match experience? Predicting the influence of price and country of origin on perceptions of product quality. International Business Review. 2009; 18(2), 134-144.
  39. Lecat, B., Le Fur, E. and Outreville, J.F. Perceived risk and the willingness to buy and pay for “corked” bottles of wine. International Journal of Wine Business Research. 2016; 28(4), 286-307.
  40. Sellers-Rubio, R. and Nicolau-Gonzalbez, J. L. Estimating the willingness to pay for a sustainable wine using a Heckit model. Wine Economics and Policy. 2016; 5(2), 96-104.
  41. Amato, M., Ballco, P., López-Galán, B., De Magistris, T. and Verneau, F. Exploring consumers’ perception and willingness to pay for “Non-Added Sulphite” wines through experimental auctions: A case study in Italy and Spain. Wine Economics and Policy, 2017, 6(2), 146-154.
  42. Lanfranchi, M., Schimmenti, E., Campolo, M. and Giannetto, C. The willingness to pay of Sicilian consumers for a wine obtained with sustainable production method: An estimate through an ordered probit sample-selection model. Wine Economics and Policy, 2019, 8(2), 203-215.
  43. Orth, Ulrich. Consumer personality and other factors in situational brand choice variation. Journal of Brand Management. 2005; 13(2), 115-133.
  44. Stöckl, A. Der Flaschenverschluss zur Differenzierung im Marketing. In: Der Winzer, 09/2007, Vienna. 2007.
  45. Capitello, R., Bazzani, C. and Begalli, D. Consumer personality, attitudes and preferences in out-of-home contexts: The case of rosé wine in Italy. International Journal of Wine Business Research. 2019; 31(1), 48-67.
  46. Armstrong, G., Kotler, P., Harker, M. and Brennan, R. Marketing: An introduction. Pearson. 2021.
  47. Keller, K. L., and Parameswaran, M. G. Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity. 5th Edition. Pearson. 2020.
  48. Krishnamurthi, L. and Raj, S. P. An Empirical Analysis of the Relationship between Brand Loyalty and Consumer Price Elasticity. Marketing Science. 1991; 10(2), 172-183.
  49. Lim, T. and McCann, R. J. Geometrical Bounds for Variance and Recentered Moments. Mathematics of Operations Research. 2022; 47(1), 286-296.
  50. Benjamin, A. T. and Quinn, J. Proofs that Really Count: The Art of Combinatorial Proof. The Mathematical Association of America. 2003.