Consumers’ Perceived Brand Value in the Nigerian “Fruit flavored alcoholic drink” Market.

 Introduction

Understanding why consumers make purchases is considered critical because, through such understanding, companies can better design their distribution facets to ensure that the right products are supplied for the right consumers, and sales are more or less guaranteed in the process. If such understanding is not forthcoming, it becomes very difficult for companies to respond to consumers in terms of their needs and wants. On that note, it is crucial to be aware of the differences between consumer and industrial purchase decisions, as the approach adopted by companies in buying differs from the approaches adopted by consumers. In terms of consumers’ purchase decisions, perceived value is a major element that influences their purchase of any given product. This is because the more consumers perceive a product to be worth the money invested (purchase cost) in terms of the value obtained from using it, the more likely they are to make such purchases.

In any case, the focus of this research is on consumers, and it is designed to gain an understanding of how consumers perceive brand value in the Nigerian "fruit-flavored alcoholic drink" market. In order to achieve this objective, the market leader (Guinness Nigeria PLC with its product "SNAPP") is being compared with a market follower (SIX12 Investments Nigeria Limited with its product "SIX12"). In the course of achieving the set objective, this paper will look into the corporate backgrounds of the two brands as well as highlight distinctive similarities between the two products. The SHETH Model of consumer purchase decisions will be used to analyze consumers’ perceived brand value in this case. The paper is basically divided into three sections. The first section is a background overview of the brands being discussed; the second section is a review of the literature; and the final section is a comprehensive analysis of the major findings from the study.

Background analysis

Corporate profile: Guinness Nigeria PLC (SNAPP)

Established in 1963, Lagos, Nigeria, was chosen as the first location outside of the British Isles to brew Guinness' iconic dark beer (Guinness Nigeria, 2014a). Since its establishment, the company has recorded tremendous and continuous growth in terms of customer volume and market share, and it has quickly become the taste of Nigerians when it comes to having a good beer. The company has continued to introduce new drinks in the Nigerian market as it pushed towards continued customization to meet consumers’ needs. SNAPP is the company's latest product.

Figure 1: SNAPP: an apple-flavored alcoholic drink

Source: adapted from Guinness Nigeria (2014a).

SNAPP was introduced by Guinness in the ready-to-drink (RTD) drink category on September 22nd, 2012 (Guinness Nigeria, 2014b). The company describes it as a premium, natural, refreshing apple-flavored alcoholic drink that is produced specially for the sophisticated and trendy ladies of the modern century.

It is the first alcohol brand to deliver the taste of an apple-flavored alcoholic beverage for the Nigerian market. Since its inception, it has been widely accepted by Nigerian society and consumers, and it is readily available across stores nationwide.

Overall, the features of the SNAPP drink embody the corporate value and mantra that guides Guinness’s philosophy in terms of "delivering quality products that are tailored for the individual tastes of customers." This can also be viewed as the primary reason (perception) why consumers do not have a shortage of the product.

Corporate profile: SIX12 Investments Nigeria Limited (SIX12)

Incorporated in 2014, SIX12 is described as the new phase of the Nigerian brewing industry. The company shows full commitment to the health and wellness of its customers by assuring them that all their products will be made from pure natural fruit sources (SIX12 Limited, 2014a). It is located in Enugu State, Nigeria, and unlike the Guinness brand, it is actually a Nigerian-born brand.

SIX12TM Apple Flavored Cider is actually its first product on the market (SIX12 Limited, 2014, b). In line with the brand’s assurance, the drink is made from pure natural apple fruit, and each can contains 25% of natural apple. It also contains 5% vodka, which blends well with the rich apple taste to give consumers a quality apple taste while also providing them with rich alcoholic contents.

SIX12 Apple Flavored Cider (Figure 2) 

Source: adapted from SIX12 Limited (2014, b).

Unlike the Guinness brand, the SIX12 brand is aimed at both male and female customers (SIX12 Limited, 2014).The brand is also readily available across Nigerian stores, with the main market dominance in terms of sales experienced in the eastern region. Additionally, it is produced under Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) contract manufacturing in Vietnam for SIX12 Investments Nigeria Limited, thus allowing Nigerians to enjoy a rich and quality imported product.

Comparison of the two products: a product feature review

Comparative elements	SNAPP	SIX12
Volume	330ml	330ml
Packaging	12 aluminum cans per carton	24 aluminum cans and 1 glass bottle per container
Retail price	2,000 naira per carton	4,500 naira per carton.
Consumer price	Each can costs 200 naira.	250 naira per can or bottle
Origin	Produced in Vietnam	Nigerian made
Apple content	25% natural apple	Only apple flavors
Target market	Both genders (above 18 years old)	Women over the age of 18 who are sophisticated and trendy.

From the above analysis, as gathered from earlier discussions, it can be seen that both products are closely related in terms of the value they offer, but SIX12 has a higher value in the sense that it contains pure natural apple, while SNAPP is made mostly of artificial apple flavors. Additionally, SIX12 is priced lower than SNAPP in both retail and final consumer pricing. The full analysis of all these perceived values will be presented later in this research. 

Review of literature

An understanding of consumers’ perceived value

When it comes to literature, the ideology of "perceived value" has been differentiated from other similar constructs like values, utility, quality, and price. Additionally, the increasing level of research performed on these constructs does present an unclear relationship between them (Lapierre et al., 1999), which makes general understanding further difficult. In actuality, some academicians in the marketing field have come to the conclusion that "value" and "values" do have the same concept, irrespective of the fact that there are clear distinctions between these two constructs. Value can be described as the outcome of an evaluated judgment, but values are used to describe standards, criteria, norms, rules, ideals, or goals that are the major basis for the evaluative judgment (Holbrook, 1994, 1999). Value is used to describe the trade-off between what has been sacrificed and what has been gained (Payne and Holt, 2001). From a contrasting perspective, values are the vital personal beliefs that people hold within themselves in terms of the goals they strive to achieve (Rokeach, 1968, 1973). As such, values can be described as the implicit criteria that individuals employ when it comes to making preference judgments about a given product. These criteria guide the way people behave because it is a reflection of their desired "outcome" from making use of a given product (Flint et al., 1997: 169). Therefore, it can now be seen that perceived value and personal values are not the same concept (Day and Crask, 2000; Oliver, 1996; Woodruff, 1997).

In the economic realm, value has been associated with utility or the desirability of a given product. In this area, utility does provide the main element that defines the concept of value (Tellis and Gaeth, 1990). In this theory, it is assumed that consumers derive value from using a given product based on the utility offered by its attributes and the alternatives forgone in terms of the price that had been paid for such a product's value. While adopting this approach, a number of authors have made use of utility in different ways to define perceived value (e.g., Afuah, 2002; Thaler, 1985; Zeithaml, 1988). In any case, current research supports the contention that perceived value is a complex construct involving more than a simple rational assessment of utility attributes.Additionally, price on its own is very indistinct and elusive in terms of the construct that it represents (Dodds et al., 1991; Woodruff and Gardial, 1996). While it is natural to consider price to be the monetary value attached to a given product, if the concept is to be fully appreciated, it should also include considerations in order areas such as effort, time, and search involved in the overall cost or the sacrifices that consumers make in the consumption experience.As such, it can easily be seen that perceived value does embody more constructs than just the trade-off between "utility" and "price" with which it has been associated (Monroe, 1990; Zeithaml, 1988).

In terms of how quality influences consumers’ perceived value, the majority of the existing literature is of the accord that value and quality are very distinct constructs (Bolton and Drew, 1991; Day and Crask, 2000; Dodds and Monroe, 1985; Monroe and Krishnan, 1985), but other researchers have also acknowledged that there are often confusions between the two terms (Oliver, 1999; Zeithaml, 1988). Overall, the above discussions have presented a background overview of the concept of perceived value and what it all implies for consumers to view one product as being better than the other.

Consumer behavior model

Consumer behavior does cover all actions made by humans when it comes to purchasing and using a given product and/or service. Consumer behavior research is critical because it provides the firm with the ability to understand the factors that influence consumer purchasing decisions.In essence, it is used to determine why consumers choose one brand over another, as well as to understand how they make these decisions and how companies can use this knowledge to create more value for customers.

In definition, consumers’ behavior can be viewed as the study of processes undertaken by individuals when it comes to selecting, purchasing, using, or disposing of a given product, idea, experience, or service in order to ensure that consumers’ needs and desires are satisfied in the process (Vainikka, 2010). There are different kinds of models that can be used to study consumers’ behavior in terms of their overall perceived value of a given product, but the focus of this paper will be on Howard and Sheth’s (1989) model.

Howard and Sheth (1989)

This model is viewed as one of the most complete and significant when it comes to the buying behavior of consumers, and it is also one of the most debated in that area. As can be seen in Figure 3 below, the model does involve the complexity of consumers’ decision-making process in the form of incomplete information (Howard, 1989). The model does attempt to present an explanation of how consumers process information and make decisions via their perception and learning inputs (which are normally gained from usage stimuli and social marketing) and how consumers convert these inputs into outputs (in the form of purchase decisions).

In the model, three levels of decision-making processes have been suggested: extensive problem solving, limited problem solving, and habitual response behavior. When it comes to extensive problem solving, consumers don’t have any basic information or background knowledge in relation to the brand or preferences for any given product. In such a situation, consumers will extensively seek information prior to making any given purchase decision. On the other hand, limited problem solving exists for consumers who have basic market knowledge and a level of preference for which brand they prefer over the others.In this case, consumers do seek comparative brand information in order to reach their final decisions. The final step, which is habitual response behavior, is a case in which consumers have learned many things about different brands available in the market and, as such, can differentiate products in terms of their features (Howard, 1989).

Figure 3: Sheth Model of Buyer Behavior

Source as adapted from: Howard (1989)

From the above figure (3), it can be seen that four sets of variables are identifiable, and they are: inputs, outputs, constructs, and external variables. Inputs consist of significant sources, or the physical features of the product; symbolic sources, or the images and ideas that are attached to the suppliers; and social sources, or the ideas that a given society does attach to the product. Perceptual and learning constructs are based on the psychological aspects involved in decision-making, and this includes how consumers receive and understand information presented, as well as information about the brand, approaches for evaluating alternatives, and purchase intentions. On the other end, outputs are related to the perception and learning variables as well as how consumers respond to these variables (Howard, 1963).

Overall, the main reason why the Sheth model is the most widely adopted and debated can be seen from the above discussions, and it all centers on the understanding that it covers all aspects of the consumers’ decision-making process, right from how they source information to factors that play a mediating role to their final decision to make purchases. In essence, it can be said that consumers’ decision-making processes embody numerous facets of their human psychology. As a result, it is easy to see why perceived value is important in purchase decisions. When consumers perceive a product as having the potential to meet their needs, they are more likely to purchase and repurchase such products as long as it meets or exceeds their expectations.

Comparative Analysis

Influence on consumers’ perceived value for SNAPP vs. SIX12

Input

SNAPP

In terms of the input, a number of associations can be made in relation to the two products. SNAPP is packaged in both bottles and aluminum cans with a classy gold design. It is an apple-flavored alcoholic drink that is made specifically for the trendy and sophisticated women of the 21^st century. Being the market leader, it is not surprising that the product is currently the most expensive in that category. It is very distinctive and easily available across the country.

SIX12

On the other hand, SIX12 has developed a very competitive advantage over the brand in their bid to conquer market shares and possibly become the largest market leader. As such, the products are packaged only in 12 aluminum cans, which means that they can easily be purchased as consumers will be paying less than half of what it takes to buy a carton of SNAPP to purchase a carton of SIX12 (but of course with 12 cans less). Additionally, SIX12 is pure natural apple cider with a crunchy alcoholic content. It is also cheaper than SNAPP (at 200 naira). However, the product is presently not easily accessible across the country like SNAPP.

Psychological constructs: perceived and learned constructs

Both brands provide a wealth of information to consumers who want to learn more about their products.Such information can be gathered from their websites, Facebook pages, Twitter pages, advertisements, and other media sources. However, since Guinness does have a broader market presence, it disseminates more information for its SNAPP than SIX12TM Limited disseminates for its SIX12 product. Psychologically, consumers view SNAPP as feminine due to the company’s marketing strategies, while SIX12 is viewed as unisex due to the company’s marketing strategies.

Output

From the above discussions, consumers can respond to the products in numerous ways. For instance, male consumers are more likely to consume SIX12 than SNAPP due to the difference in marketing positioning strategies. Also, SIX12 will easily be consumed due to its lower price tag and natural apple contents. However, due to Guinness’s huge distribution network, it can be argued that SNAPP will be consumed more in the country. Also, transportation (shipping from the country of production down to Nigeria) does have a negative influence on the availability of SIX12 in the country because Guinness can take huge advantage of the transportation gap to reach more markets and make more sales before the products finally arrive in Nigeria. In any case, ceteris paribus, it can be stated that the output (purchase decision, intention, or possibility to purchase) will be higher for SIX12 because it is priced lower, it is pure natural apple cider, it is packaged for easy purchase (12 cans in a carton instead of 24 cans, which reduced the price per carton), and it is imported.

From the above discussion, it is evidently clear that the sheth model does influence consumers’ perceptions of value for a given product, and as such, it has a great influence on their purchase intention. In essence, what this implies is that the SHETH model can be used easily to analyze factors that influence consumers’ decision-making processes as well as the perceived value of the products. Companies can now deliver more innovative products that are better aligned with the perceived value of the attributions that consumers have towards a given product as a result of such an understanding.

Conclusion

Right from the onset, the purpose of this study was communicated as being to gain an understanding of consumers' perceived value for products in terms of what influences such perceptions and the influence of such perceptions on their overall purchase intentions. As such, two brands (SNAPP and SIX12) in the Nigerian "apple-flavored alcoholic drink" market were selected for a broader analysis. From the analysis, it was gathered that consumers do view SNAPP as more feminine, while SIX12 is viewed as unisex. Additionally, the lower price tag, lower carton price, and pure natural fruit features associated with SIX12 mean that consumers are more likely to purchase SIX12 than SNAPP. However, SNAPP will likely generate the highest output because it is easily available across markets due to the advanced, sophisticated, and broad distribution network system of Guinness Nigeria. In conclusion, it can be stated that the SHETH model of perceived value is an important tool when it comes to understanding consumers’ perceived value for a given product and the influence of such value on their purchase decision-making process.

References

Afuah, A. (2002) ‘Mapping Technological Capabilities into Product Markets and Competitive Advantage: The Case of Cholesterol Drugs’, Strategic Management Journal 23(2): 171–9.

Bolton, R.N. and Drew, J.H. (1991) ‘A Multistage Model of Customers’ Assessments of Service Quality and Value’, Journal of Consumer Research 17 (4): 375–84.

Day, E. and Crask, M.R. (2000) ‘Value Assessment: The Antecedent of Customer Satisfaction’, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior 13: 52–60.

Day, E. and Crask, M.R. (2000) ‘Value Assessment: The Antecedent of Customer Satisfaction’, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior 13: 52–60.

Dodds, W.B. (1991) ‘In Search of Value: How Price and Store Name Information Influence Buyers’ Product Perceptions’, Journal of Services Marketing 5(3): 27–36.

Dodds, W.B. and Monroe, K.B. (1985) ‘The Effect of Brand and Price Information on Subjetive Product Evaluations’, Advances in Consumer Research 12(1): 85–90.

Flint, D.J., Woodruff, R.B. and Gardial, S.F. (1997) ‘Customer Value Change in Industrial Marketing Relationships: A Call for New Strategies and Research’, Industrial Marketing Management 26(2): 163–75.

Guinness Nigeria (2014a). Overview. Available at: http://www.guinness-nigeria.com/about/overview/ [Accessed on: 27-10-2014].

Guinness Nigeria (2014b). Snapp. Available at: http://www.guinness-nigeria.com/brands/detail/snapp/ [Accessed on: 27-10-2014].

Holbrook, M.B. (1994) ‘The Nature of Customer Value: An Axiology of Services in the Consumption Experience’, in R. Rust and R.L. Oliver (eds) Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice, pp. 21–71. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Holbrook, M.B. (1999) ‘Introduction to Consumer Value’, in M.B. Holbrook (ed.) Consumer Value. A Framework for Analysis and Research, pp. 1–28. London: Routledge.

Howard, J.A. (1863). Marketing Management: Analysis and Planning, Richard D. Irwin, Inc., Revised Edition.

Howard, J.A. (1989): Consumer Behaviour in Marketing Strategy. Prentice-Hall.

Lapierre, J., Filiatrault, P. and Chebat, J.C. (1999) ‘Value Strategy Rather Than Quality Strategy: A Case of Business-to-Business Professional Services’, Journal of Business Research 45(2): 235–46.

Monroe, K.B. (1990) Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Monroe, K.B. and Krishnan, R. (1985) ‘The Effect of Price on Subjective Product Evaluation’, in J. Jacoby and J.C. Olson (eds.) Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and Merchandise, pp. 209–32. Lexington, MA. Lexington Books.

Oliver, R.L. (1996) ‘Varieties for Value in the Consumption Satisfaction Response’, Advances in Consumer Research 23: 143–7.

Oliver, R.L. (1999) ‘Value as Excellence in the Consumption Experience’, in M.B. Holbrook (ed.) Consumer Value. A Framework for Analysis and Research, pp. 43–62. London: Routledge.

Payne, A. and Holt, S. (2001) ‘Diagnosing Customer Value: Integrating the Value Process and Relationship Marketing’, British Journal of Management 12(2): 159–82.

Rokeach, M. (1968) Beliefs, Attitudes and Values. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Rokeach, M. (1973) The Nature of Human Values. New York: The Free Press.

SIX12 Limited (2014a). About SIX12™ Limited. Available at: http://mysix12.com/about.html [Accessed on: 27-10-2014].

SIX12 Limited (2014b). Our products. Available at: http://mysix12.com/products.html [Accessed on: 27-10-2014].

Tellis, G.J. and Gaeth, G.J. (1990) ‘Best Value, Price-Seeking, and Price Aversion: The Impact of Information and Learning on Consumer Choices’, Journal of Marketing 54(2): 34–45.

Thaler, R. (1985) ‘Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice’, Marketing Science 4(3): 199–214.

Woodruff, R.B. (1997) ‘Customer Value: The Next Source for Competitive Advantage’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25(2): 139–53.

Woodruff, R.B. and Gardial, S.F. (1996) Know Your Customer. New Approaches to Understanding Customer Value and Satisfaction. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, Inc.

Zeithaml, V.A. (1988) ‘Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means–end Model and Synthesis of Evidence’, Journal of Marketing 52(3): 2–22.