Journal of Product & Brand Management

Art as strategic branding tool for luxury fashion brands Julia-Sophie Jelinek London College of Fashion, Vienna, Austria Abstract Purpose – This study aims to understand the lasting relationship between luxury fashion and art. The purpose of the paper is to explore whether the application of art, the cooperation with artists, the implementation of experiential strategies focusing on retail spaces and shows embedded in the strategic concept of a luxury brand lead to a competitive advantage and to a sustained value creation for luxury brands. Design/methodology/approach – Based on the literature, the strategic role of art and the importance of experiential marketing for the value creation of European luxury fashion brands was explored through empirical data collection, consisting of 26 semi-structured in-depth interviews. The gained data have been analysed through a thematic analysis approach and triangulated to avoid bias. Findings – The exploratory study revealed that when art is applied as a strategic tool, it is of relevance to achieve an authentic fit to the brand. When integrating art consistently and authentically within the whole value chain system, it leads to a higher brand equity. Practical implications – The paper provides a guide for both academics and marketers as theoretical frameworks are examined, analysed and future recommendations are given, which are suited to be applied within the brand management principles. Originality/value – The outcome contributes to a wider delineation regarding the future of luxury brands. The study reveals novel viewpoints concerning the integration of arts in luxury brand marketing and adds to existing literature. Keywords Brand management, Culture, Art, Fashion marketing, Experiential branding, Marketing strategy, Luxury branding Paper type Research paper Introduction The proximity between art and luxury, developing side by side and constantly feeding each other, has been an ongoing discussion for many decades (Kapferer, 2015a; Steele, 2012a). Kapferer states that luxury likes to be associated with art, because both aim to be perceived as imperial and timeless and share a love for creativity, craftsmanship, rare materials and exclusivity. Luxury tries to position products as contemporary authentic art items made by the hand of a designer, emphasising craftsmanship, expertise and effort. Which can be seen as an object of art, communicating sophistication and an intrinsic value (Kapferer, 2015b). Fashion-historian Valerie Steele distinguishes between art and fashion as follows: fashion is an industry with a creative element, a commodity with a commercial nature. In contrast, art is a !eld of high cultural production, including sculptures, paintings and music associated with a greater aesthetic realm (Steele, 2012a, 2012b). The implementation of art and design has been visible in various ways in luxury. There are designers with whom art plays a dominant role in their own creative process. These designers set themselves into an art context and often see themselves as artists, recognisable throughout their whole brand identity (Kubler and Smith, 2013). Often resulting in collections with posit social and political statements, while simultaneously breaking the boundaries between architecture, design and art (Twist, 2005). Designers like Raf Simons, Helmut Lang, Martin Margiela, Hussein Chalayan, Alexander McQueen, Rei Kawakubo and Viktor&Rolf are examples. Conversely, other luxury brands (LB) such as Louis Vuitton and Prada deploy art as a clear marketing strategy, to set a context and a hype, to remain relevant and upgrade the brand image to create a competitive advantage and a different positioning (Kapferer, 2015b). They often have a purely commercial interest in art, manifested by special collaborations with artists, art foundations and more commonly, exhibitions (Kubler and Smith, 2013). Their limited series and exclusive showrooms simulate the experience of “buying art” which is co-produced by the LB (Kapferer, 2015b). It has been argued that the “new” luxury has increasingly become a source of enjoyment rather than the importance of being accessible and is frequently seen for people as self-reward (Doran, 2013). To create a strong unique selling proposition (USP), the involvement of “emotional communications” often including experiential marketing (ExM)/experiential branding (ExB) is essential for luxury fashion brands (LFB) (Binet and Field, 2007). Through the past three decades, design, ambience and layouts were used to produce entertaining and sensory experiences which create an emotional connection to LB (Jackson and Shaw, 2009; Hultén, 2011). Innovation merged with creativity have been key drivers for ExB (Jackson and Shaw, 2009). Some brands use the opportunity to surprise the audience by offering a multi-sensory performance, often including an artistic performance character, which exceeds The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/1061-0421.htm Journal of Product & Brand Management 27/3 (2018) 294–307 © Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421] [DOI 10.1108/JPBM-01-2017-1408] 294

expectations deploying a way to combine art, culture, provocation and fashion (Kubler and Smith, 2013). The purpose of the paper is to explore the role of art as a concept to create value and as a strategic tool for positioning European luxury (fashion) brands and subsequently to illustrate how LB can be perceived when art is embedded authentically. Research regarding the applicability and implementation of art in luxury in conjunction with branding, concentrating on LFB, has not been fully explored yet (Teunissen, 2009; Kubler and Smith, 2013; Baumgarth et al., 2014; Sjöholm and Pasquinelli, 2014) and includes few academic studies (Kastner, 2014; Joy et al., 2014). The contribution of the paper is in two major areas. From a marketing perspective, it is of interest to examine if the application of art for LFB can create an added value. The aim is to explore the role of art as a concept to create value and as positioning strategy tool for LFB. The strategic angle, if the integration of art and experiential strategies can be used as a valuable positioning tool for LB, contributes and adds to the existing relevant literature while deriving theoretical and managerial implications. Theoretical foundation As it is beyond the scope of this paper to present an entire overview of the related literature, the aim was to compile the most relevant theoretical background, through de!ning luxury, contextualising the drivers between the intimate liaison of luxury, art and ExB and investigating the concept of competitive advantage and value creation. Exploring the relationships between luxury and these strategies aims to build a typology, a connection and an understanding for the empirical part. Luxury A dispute exists as to whether one can de!ne the meaning of luxury and LBs as in permanent "ux, a simple de!nition is impossible (Kapferer, 2015a; 2015b; Chevalier and Mazzalovo, 2012; Okonkwo, 2007; McNeil and Riello, 2016). Kapferer described luxury as follows: luxury relates to hedonic, rare products and experiences beyond the necessary requirements of life (Kapferer, 2015a) and unimportant to human survival (McNeil and Riello, 2016). Coco Chanel asserted that “Luxury is a necessity that begins where necessity ends”, and that “Luxury is the opposite of vulgarity”. Okonkwo (2007) argued that luxury purely exists for contributing to people’s own appreciation and lives. Chevalier and Mazzalovo (2012) contended that the most important aspect of luxury is that it should be in opposition to a norm shared and ful!lled by most people. The luxury syndicate Altgamma distinguishes three categories of luxury, accessible, aspirational and absolute luxury, as the pinnacle of luxury (D’Arpizio, 2015). In 2015, speakers at the FT Business of Luxury Summit agreed that luxury is becoming more and more about doing and being and less about having. One speaker referred that true luxury is about creating a compelling, authentic and unique experience, provoking emotions which remain in our memories, hard to replicate (Saunter, 2015). Wiedmann and Hennings (2013) categorised luxury into four distinct but linked approaches: the commodity, the customer perception, the marketing management and the functional approach. This work focuses on the marketing management approach on luxury, and when alluding to LBs, it refers to the brands representing the peak of craftsmanship and quality – “the epitome of prestige” – based on great customer loyalty. The substantial characteristics of luxury products correspond largely with those of LBs, leading to the following de!nition: a LB is seen in the consumer’s mind as an image which comprises associations about aesthetics, symbolism, quality, price, extraordinariness, rarity and a great degree of non-functionality (Heine, 2012). Okonkwo (2007) de!ned differentiation, innovation, exclusivity, brand strengths and value, precision and craftsmanship, high pricing and extraordinary quality as main characteristics. Additional important values to emphasise for LB are as follows: the heritage and history (Jackson and Shaw, 2009), extraordinary materials, rarity, tradition and the importance of mystery, events, "agship stores and community management (Kapferer, 2015a), as well as functional, symbolic and experiential elements resonating with consumers (Berthon et al., 2009). Lasting value, innovation and timelessness are essential to differentiate LB from others (Saunter, 2015), cultural values, store presentation and superior service are important as well (Warc, 2016; Bruce and Kratz, 2007). Figure 1 displays a summary of LB characteristics. The luxury marketing strategy might be distinguished by characteristics, like super"uity, long-lasting value and great impressiveness. However, for luxury marketers the question is, if the target group perceives the highest end of quality through the implemented strategy. The embedding of ExB to create unique experiences is a prerequisite for the success of LB (Bruce and Kratz, 2007; Figure 1 Constitutive characteristics of LBs Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 295

Kapferer, 2015a; Saunter, 2015). This strategy has been used by brands like Chanel, Hermès, Prada and Dior. Advices regarding strategy and marketing for LBs are listed in the antilaws of marketing by Kapferer. One suggestion that should not be underestimated is to build friendships with artists and keep contact with the art world (Kapferer, 2015b). Art As with the term luxury, the question of what is art (de!ning art into one coherent de!nition) has been discussed without agreement (Carroll, 2000; Kapferer, 2015a; Miller, 2007). Art philosopher, George Dickie postulates 1992 “a work of art is an object of which someone has said I christen this object as art” (Dickie: 93: cited in Carroll, 2000). He de!nes art in the classi!catory sense as “(1) an artefact, (2) a set of the aspects of which has been conferred upon it the status of candidate for appreciation by some person or persons acting on behalf of a certain institution” (Dickie, 1992, p. 438: cited in Miller, 2007, p. 28). For philosopher Carroll art concludes expression, representation, formal qualities and aesthetics (Miller, 2007). Dictionaries contextualise art through several meanings: ✏ the application of creative imagination and skills, frequently through the visualisation of paintings and sculptures; ✏ literature, music, drawing and dance as types of creative activity; and ✏ subjects of study related to human culture instead of technical or scienti!c subjects (visual-arts-cork.com; Cambridge dictionary; Webster dictionary, 2018). Nowadays, art can be classi!ed into traditional and contemporary art with the activities (extract): theatre, dance, opera, music, installation, architecture, painting, illustration, drawing, sculpture, photography, video, !lm printmaking and ceramics. These are generally referred as “the arts” and can be sorted into categories, which are as follows: !ne, applied, visual, decorative, plastic and performing arts (Encyclopaedia of art, 2018). Fine art, applied art, design, music and performance were chosen as the essential types for this research. Art: relationship to luxury Fashion before the nineteenth century was shown on canvas in oil or visible on the streets (Benjamin: 1963: cited in Benjamin, 2012). The invention of photography during the nineteenth century made fashion for the !rst time reproducible and visible and gained greater importance to the economy. Since that moment, a correlation between fashion and art has been noted (Simon, 1995). Fashion and art are systems which occupy different modalities of reception, presentation and subject to different responses within the economy. The two worlds are of great social, linguistic and economic difference (Geczy and Karaminas, 2012). Haute Couture seems to be correlated and often regarded as art; however, it is produced within the fashion system and not within the art world (Steele, 2012b). The question, if fashion is art has been discussed for over 70 years, reaching its peak between the 1980s and 1990s. Through the displaying of fashion in museums, clothes were able to gain the “aura” of the art world too (Kim, 1998; Steele, 2012a). In 1996, the Biennale di Firenze “Looking at fashion” drew additional attention to the complicated intersection (Steele, 2012b). The event was a major milestone for fashion, joining the art world, involving collaborations from the world of art, fashion, design and music. Aiming to showcase the reciprocal in"uences and creative relationship of talents where borders vanish, exploring the af!nity and contiguity between art and fashion (Celant et al., 1996). Regardless, if fashion can be seen as an art form, various synergies and the complexity between the two universes can be highlighted: the identi!cation of a LB with art as a source of culture, limited collections in cooperation with artists, placing luxury creations in museums, sponsorships of artistic activities and that works of art inspired dressmakers over the past centuries (Giro◆n, 2010; Maynard, 2012; Kapferer, 2015a; Judah, 2013, Chailan and Valek, 2014), high-priced creations and a similar target group, aiming to be perceived as immortal and both are unrelated to functionality (Kapferer, 2015a). The advantage of using art in luxury as an aesthetic and moral endorsement, uncommercial connotations and a paradoxical legitimation of its extraordinary prices has been postulated (Kapferer, 2014). Historically, there have been two established perspectives within the fashion industry, starting in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. Some designers position themselves as artists and see fashion as a form of performance, theatre and art. Others postulate that fashion is not art and fashion designers are clearly not artists. Those see fashion “only” as an industry with a practical purpose (Kubler and Smith, 2013). However, the connection between the two worlds through performance art, fashion installations, exhibitions and employing the body as a canvas can be noted as a form of art. A strategic tool for gaining attention, promoting a brand and selling the clothes (Kubler and Smith, 2013). The “luxury is art” model (Okonkwo, 2007) or art strategy (Kapferer, 2014) is gradually incorporated by certain LB. Following this theory, the result is that through the globalization of luxury, art is universal too (Kapferer, 2014). Joy et al. (2014) referred to this market involving art inside the brands very identity as “M(Art) World” including seven essential features (Luxetecture, Luxemosphere, (De)Luxe, Luxedesigners, authentic experiences, Luxescape and LuxeArt foundations). Brands closely linked to (local) cultural elites support the aim of being perceived as an active element of culture. Kapferer states the usage of art – “arti!cation” – as a key strategy for LB, used by brands LV, Chanel, Hermès, Gucci, Cartier, among others, and speaks about the conscious arti!cation as a strategy, integrating art in every act of the value chain. The concept of “arti!cation” is: [. . .] a process of transformation of non-art into art, to circumvent the volume problem. It requires the active collaboration of art authorities and renowned artists. The goal is to change the status of the brand, of its founder and products, and in so doing, to reinforce the idea of a better-than ordinary brand whose price and symbolic power are undisputed (Kapferer, 2014, p. 371). The gradual processing into the luxury system at all levels takes time but is important, such as sponsoring artists’ exhibitions, in-house collaborations and commercial creations with artists, developing brand exhibitions, establishing art prices and art foundations and funding of art programmes and artistic patronage (Kapferer, 2015a; Chailan and Valek, 2014). At the Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 296

apex of collaboration, artists advise the brand on everything referring to value creation. It is of further importance to translate the arti!cation into cultural events and artistic online content, particularly on social media (Kapferer, 2015a). Here, it seems appropriate to illustrate that not only LFB are interested in this art–luxury–brand relation. LB such as BMW and their long-lasting Art Car project and beauty brand La Prairie has shown cultural responsibility by partnering with artists from different disciplines giving them a carte blanche to be exhibited in its pavilion at several art fairs, like Art Basel, in 2017 (Moore, 2017). Rolls-Royce supports artists through its Art Programme and BMW and Volkswagen have been a supportive of the arts, by funding various museums and art fairs. Showing their “social responsibility” to culture and art through sponsorship (Falkenstein, 2017). The “museum shows”, catwalk shows and retail stores have been stated as the ‘heaps of money for fashion (Menkes, 2000: cited in Steele, 2008). In all three disciplines, the in"uence of art and artful concept have been noticeable. Shows are a form of entertainment with the power to communicate commercial, artistic and political underlying messages (Kamitsis, 2009) and are opportunities for re-af!rming a brand’s DNA (Chapman: cited in Conlon, 2016) often used as a medium to send a message, illustrated by several artists. Shows of performance character, are visual spectacles, offering an “experience aspect”, where clothes might play a subordinate role (Teunissen, 2009). The 1960s can be seen as the cornerstone for experiential fashion shows of the twentieth century. Incrementally, catwalk shows transformed into theatrical performances, blurring the boundaries, using dancers, actors and musicians. The concept of creating conceptual artistic performances “happenings” as part of shows reached a peak in the 1990s with designers like Martin Margiela, Walter Van Beirendonck and Dries Van Noten. The increasing importance of fashion exhibitions is obvious (Kubler and Smith, 2013), but for many decades fashion has been “unworthy”, even though a form of applied arts, to be displayed in museums. Curators like Diana Vreeland, Richard Martin, Herold Koda, Andrew Bolton, Valerie Steele and Cecil Beaton helped to create an understanding of fashion as an art form (Clark et al., 2014; Steele, 2008). Furthermore, LB use their own spaces, in store or their foundations, to display art and support artists. However, historically fashion exhibitions have often been criticised for being “paid advertisements”, a “fancy showroom” “promoting products” providing entertainment without ful!lling the historical educational role of museum exhibitions (Steele, 2008). From a critical perspective, it can be said that progressively LB have declared themselves as art by displaying their own work in museums, thereby communicating that the luxury Maison’s products can be interpreted as artworks (Chailan and Valek, 2014). As fashion exhibitions are often part sponsored by LFB and retailers, they sometimes result in issues regarding different perspectives about the showcased content of the exhibition (Steele, 2008). Setting a brand critically in the contemporary art world through an exhibition encourages the brand credibility on heritage and showcasing it in a noncommercial context (Kapferer, 2015a). At the same time, LBs style their stores to resemble galleries by displaying art (Kubler and Smith, 2013). Rede!ning themselves as hybrid institutions creating a “M(Art) World” (Joy et al., 2014). Experiential branding: in luxury The luxury industry entered a new phase, called “new luxury”, shifting from conspicuous consumption towards meaningful luxury experiences and lifestyle branding (Passport, 2016) offering cognitive, sensory, rational and emotional values for consumers (Atwal and Williams, 2009). Speakers at the FT Business of Luxury Summit 2015 advocated a similar perspective by postulating that the classical concept of luxury is outdated and the “new” approach is selling experiences (Saunter, 2015) and promising pleasure (Roosevelt, 2015). Already, Pine and Gilmore (1998) had forecasted experiences as essential key value for brands as they remain long afterwards in the minds. Since the end of the past century, ExM was incrementally embedded into the marketing mix (Smith and Hanover, 2016). As the terms ExM and ExB are often used interchangeably, the paper will continue to do so. For Pine and Gilmore (2011), experiences involve individual, emotional, physical, intellectual, personal and spiritual engagement of consumers, which remain in mind. Emotions, aesthetics and symbolic aspects are essential for ExM (Schmitt, 1999; Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982). Hultén’s (2011) !ndings exploring multi-sensory brand experiences, reveal the signi!cance of the use of sensorial strategies for differentiation, embedded in the long-term strategy for distinguishing brands and positioning them in the consumer mind. More recently, Smith and Hanover (2016) have introduced the 11 experiential pillars of creation: experiences must be remarkable, shareable, memorable, measurable, relatable, targetable, connectable, personal, "exible, engageable and believable. Luxury car brand Lexus has used a personal ExM strategy by offering the Lexus pop-up concert series and exclusive secrete pop-up !ne-dining experiences (Smith and Hanover, 2016). Bene!ts of ExM are differentiation of brand or product, creating a (stronger) identity and image, opportunity to in"uence decisions during the post-purchase period, promoting innovations and possibility to push declining brands to increase purchases and loyalty and simply engage and emotionally connect with customers (Schmitt, 1999; Smilansky, 2009; Smith and Hanover, 2016). The relevance of visually interesting, creative physical retail spaces is evident, especially because of its opportunity to engage emotionally with customers through offering multisensory experiences and representing “prestige”: (Moore and Doherty, 2007; Manlow and Nobbs, 2013; Arrigo, 2015; Saunter, 2014). This physical “manifestation” of a brand serves as a means of communicating the “intangible” brand characteristics, such as values, image and identity, generating and maintaining customer loyalty and building relationships. It contributes to the brands’ positioning and involves excessive investments, often given “indirect” returns and minor revenue (Moore and Doherty, 2007; Nobbs et al., 2012; Manlow and Nobbs, 2013). Following the mantra “need to impress” through artistic design of retail spaces outside and inside and the used materials (Moore and Doherty, 2007). Through the union with famous architects, LB have the chance to set strong statements, beyond “regular” retail resulting in a level of ultraStrategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 297

luxury (Simonet and Virgile, 2013; Lipovetsky and Manlow, 2009; Moore and Doherty, 2007). These architectural, extraordinary, location-speci!c masterpieces are more recognisable and convey the feeling of products in an artistic environment, almost like an individual art installation, setting a cultural impulse (Schaefer, 2015), creating a multisensory experience (Manlow and Nobbs, 2013). Some "agship stores have been postulated as “art institutions in their own right” (Joy et al., 2014) using museological techniques (Dion and Arnould, 2011). It can be critically argued that the aim by LB to have a standardized approach to construct one clear brand identity globally has been replaced by the hunger to create different "agship and satellite store environments to offer diverse experiences in each key store (Nobbs et al., 2012). The in"uence of art and culture as footfall and traf!c drivers for the time-pressured consumer is obvious (Saunter, 2014). Joy et al. (2014) stated technology, designer mystique, excellent service, interior decoration, architecture and the relationship to avantgarde art as experiential luxury store elements. Some LB have transformed spaces into a combination of consumption and art while simultaneously becoming tourist attractions. LV stores are often providing museum like experiences in a commercial setting, becoming stores-as-museums (Joy et al., 2014). Prada’s Epicenters are designed by different well-known artists and its store design changes depending on the location and vary from other Prada stores. Furthermore, certain "oors are used as spaces for art, events, performances and laboratory. The Tokyo Epicenter, designed by Herzog & de Meuron, known for its façade is named in the lonely planet as an architectural mustsee (Lipovetsky and Manlow, 2009; Milner, 2015; Moore et al., 2010). Aesop manifests a very artistic strategic approach. The LB has put emphasise in establishing its signature artistic retail spaces, creating stunning avant-garde experiences through collaborating with the arts. Renowned architects like Jeremy Barbour built unique interior stores. Aesop stores frequently transform into cultural hubs, a social environment where work from artists like authors and designers replace the commercial aspect of the store. The brand explores and supports the arts as a way to !nd inspiration and communication (www.aesop. com). Studies revealed the implementation of third spaces, as a strategy to increase time spent in stores often observed as dedicated exhibition spaces, café/restaurant/bar and art installations (Nobbs et al., 2012). As examples serve concept stores like Dover Street Market (e.g. London), 10 Corso Como (Milan) and L’Eclaireur (Paris). Stores like these show that the separation between art and commerce is synergistically "oating. In some shops, space for art galleries, organised exhibitions with artists, cultural events and multifunctional installations exists. Lexus developed its unique “Intersect by Lexus” concept stores where not only cars as products are presented but also the store is transformed into an event and an exhibition space and integrates a café and a bistro. Architecture and smart design are essential (Walker, 2013). The commercial aspect is clearly tied to culture and art. Luxury venues in the hypermodern era try to be artistic and culturally attractive, providing spaces of better living and ethical considerations and not just a point of sale. The more LBs want to be in a marketing mindset, the more they acquire astonishing architecture and a strong interaction between art and fashion (Lipovetsky and Manlow, 2009). The bene!ts for LB when collaborating with the art world for retail spaces are: it creates a buzz around a product and the store, renews a brand’s relevance, highlights cultural differential, makes a brand strategy harder to copy, attracts new consumers, raises aesthetic awareness, gains attention from passing people and is more likely communicated to peers and might allow a brand to create a unique competitive advantage (Saunter, 2014; Chailan and Valek, 2014). Tokyo’s Maison Hermès Ginza is the best example of merging art with fashion, designed by Renzo Piano and contributing the whole 8th "oor as a gallery (Lipovetsky and Manlow, 2009). Competitive advantage and value creation Fundamental sources for gaining a competitive advantage for LFB are innovation, involving the whole value system, constant improvement, long-term investments, domestic and global approach, original product design, economies of scale, brand identity, speed to market, experiential retailing and a designer’s name and heritage (Jackson and Shaw, 2009; Baker, 2007). Different theories have been developed to explain sources of competitive advantage, among others, Michael Porter’s !ve competitive forces (1985), three generic competitive strategies (1985) and the generic value chain concept (2004) – although often criticised – were signi!cant for the development of future explanations (Baker, 2007). Ultimately, the goal of competitive advantage is to create (consumer) value, often achieved through adding irrelevant attributes to a product, justifying higher prices, leading to increasing demand and competitiveness (Schmitt, 1999). The Blue Ocean Strategy (Kim and Mauborgne, 2015) de!nes the value innovation as the most important. If the brand creates an added value for customers, competition is outdated, new markets are opened and new models for the demand created. A further point of the strategy is to differentiate and lower costs at the same time. Hence, Zenger argues that the backbone of the strategy, the positioning concept, has to go far beyond growth expectations. He is – like Kim and Mauborgne – convinced, that competitive advantage, referring to Porters de!nition, does not go far enough and that a company has to create repeatedly new sources of value. Surprising the investors, who are fond of unexpected value. It is the creation of sustainable value that counts. Zenger’s three pillars of theory regarding sustained value creation are foresight, insight and cross-sight: ✏ Foresight relates to how an industry will evolve offering guidance on which assets and resources to emphasise in the future. ✏ Insight identi!es valuable, unique internal resources, assuming a company’s understanding of valuable existing assets or activities. ✏ Cross-sight concerns complimentary assets and resources among the unique existing capabilities a !rm owns (Zenger, 2016). Summarising the !ndings in literature it can be said that despite the different arguments and perspectives shown above a strong conjunction between art and luxury exists for many decades. Nowadays, art, fashion, technology, design and culture are the key drivers and are used as a means to create unique unforgettable experiences (Saunter, 2014). François-Henri Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 298

Pinault referred to the topic at the New York Times International Luxury Conference in 2014 as follows: “Luxury, art and technology have always converged, often producing a rich and productive relationship – provided each discipline remained true to itself” (www.kering.com/en/ magazine/luxury-art-and-technology). Several points seem appropriate to critically question. How do consumer experience the “arti!cation” of LBs? Do they value this close luxury-art relationship? And is this a valuable strategy for achieving a sustainable impact or even a competitive advantage for LB? Methodology and research design With regard to the research aim and the research question, an exploratory qualitative analysis with an inductive approach was adopted. The empirical part was suited to a qualitative method approach. The research design chosen is of explorative nature in the form of 26 semi-structured, in-depth interviews, conducting with 16 people working in a luxury fashion environment (experts) and ten with luxury consumers consisting of men and women. The research approach included a traditional type of access involving face-to-face, Skype, email or telephone interactions over a two-month period in July and August 2016. The use of pre-formulated questions was important with the opportunity of adding questions during the interview, led to thought-provoking impulses and made !ndings more interesting (Myers, 2013). It was of interest to gain insights into the research topic and the underlying reasons for particular developments within the luxury industry from people working directly for LB, as well as artists relating to luxury. Experts recruited from different cities (New York, Milan, London, Vienna, Paris) working in different professions, of various ages and genders with the criteria of working within the fashion luxury or art environment were found as most suitable and chosen through a purposive sampling, selected subjectively (Table I). To have a high credibility, experts were researched in detail and the majority were approached through an invitation via email or during direct conversations. Furthermore, existing contacts were used and experts referred me via snowball technique to additional experts. Conducting in-depth interviews with luxury consumers, with different demographics, various careers, but similar psychographics and lifestyles, such as interests in luxury (brands) and signs of a luxury lifestyle, providing a knowledge basis, the experience of at least one visit in a luxury store/ "agship and a purchase behaviour regarding luxury items as a regular routine were additionally necessary to get another perspective on the theme to gain a broad viewpoint on the research topic. The interviews were realised to get an impression of how people within and outside the industry see the correlation between art and luxury now and in the future. Tendencies and bias need to be taken in consideration when evaluating the result. The questionnaire was designed from the main frameworks investigated in the literature and changed slightly between experts and consumers, as consumers might not have the same expertise. An interview guideline containing 22 questions, including several sub-questions, for both the experts and the consumers, was designed in English and German (Figure 2). The average duration of expert interviews was 50 min, with a maximum of 91 min and a minimum of 32 min. The consumer interviews had an approximate length of 30 min. Each interview followed a similar structure and was audio-recorded, transcribed, interpreted and analysed following a qualitative thematic analysis (Silverman, 2014) using the six phases: familiarising with data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, de!ning and naming themes and subthemes and producing the report, advised by Braun and Clarke (2006). The goal of the coding process was to !nd repeated patterns of meanings and to systematically organise the gathered data into classi!cations, “themes”, without looking at the framework of the questionnaires, which were extracted from the literature review. The qualitative data was triangulated and analysed through the help of the computer aided qualitative data analysis software MAXQDA12 providing accurate and comprehensive !ndings. Table I Sample expert information (N = 16) Expert Job description EX1 Fashion curator EX2 Deputy of department: visual arts, architecture, design, fashion and photography EX3 Head of the Academy of Fine Arts EX4 Global PR communication for LFB EX5 Designer RTW for LFB EX6 Lecturer – research in: design, object fabrication, crossing fine art, fashion and performance EX7 Marketing department for LFB EX8 Luxury lecturer/ luxury consultant EX9 Fashion/business/technology journalist and digital innovation strategist EX10 Communication director for LFB EX11 Freelance set designer| artist| art director EX12 Contemporary artist EX13 Designer and artist EX14 Designer RTW for LFB EX15 Director and chief curator – Fashion museum EX16 Retail merchandising manager/ visual merchandising for LFB Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 299

This study follows the logic of an interpretive method and because of the complexity of the research topic and the chosen methodology, the outcome might change when choosing different participants and evaluated by a different person. Consequently, statistical generalisation is impossible. Despite the principle of objectivity during any research, it was not possible for the researcher to have a value-free perspective. Therefore, the results might be unconsciously in"uenced by subjective evaluation and minor reliability. Findings As it is irrelevant to allocate perspectives, comments and quotes to speci!c names of experts and luxury consumers, experts are abbreviated as EX one-to-sixteen and luxury consumers as LC one-to-ten to provide anonymity and a better readability. The !ndings with supporting quotes are illustrated below. The question, if fashion can be considered as art was answered in two different ways. An important thought by one expert helps to give a better understanding of the complex relationship. “Potentially anything could be art, but that doesn’t mean that everything is art” (EX15). However, one should not forget that even if fashion is seen as art, it still serves the purpose to be worn by people (LC5). “Fashion is art and art is fashion, it is linked and works together always” (EX16). “Yes, because luxury fashion in an upper sophisticated segment is art for me, applied art! However at the end of the day it’s also about the wearability of clothes” (LC5). “Art is also a way to generate “events” for brands” (EX8). “Art for me is past, present and future all together” (EX7). From the conducted thematic analysis of the interviews, three relevant key themes, regarding the relationship between arts and branding, emerged. Theme 1: associations relationship art and luxury fashion The strong friendship Regarding the relationship between art and fashion, a consensus towards a positive opinion linking luxury fashion with art was identi!ed among the interviewees. Many experts see art and fashion going hand-in-hand as a “natural synergy” having been bound to each other for a long time resulting in mutual enrichment for both. “Usually there is a strong connection between fashion and art. It is an open conversation” (EX16). “A lot of brands seek this, let’s say “closeness and relationship” (EX10). It was mentioned that especially for the LBs, this conjunction is very positive, as it brings an opportunity to contextualise luxury from its commercial aspect. One of the experts stated that “art is a word that makes everything easier to sell” (EX8). “Brands are striving to be associated in fashion with a wider cultural occurrence and what art brings is just a way to contextualise and actually bring the audience away from the commodity aspect” (EX6). “Also, big stores from like LV can do that and are becoming de!nitely more an expression of a state-of-the-art in terms of not only fashion, but their global message of culture” (EX10). However, three experts considered negative aspects as well. First, a negative aftertaste for the art world to be associated with fashion and its commercial framework because the art world does not prioritise a commercial context. If fashion ennobles from the art but thinks only in a commercial way and returns nothing of the creativity, it is an uneven relationship (EX2). Furthermore, there has been a shift regarding the relation to art in the twenty-!rst century claiming that it was very positive for fashion to be associated with art. But starting with the economic crisis in 2007 it got a negative connotation to it (EX5) and was also stated as a “label attached to the brand” (EX13). Another statement was that people from the art world might be annoyed that fashion has been trying to piggyback their world (EX11). Bene!ts of the two-way relationship However, an advantage for the arts is the funding of artists through the fashion houses. Giving artists a carte blanche enhances the artist’s publicity and scale, and the work most likely will be seen by a wider audience. So, it can be argued that overall it is a two-way relationship, bene!ting each world. Several reasons for the use of art for LBs from a marketing business perspective were mentioned and are summarised. ✏ LFB associating themselves with art and stepping into the art world to attract a new consumer segment (EX9, EX3), anticipating younger potential segments through the inspiration from photography or street art (EX3). ✏ The link to art and the arti!cation itself helps to develop luxury commodities further and to create a certain, precise and more speci!c brand image, identity and personality (EX12) which can lead to a greater buzz to promote a brand (EX7). ✏ Fashion tends to repeat itself and art/artists can help to make a brand and its products seem fresh, innovative, modern and new. Collaborations with artists can create a new direction, an inspiration and might involve a greater emotional af!nity of the consumer (EX5, EX16). By involving art/artists in LB’s marketing and communication concepts, brands have the chance to create and keep relationships with people and stay relevant in modern life (EX10). ✏ The approach of art as a kind of co-existing for LBs (EX9). Figure 2 Guideline structure Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 300

✏ The inspiration for garments and possibility to embed the products in a cultural context which informs about the heritage and identity of brands (EX14). ✏ Having the “art” visible integrated in store (e.g. artistic installations, artistic window displays), can increase the footfall and traf!c and furthermore might raise the “dwelltime” spent in store (EX11). ✏ It can provide a form of abstract expression which may support a brand’s image and the arti!cation can become one part of the branding strategy (EX14, EX10). Mixing art and fashion can lead to interesting projects when correct embedded into a brand’s communication strategy. Some experts also asserted that the collaboration with artists is an attempt of LBs to be associated with a wider cultural occurrence and a way to contextualise fashion going beyond its commercial context. One expert highlighted the fact that the engagement of LBs with art can be seen critically because it is still a phenomenon that the objects have the commodity label of the company attached to it. It became evident that certain LFB and designers were repeatedly named in correlation to art: Alexander McQueen, Hussein Chalayan, Prada, LV, Marc Jacobs, Raf Simmons, Hermès, Helmut Lang, Viktor&Rolf, Martin Margiela, Vetements, Vivienne Westwood, Burberry and Chanel (Karl Lagerfeld). In a historic sense, Elsa Schiaparelli, Yves Saint Laurent, Coco Chanel and Charles James were mentioned. However, it is evident that experts distinguish between brands which integrate art and artists as an expression of modernity in the communication (e.g. branding) and marketing concepts, such as LV. Others like Chalayan, Westwood, Lang or McQueen have a strong relationship through their personality. Consequently, the whole brand is art-related because of the designer’s personal connection to art, resulting in a visible way of a very authentic brand image and identity (EX1, EX3, EX10, EX5). The luxury consumers furthermore revealed that just three out of the ten bought luxury items because of its connection to art. Theme 2: competitive advantage and differentiation through art The interviewees were asked whether the “arti!cation” of LBs can create a bene!t leading subsequently to an added value and creating a competitive differentiation. The !ndings are summarised below. Why arti!cate products? Mentioned bene!ts are: “cultural leadership, aura of luxury, quality, pro!le/awareness raising and sharpening, showing the relevance and niche and that people will buy more”. A method to retain distance from the non-luxury world while keeping a certain LB image. “Art creates a certain cultural leadership, that means you connect your product, if it’s a (fashion) product, to the world of art collectors, art admirers and to the world of cultural leadership” (EX10). “It would de!nitely seem to add to the aura of luxury objects if they could be considered to be art and more widely also the idea that a luxury company by having a major art collection or an art museum would create a certain aura around the brand name, so that even if you weren’t thinking that these objects produced by the brand were art, there will be a kind of arch like quality associated with the brand” (EX14). “It raises the pro!le of brands and puts them in a different bracket to mainstream fashion brands” (EX11). “It’s a very precise pro!le if you do this arti!cation either you keep it niche and very high pro!le or brands like LV or Chanel which already have a big brand awareness use arti!cation as a moment to be more relevant and niche, so they are more interesting and more edgy” (EX10). “Arti!cation is naturally a kind of policy, but in fact I anticipate in this case through the clothes which I wear, that I arti!cate myself. In other words, I am a part of the art world myself” (EX3). “Luxury itself is for a limited target group, so art in luxury is even further limited. But for those it creates a certain bene!t and they buy more than others” (LC1). Three experts mentioned that it depends on the brand’s goals and who they want to target, and that art is not immediately an advantage as it: ✏ depends on the authentic !t to a brand; ✏ the desired market segment; and ✏ might lead to rivalry among those brands doing arti!cation and therefore this small market segment might be harder to reach as many heavyweight houses will “artify” as much as they can, following together the same path and increasing their competitiveness. But is “playing the art card” for a LB enough to be successful? Can the creation of arti!ed institutions ultimately prosper? How is this “arti!ed” world of LBs being perceived? Can it lead to a long-term impact on the brand? All experts and most consumers are convinced that the arti!cation of a LB can lead to a differentiation and consequently create a competitive advantage in the market. The arti!cation can result in attracting a very precise customer segment and can be interpreted as a speci!c element of LBs among others. “Yes, it helps to be seen different than mass-produced goods and creates some kind of USP” (LC10). Luxury brands artifying: results on positioning, perception and value creation Although all experts are persuaded that positioning is of major importance for LBs, not all think that art or the collaboration with artists alone is an appropriate tool to improve the positioning of a brand. One expert believes that customers might not even perceive the art connection as such, but rather buy a product because they like it and the “arti!cation” may just help the product being perceived more exciting. Another one stated that if the brands’ positioning is already bad anyway, not even the “best connection” with art will change that. Experts think that the arti!cation of LBs or products only helps referring to the positioning if the arti!cation becomes part of the brands’ policy and then the credibility will be awarded. They are convinced that only if the arti!cation is embedded as a long-term strategy and therefore repeatedly adapted to social developments, it will be successful and might improve the positioning in the long-term run. A majority believes that the Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 301

authentic adaption, which works with the brands’ values and concept of the use of art, is key to a successful positioning. “If we’re thinking about creativity, then it can help to enhance the positioning of a brand and to set it apart” (EX9). “Only an authentic arti!cation can survive in the long-run” (EX12). “Yes, it depends on the collaborations or on the type of arti!cation it can really bring the brand to a new level, but on the contrary, if the arti!cation is not successful it can damage the image of the brand” (EX7). “It can enhance the positioning only if a brand chooses a coherent set of artistic references” (EX8). The experts independently stated that arti!cation creates a sustained added value if the collaboration is long lasting, !tting to the brand, credible and authentic otherwise the brand could lose credibility. “Yes, it’s de!nitely on a long-term perspective we have to keep these collaborations to get a competitive advantage or bringing an added value to our brand” (EX7). “Yes, I think it is a long-term strategy if it’s done in a way that is incredibly authentic” (EX9). “De!nitely yes. I think it creates a long-term value for the brand and will work in the long-term only. It is not a short-term investment” (EX10). “I think it does. It can make pieces timeless and memorable” (EX11). “If a luxury brand succeeds to keep its product appealing on various levels, it will bene!t from that connection on the longrun. Goods bene!t from an avant-garde brand image in sales. That’s how luxury brands make money mostly” (EX14). Arti!cation as strategic tool When asking experts about their opinion as to whether arti!cation or the usage of art is used as a strategic marketing tool, the majority answered yes. Some of them even state that it is not just a strategic tool, but furthermore an artistic tool as well. The embedment of artistic elements can help to create a story and to raise the brand image, especially if it is already a well-known LB, like LV as the collaboration with Yayoi Kusama showed. The use of art can attract a new consumer segment, which has a special af!nity for art and culture but not necessarily to fashion. “It is not always a tool, it’s often also a general interest in collaboration, [. . .] so, it is partly a tool but also interest in collaboration” (EX6). “If you think about Prada, Jil Sander or Raf Simmons these new intellectual brands for sure they create and bring the core clients with their collaboration with art” (EX4). “Yes, especially if the customer is interested in the artists exposed, if not it is important that the artists are “close” to the brand. Then, if someone likes the brand, he/she might like the artists exposed” (EX8). “It is both, it is de!nitely helping the brands, but in a good way so it’s a win-win situation” (EX10). “I mean I think the fact is they are primarily strategic marketing tools” (EX15): “I am thinking about Louis Vuitton who really likes to put the quality of art into their marketing and their image and inviting very known artists. There is already a very clear strategy and positioning behind that” (EX13). It should be acknowledged that for big LBs, art used as strategic marketing tool is just a part of the whole marketing concept. Theme 3: experiences in retail stores in correlation with art The experts and the consumers both revealed that the presentation of artworks and exhibitions in luxury fashion stores can be nice, but are not of major interest or necessary, more like a “hidden” added value. The !ndings indicate that the relevance of having art in stores depends on the location and environment of the store, as each store might have different loyal clients going there. There appeared to be a greater agreement regarding experiences regardless if art or artistic installations are involved. It was often mentioned that this can be one interesting strategy to bring people inside stores. Sometimes it might not be the brand’s target audience or conversely the people who would usually not come into this particular store. There was no clear outcome of the interviews whether brands having “free spaces” for art in stores can increase their actual sales. However, it was often seen as an auxiliary tool to enhance a brand’s image. It was furthermore mentioned that the quality and the way of showcasing the exhibited works are essential and might also add a personal connection and show a brand’s expression of its dedication to art. If a brand manages to create a special, unique, exclusive moment, which impresses customers in a space, then it will remain in people’s minds, might lead to an increasing foottraf!c and a return to stores. It became evident that most experts and luxury consumers like the idea of art foundations of big luxury houses to support art, apart from their own spaces. This “patronage” was highlighted as a big “plus”, an interesting value of a luxury company, to present art in a different context and to show the dedication and investment in art. Art and luxury – outlook into the future In the future, art and luxury will continue to walk hand-in-hand together. “On the basis of the evidence from recent decades, it doesn’t seem to have lost its power to confer value” con!rmed one expert (EX15). “It will for sure play an important role as it seems that fashion and art inform each other. And it’s not only a one-way street” (EX14). “I think art will be forever! Fashion and art there will always be collaborations and some good, some bad, but I think they always happen and I think that will continue” (EX1). “I think the relationship will continue to play a role. It will be mixed, there will be brands that have art completely embedded in what they do, who they are, how they exist and what their positioning is and then there will be the ones that continue with collaborations and campaigns. So, I think they will continue to sit alongside each other and integrate at times when it’s authentic and relevant to the brand to do so” (EX9). It was furthermore agreed that digital technology will play a role for luxury with the task to !nd the right approach that works in relation to the brand’s own heritage and values and those of its customers. The importance of integrating technology for LBs was seen by most consumers as important with the requirement that it !ts and is not too aggressively used. Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 302

“There will be lots of things which you can do with technology. It needs to be very personal and not only for a certain target group but let’s say for a target group of hundred. Each customer is different and you want to target each one. To gain them as loyal customers you can use technology, art or other things.” (LC5). Experiential strategies will be led by personalisation, exclusivity and high standards, and they will need to be increasingly more differentiated and adapted to special targeted segments. Additionally, addressing sustainability, ethically and environmentally, was seen as prerequisite for the future of LB. As e-commerce grows, physical shops might become more spectacular and connected environments on an experiential basis (EX1), presenting one touch-point of a brand. One expert spoke about the goal of its company to have different store visualisations worldwide, as even in the same city, different images of the stores according to the customer sensitivities are important to create unforgettable moments. Discussion All experts see ExB as an essential tool and predict that ExB will be of increasing importance in the future. With the essence of being personalised, exclusive, authentic and bringing an element of steady surprise, but still being consistent with the brand’s values. However, it should be noted that brands need to pay attention that ExM will not be used in an overexposed way and that the implementation needs to !t with the brand in every respect. Regarding the recurrent relationship between art and luxury, various !ndings were ascertained which were consistent with the literature. Mentioned bene!ts of using arti!cation for LB as a moral and aesthetical endorsement, uncommercial connotation and reinforcing element renewing brands- images and relevance close to culture justify high prices. These bene!ts aim to create a competitive advantage leading ultimately to a sustained added value in the long-term (Kapferer, 2015a) were mostly con!rmed in the research results. Regarding the prerequisite in literature that art is a key factor for the future success of LBs (Kapferer, 2015a; Giro◆n, 2010; Chailan and Valek, 2014), experts pointed to the importance of making a distinction regarding the brands. To gain differentiation and subsequently create a competitive advantage, the application of “arti!cation” will only be helpful if it !ts to the brand, as a result it is a marketing tool that is not applicable to every brand. The collaborating artists have to be tailored to the brand values and image to be bene!cial. The !ndings of the literature research (Jackson and Shaw, 2009; Baker, 2007; Kapferer, 2015a) stated that involving art can only be successful if it is embedded as an authentic, long-term strategy; integrated into the entire value system; and is in line with the interviewees. It can be added that “art” and its usage does not lead automatically to an advantage, as it depends on the targeted market segment and the number of competitors “artifying” as well. Whether the application of art alone for LB can be seen as highly appreciated attribute by consumers, resulting in a clear USP and reaching a competitive success cannot be clearly answered from the research outcome. It did not become evident that customers really perceive the arti!cation as such an important attribute or value; it was stated that the item might be bought because the customer likes it rather than because of its relation to art. LC con!rmed that barely any of them remembered purchasing a product purely for its link to art. Therefore “playing the art card” in the short-term will not be enough for successful LB in the current century. Brands using art as one segment of its branding, targeting a very specialised market segment, such as LV and Prada, who use art more as a strategic tool to create a constant renewing modern brand image, seeking the interesting closeness and relationship to the art world to present itself in a noncommercial, cultural context. Literature also states that the peak of arti!cation is when artists get the opportunity to advise LBs universally to increase the value creation (Kapferer, 2015a) and collaborations bring the possibility of organisational alterations e.g. improvement of artistic thinking (Baumgarth et al., 2014). However, when speaking to experts, some of them disagree with this suggestion, as in general, artists are not necessarily familiar with marketing strategies per se. One expert emphasises the importance of collaborations with artists to get fresh ideas and new views, but the ultimate decision regarding implementing art in LB has to be taken by the management and not the artist. The value innovation (Kim and Mauborgne, 2015) is most important for creating an added value, here again if integrating art/artist collaborations today alone creates an added value is questionable. The results of the project revealed that only if all elements below are consistent with the LB’s strategy a competitive advantage and subsequently a sustaining added value will succeed because of “arti!cation”. ✏ Authenticity: the quality of the art, the reputation and values of the artist must go in line with the communicated brand’s image and values, more than a super!cial relationship. ✏ An appropriate integration in a brand’s long-term strategy: collaborations with artist alone will not be enough in the long-term to create a sustained added value. ✏ The arti!cation needs to support the brand and the artist itself: creating a win-win situation; as the chosen artists need to !t in scale and reputation to the brand; there is the danger that (young) artists collaborating with brands get a disadvantage for their subsequent carrier, if there is too much emphasis on the brand. ✏ Limited and exclusive availability to a very precise market segment: brands need to know exactly who they want to target through the arti!cation, and if the artist or the art itself will be appreciated by the target audience. ✏ A constant transformation and adoption to the customer tastes and desires: it is important that the changes in society are taken into consideration at all times. Only if a brand goes in line with the permanent altering values of people, it will survive within changing times. The right artist at the right time plays a signi!cant role for the successful value creation. ✏ Constantly withstand competition: as more and more LBs will artify increasing the competitiveness in this very limited market segment. LB foundations were seen as more bene!cial than exhibitions, through showing their dedication to the art world. The two concepts, authenticity and personalisation, were also mentioned as key recommendations for successful LBs. Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 303

Conclusion After the intense examination with the primary and secondary investigation, the research question whether “the combination of ExM with the in"uence of art can create a unique added value for LFB” can be answered as follows: ExM and the “arti!cation” of LFB and their products can generate a unique added value; however, several elements need to be considered to create a true competitive advantage. It was explored that collaborating with the arts is a frequently used tactical and strategic brand management approach of LBs. Research demonstrates the increasing closeness between art and LBs around the world. However, as Joy et al. (2014) suggested it must be clear that the art– brand association needs to be balanced with the brands values, heritage, history and ideology. It can be summarised that the implementation of art (“arti!cation”) is most likely just one tool that LB will use to differentiate themselves and to be simultaneously individual and artistic if it !ts with the brand. Using “only” art to create an ultimate sustained added value will be achievable for only a few brands. But not only LFB are positioning themselves through art-related activities. Among others, Ruinart, the champagne brand, is known for its consistent long-standing relationship with art, patronising contemporary art and design, perfectly matching the brands image (www.ruinart.com). Veuve Clicquot introduced its Veuve Clicquot Widow Series as contribution to the arts world partnering with the creative and arts communities (Theodosi, 2016) and Dom Pérignon has its annual art projects launching its limited edition champagnes in collaboration with artists like David Lynch, Jeff Koons, Iris van Herpen and most recently Michael Riedel (Berlin Art Link, 2016) creating display boxes, packaging, labelling, as well as artistic events together. In the twenty-!rst century, LBs are seeking innovative ways to engage with consumers. Implementing brand–art associations can be an authentic way to acquire potential new audiences, to create different touchpoints and strengthens a brands contemporary cultural relevance. Collaborating with artists is a different way to express the brands’ vision, building stories, and can set a brand into a cultural relevant context. Theoretical contribution Because there is minor research on the topic, discovering the long-term relationship between art and fashion through theoretical and empirical research has contributed a great value to future theoretical academics. The outcome leads to several recommendations to support the value creation of LB, presenting implications for marketing strategies and subsequently gives further insights into the future of luxury. The fresh research project advances the literature in luxury branding and will be of great value for academics and marketers as theoretical frameworks were illuminated, analysed and questioned and practical implementations and future recommendations given. The !ndings support and enrich literature by introducing interesting insights in relation to art–fashion–luxury– experiential retail. And furthermore, foster the understanding of this complicated long-term relationship, offering empirical con!rmation that art-brand associations, under certain circumstances, have a positive impact on LB. Managerial implications The nature of the art–brand identity needs to be understood by LB marketers. On the basis of the results the points below aggregate the conclusion and shall support LB and their marketing departments to identify how art can be integrated in their future strategies. The bullet characters recommend actions which can be applied separately or in conjunction depending on the brand’s aims and strategies. If tailored to the brand and implemented effectively these suggestions can contribute to a lasting value creation and favourable brand differentiation (Table II). Table II Framework of future implications for LBs Art Experiential strategies General requirements Choose art | artist appropriate to the brand values Use art in an authentic way! Differentiate and create a possible competitive advantage through artifying Attract new market segments by applying innovative art (e.g. niche segment) You can justify higher prices Use art as a selling-strategy Contextualise your brand Integrate art in the whole value chain system in the long-term See ExM as future requirement for LB Create an added value through implementing ExM Personalise experiences Create authentic experiences Use ExM authentically – adjust it to brand values Use ExM to create a buzz/ increase brand awareness Attract new audience Retail store Increase footfall | traffic | dwell-time using art and presentation Attract new market segments through art in store (exhibitions, artistic events) Increase footfall | traffic | dwell-time through art Adjust experience to your brand and customer Do clever visual merchandising Online Be authentic when using art Use touchpoint to create unique experiences LB exhibitions | exhibit artists Generate events through art Set yourself in a new non-commercial context Create a buzz and an authentic dialogue Offer an educational and fun factor Use technology to create experiences Shows | presentations Use art as a means to create spectacles Follow the principle of showmanship Balance dramaturgy Surprise audience Create emotions Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 304

Limitations and future research The work presents thorough insights but certain limitations have to be considered. From a general LB perspective, it is uncertain if the research results focusing on LFB are directly transferable to other luxury sectors. The outcome is neither representative of the whole luxury fashion industry nor can it be generalised. For this to happen, more European LBs of various sizes and sectors would have to be included in this study. The study’s research design limits the reliability, as reliability is often not a realistic attribute of qualitative interviews. The effect of translation bias might be given, as three interviews were conducted in German and later translated and paraphrased into English. The evidence from the study suggests that the conjunction between art and fashion will continue to exist in the future, and therefore additional studies exploring their correlation will be bene!cial. The relationship between art–technology–fashion is still rarely researched. There is great potential of exploring this topic, focusing on brand management in terms of branding and communication (re-positioning, CSR), retail spaces, shows and brand exhibitions in the future. The primary research results highlight the increasing importance of technology as a tool to support art in the store, like brands such as Audi, Tesla, BMW, Lexus, Chanel, Dior, LV and Prada have demonstrated. Therefore, future research should explore the link between technology–art–luxury and ExB. Further investigations regarding the integration of art or collaborations with artists of various LBs on a different scale are encouraged. It will be interesting to compare and explore, from an internal company perspective, the effect of applying and implementing art and ExM on brand !gures of various LBs, differing in scale and brand awareness. Another interesting direction in this context is to further examine how lasting the “effect of arti!cation” is. Comparing brands who embed art only in one single action and those who are consistently following an art–brand strategy and analysing sales !gures as well. Further studies might enhance the examination of the correlation of this merging topic. Finally, it has to be said that the complexity of luxury fashion as part of the art world, because of its capitalist nature, still remains open to interpretation. References Arrigo, E. (2015), “The role of the "agship store location in luxury branding: an international exploratory study”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 518-537. Atwal, G. and Williams, A. (2009), “Luxury brand marketingthe experience is everything”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 338-346. Baker, M.J. (2007), Marketing Strategy & Management, 4th ed., Palgrave Macmillan, London. Baumgarth, C., Lohrisch, N. and Kastner, O.L. (2014), “Arts meet luxury brands”, in Berghaus, B., Müller-Stewens, G. and Reinecke, S. (Ed.), The Management of Luxury: A Practioner’s Handbook, Kogan Page Limited, London, pp. 157-171. Berlin Art Link. (2016), “Announcement//Dom Pérignon embraces collaboration with renowned artists”, available at: www.berlinartlink.com/2016/09/21/announcementdom-perignon-embraces-collaboration-with-renownedartists/ (accessed 4 July 2017). Berthon, P., Pitt, L., Parent, M. and Berthon, J.P. (2009), “Aesthetics and ephemerality: observing and preserving the luxury Brand”, California Management Review, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 45-66. Binet, L. and Field, P. (2007), “Marketing in the era of accountability”, Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 225-228. Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006), “Using thematic analysis in psychology”, Qualitative Research in Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 77-101. Bruce, M. and Kratz, C. (2007), “Competitive marketing strategies of luxury fashion companies”, in Hines, T. and Bruce, M., Fashion Marketing - Contemporary Issues, 2nd ed., Butterworth-Heinemann/Elsevier Ltd., Oxford, pp. 130-148. Carroll, N. (2000), Theories of Art Today, The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. Celant, G., Sischy, I. and Settembrini, L. (1996), Looking at Fashion: Biennale di Firenze, Rizzoli, Florence. Chailan, C. and Valek, I. (2014), “Preserving luxury exclusively through art”, in Berghaus, B., Müller-Stewens, G. and Reinecke, S. (Ed.), The Management of Luxury: A Practioner’s Handbook, Kogan Page Limited, London, pp. 157-171. Chevalier, M. and Mazzalovo, G. (2012), Luxury Brand Management: A World of Privilege, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons Singapore Pte. Ltd, Singapore. Clark, J., Haye, A.D. and Horsley, J. (2014), Exhibiting Fashion: Before and After 1971, Victoria and Albert Museum, London. Conlon, S. (2016), “Vogue investigates: the future of the fashion show”, available at: www.vogue.co.uk/news/2016/ 02/05/the-future-of-the-fashion-show-season-changeindustry-reaction (accessed 30 July 2016). D’Arpizio, C. (2015), “Altgamma 2015 worldwide markets monitor”, Milan October 2015, available at: www.altagamma. it/en/studi-e-ricerche/ (accessed 20 January 2016). Dion, D. and Arnould, E. (2011), “Retail luxury strategy: assembling charisma through art and magic”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 87 No. 4, pp. 501-520. Doran, S. (2013), “The new luxury is luxury for all, suggests Jean-Noël Kapferer”, available at: http:// luxurysociety.com/articles/2013/04/the-new-luxury-isluxury-for-all-suggests-jean-noel-kapferer (accessed 11 June 2016). Encyclopaedia of art (2018), “Art glossary”, available at: www. visual-arts-cork.com/art-de!nition.htm (accessed 6 May 2018). Falkenstein, M. (2017), “Auto companies deliver sponsorship for contemporary art”, available at: www.artnews.com/2014/ 09/17/auto-companies-sponsor-contemporary-art/ (accessed 4 July 2017). Geczy, A. and Karaminas, V. (2012), Fashion and Art, Berg, London. Giro◆n, M.E. (2010), Inside Luxury – The Growth and Future of the Luxury Goods Industry: A View From the Top, LID Publishing Ltd., London. Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 305

Heine, K. (2012), “The de!nition of luxury brands”, available at: www.concepto"uxurybrands.com/concept-of-luxurybrands/de!nition-of-luxury-brands (accessed 25 July 2016). Holbrook, M.B. and Hirschman, E. (1982), “The experiential aspects of consumption: consumer fantasies, feelings and fun”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 132-140. Hultén, B. (2011), “Sensory marketing: the multi-sensory brand experience concept”, European Business Review, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 256-273. Jackson, T. and Shaw, D. (2009), Mastering Fashion Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. Joy, A., Wang, J.J., Chan, T.-S., Sherry, J.F. Jr. and Cui, G. (2014), “M(art) worlds: consumer perceptions of how luxury brand stores become art institutions”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 90 No. 3, pp. 347-364. Judah, H. (2013), “Inside an artist collaboration, business of fashion”, available at: www.businessoffashion.com/articles/ intelligence/inside-an-artist-collaboration (accessed 20 August 2016). Kamitsis, L. (2009), “An impressionistic history of fashion shows since the 1960s”, in Brand, J. and Teunissen, J. (Ed.), Fashion and Imagination- about clothes and art, ArtEZ Press, d’jonge Hond, pp. 93-103. Kapferer, J.N. (2014), “The arti!cation of luxury: from artisans to artists”, Business Horizons, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 371-380. Kapferer, J.N. (2015a), Kapferer on Luxury: How Luxury Brands Can Grow Yet Remain Rare, Kogan Page, London. Kapferer, J.N. (2015b), “The brand challenge: luxury branding”, available at: www.warc.com.arts.idm.oclc.org/Content/ ContentViewer.aspx?MasterContentRef=4fac99bc-35c8-4e42- bbbd-d969299ff8fa&q=luxury1and1art&CID=A105332& PUB=WARC-RESEARCH (accessed 24 July 2016). Kastner, O.L. (2014), When Luxury Meets Art: Forms of Collaboration Between Luxury Brands and the Arts, Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. Kim, S.B. (1998), “Is fashion art?”, Fashion Theory, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 51-71. Kim, W.C. and Mauborgne, R. (2015), Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make Competition Irrelevant, Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, Boston, MA. Kubler, A. and Smith, M.O. (2013), Art/Fashion in the 21st Century, Thames and Hudson Ltd., London. Lipovetsky, G. and Manlow, V. (2009), “The ‘artialization’ of luxury stores”, in Brand, J. and Teunissen, J. (Eds), Fashion and Imagination - About Clothes and Art, ArtEZ Press, d’jonge Hond, Arnhem, The Netherlands, pp. 154-167. McNeil, P. and Riello, G. (2016), Luxury - a Rich History, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Manlow, V. and Nobbs, K. (2013), “An international exploratory study of the meaning of the "agship store for managers and customers”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An international Journal, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 49-64. Maynard, M. (2012), “Clothing: art clothes or wearable art”, in Geczy, A. and Karaminas, V. (Eds), Fashion and Art, Berg, London. Miller, S. (2007), “Fashion as art; is fashion art? ”, Fashion Theory, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 25-40. Milner, R. (2015), Lonely Planet Pocket Guide Tokyo, 5th ed., Lonely Planet, Melbourne. Moore, C.M. and Doherty, A. (2007), “The international "agship store of luxury fashion retailers”, in Hines, T. and Bruce, M. (Eds), Fashion Marketing, ButterworthHeinemann, Oxford, pp. 277-286. Moore, C.M., Doherty, A.M. and Doyle, S.A. (2010), “Flagship stores as a market entry method: the perspective of luxury fashion retailing”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44 Nos 1/2, pp. 139-161. Moore, E. (2017), “Cell mates: La Prairie fuses the worlds of luxury skincare and art”, Wallpaper July 2017, available at: www.wallpaper.com/lifestyle/la-prairie-fuses-the-worlds-ofluxury-skincare-and-art (accessed 4 July 2017). Myers, M. (2013), Qualitative Research in Business and Management, 2nd ed., SAGE Publications Inc, CA. Nobbs, K., Moore, C.M. and Sheridan, M. (2012), “The "agship format within the luxury fashion market”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 40 No. 12. Okonkwo, U. (2007), Luxury Fashion Branding - Trends, Tactics, Techniques, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY, Basingstoke. Passport. (2016), “Global luxury goods trends report”, available at: www.warc.com.arts.idm.oclc.org/Content/ ContentViewer.aspx?MasterContentRef=68ca3867-3a4a -4da0-94cd-75e7f9aa02a5&q=global1luxury1report& CID=A107451&PUB=EUROMONITOR-STRATEGY (accessed 22 July 2016). Pine, J. and Gilmore, J. (1998), “Welcome to the experience economy”, Harvard Business Review, available at: https://hbr. org/1998/07/welcome-to-the-experience-economy (accessed 11 January 2016). Pine, J. and Gilmore, J. (2011), Welcome to the Experience Economy, updated Edition, Harvard Business Press, Brighton, MA. Roosevelt, M. (2015), “New models of luxury marketing”, ADMAP, WARC. Saunter, L. (2014), “Eight ways retail is capitalising on culture”, available at: www.wgsn.com.arts.idm.oclc.org/ content/board_viewer/#/55882/page/1 (accessed 25 July 2016). Saunter, L. (2015), “FT business of luxury summit – 2015- key themes, available at: www.wgsn.com.arts.idm.oclc.org/content/ search/reports/#/FT%2520Business%2520of%2520Luxury% 2520Summit (accessed 25 July 2016). Schaefer, W. (2015), “Luxury marketing: 5 ways to market prestige brands”, available at: www.warc.com.arts.idm.oclc.org/ Content/ContentViewer.aspx?MasterContentRef=5111b8c6- dad6-467e-862d-8f5e9fed219c&q=Luxury1marketing% 3a151ways1to1market1prestige1brands%2c&CID= A105066&PUB=BESTPRAC (accessed 25 July 2016). Schmitt, B.H. (1999), Experiential Marketing: How to get customers to Sense, Feel, Think, Act, Relate to Your Company and Brands, The Free Press, New York, NY. Silverman, D. (2014), Interpreting Qualitative Data, 5th ed., Sage Publications Inc., London. Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 306

Simon, M. (1995), Fashion in Art: The second Empire and Impressionism, Editions Hazan, London/Paris. Simonet, P. and Virgile, C. (2013), “Luxury brand marketing: the art of luxury”, available at: www.warc.com.arts.idm.oclc. org/Content/ContentViewer.aspx?MasterContentRef= ed06b2d4-3222-47be-ac4a-64a84508f000&q= luxury1brand1marketing%3aThe1art1of1luxury&CID= A100566&PUB=ADMAP (accessed 25 July 2016). Sjöholm, J. and Pasquinelli, C. (2014), “Artist Brand building: towards a spatial perspective”, Arts Marketing: An International Journal, Vol. 4 Nos 1/2, pp. 10-24. Smilansky, S. (2009), Experiential Marketing – A Practical Guide To Interactive Brand Experiences, Kogan Page Limited, Great Britain. Smith, K. and Hanover, D. (2016), Experiential Marketing – Secrets, Strategies, and Success Stories from the World’s Greatest Brands, John Wile & Sons inc., Hoboken. Steele, V. (2008), “Museum quality: the rise of the fashion exhibition”, Fashion Theory, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 7-30. Steele, V. (2012a), “Fashion”, in Geczy, A. and Karaminas, V. (Ed.), Fashion and Art, Berg, London. Steele, V. (2012b), “Is Fashion Art? @ mumok”, available at: YouTube: https://youtu.be/weB-SQ-XP-c (accessed 24 July 2016). Teunissen, J. (2009), “Fashion and art”, in Brand, J. and Teunissen, J. (Ed.), Fashion and Imagination - About Clothes and Art, ArtEZ Press, d’jonge Hond, pp. 10-25. Theodosi, N. (2016), “Veuve Clicquot taps FKA twigs for second annual ‘widow series,” available at: wwd.com/fashion-news/ fashion-scoops/veuve-cliquot-fka-twigs-second-annual-widowseries-10692410/ (accessed 04 July 2017). Twist, K.V. (2005), “Foreword”, in Evans, C., Menkes, S., Polhemus, T. and Quinn, B., Hussein Chalayan, Nai Publishers, Rotterdam. Walker, D. (2013), “Car culture: Lexus opens !rst luxury store)”, available at: www.lsnglobal.com/brie!ng/article/8275/carculture-lexus-opens-!rst-luxury-store (accessed 4 July 2017). Warc (2016), “What we know about luxury brands - Warc best practice”, April 2016. Webster Dictionary. (2018), “Art”, available at: www. merriam-webster.com/dictionary/art (accessed 6 May 2018). Wiedmann, K.P. and Hennings, N. (2013), Luxury Marketing, Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, Wiesbaden. Zenger, T. (2016), Beyond Competitive Advantage – How To Solve The Puzzle Of Sustaining Growth While Creating Value, Harvard Business Review Press, Watertown, MA. Further reading Baumgarth, C. and O’Reilly, D. (2014), “Brands in the arts and culture sector”, Arts Marketing: An International Journal, Vol. 4 Nos 1/2, pp. 2-9. Benjamin, W. (2012), Das Kunstwerk im Zeitalter Seiner Technischen Reproduzierbarkeit, 33rd ed., !rst published 1963, Edition Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main. Cambridge Dictionary. (2016), “Art”, available at: http:// dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/art (accessed 31 July 2016). Kapferer, J.N. (2008), The New Strategic Brand Management – Creating and Sustaining Brand Equity Long Term, Kogan page, London/Philadelphia. Kapferer, J.N. and Bastien, V. (2012), The Luxury Strategy – break the rules of Marketing to build Luxury Brands, 2nd ed., Kogan Page Limited, London. Porter, M.E. (2004), Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Free Press, New York, NY. Saunders, M., Thornhill, A. and Lewis, P. (2012), Research Methods for Business Students, 6th ed., Financial Times/ Prentice Hall, Harlow. Schmitt, B. and Zarantonello, L. (2013), “Consumer experience and experiential marketing: a critical review”, Review of Marketing Research, Emerald Press, Bingley, pp. 25-61. Corresponding author Julia-Sophie Jelinek can be contacted at: julia.jelinek@ outlook.com For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] Strategic branding tool for luxury Julia-Sophie Jelinek Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 27 · Number 3 · 2018 · 294–307 307

The effects of a Disney masstige brand collaboration on perceptions of brand luxury: vertical versus horizontal product line extension strategies Jung Eun Lee Department of Apparel, Housing, and Resource Management, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA, and Jung Rim Cho Office of Program Evaluation, Education, and Research (PEAR), School of Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of a Disney collaboration and Disney product line extension type on the perceptions of masstige brands and purchase intentions. By identifying masstige brands as two types (i.e. born-masstige versus luxury-masstige brands), this study investigates how consumers respond to a Disney collection across different types of masstige brands. Design/methodology/approach – The authors conducted three studies using an experimental approach. Findings – Study 1 shows that compared to a traditional collection, a Disney collection lowered perceptions of brand luxury, but the negative effect is stronger for born-masstige brands than luxury-masstige brands. Studies 2 and 3 revealed that an upward extension enhanced perceptions of luxury for the born-masstige brand more than it did with a horizontal extension, whereas there was no difference between upward and horizontal extensions for the luxury-masstige brand. Research limitations/implications – This study contributes to understanding how Disney collaborations influence consumers’ perceptions of masstige brands. It has implications for brand positioning and pricing strategies for practitioners collaborating with Disney or similar companies. Originality/value – To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to investigate consumer responses to a Disney collaborated collection across two types of masstige brands by exploring their type of product line extensions. Keywords Disney, Fashion collaboration, Masstige brands, Line extension, Brand luxury Paper type Research paper 1. Introduction With the number of middle-class consumers growing each year, marketing specialists expect the middle class to be the most significant economic and social sector in most countries by 2050 (National Intelligence Council [NIC], 2012). By then, almost three billion people will have joined the middle class (Ward and Neumann, 2012). In response to this trend, Silverstein and Fiske (2003) initially defined the concept of masstige as consumption by consumers who look for better quality products at reasonable premium prices (Silverstein and Fiske, 2003; Kumar and Paul, 2018). Masstige combines the words “mass” and “prestige” to imply a brand positioning that targets between a middle and premium price range (Kumar and Paul, 2018) and concentrates on a downward brand extension (Baber et al., 2020). The masstige strategy is important for marketers because brands can use a luxury strategy at various price points to establish mass prestige targeting this huge sector of the middle mass market, providing opportunities to existing luxury brands to broaden their target markets (Kapferer et al., 2014; Kumaret al., 2020; Paul, 2018). Brand collaboration is a marketing strategy that responds to dynamic competition and consumer expectations (Mroz- ! Gorgon, 2016 ! ). Such collaborations are popular in the fashion industry and use partnerships across diverse sectors, such as fashion designers, fashion brands, artists, celebrities and electronics (Kim et al., 2014). To differentiate a masstige brand from its competitors (Kim et al., 2014), fashion companies have collaborated with novel and unexpected partners. For example, in 2002, Louis Vuitton collaborated with Takashi Murakami, a Japanese Artist, to market a colorful monogrammed multicolor collection with cartoonish characters. It was one of the famous and innovative collaborations that received considerable public attention and commercial success (Kim and Park, 2020). Using a masstige strategy, some luxury brands have collaborated with The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/1061-0421.htm Journal of Product & Brand Management 32/1 (2023) 138–156 © Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421] [DOI 10.1108/JPBM-01-2022-3833] Received 18 January 2022 Revised 24 May 2022 Accepted 15 July 2022 138

fast fashion brands to democratize luxury fashion and increase brand awareness of luxury brands to the middle mass market (e.g. H&M’s collaboration with luxury brands; Mroz-Gorgo ! n, ! 2016). In this way, successful brand collaborations can help develop innovative products, meet discriminating consumer needs and enhance sales, brand awareness and customer brand loyalty (Kim et al., 2014; Mroz-Gorgo ! n, 2016 ! ). Among the diverse partnerships and collaborations used in the fashion industry, Disney collaboration is one of the recent trends of masstige fashion brands to offer exclusive collections to appeal to youth cultures and broaden its market share (Hoshikawa, 2016). For example, Miu Miu released a limited knitwear collection for its 2020 Spring/Summer collection featuring Bambi and Alice in Wonderland. In 2021, Coach collaborated with Disney and Keith Haring, an Artist, using his playful illustrations of Mickey Mouse on Coach’s bags and accessories. When masstige and luxury brands introduce their Disney collaborated products, they typically come with a higher price. For example, the retail price of Coach’s shoulder bag with a solid color was $395, while the same bag with a Mickey Mouse print was $495 – a 25% price premium. Although Disney products have gained popularity from masstige consumers, it is unknown how the collaboration and upward pricing impact brand perceptions; i.e. whether it increases or decreases the luxury and prestige image of masstige brands through their association with Disney characters. Despite the huge mass-market potential of masstige brands, researchers have paid little attention to masstige marketing, and masstige research is still in its infancy (Kumar and Paul, 2018; Paul, 2018; Truong et al., 2009). At least three research gaps exist in the masstige brand context concerning a Disney collaboration, line extension via price and types of masstige brands. First, to the best of our knowledge, no study has investigated how a Disney collaboration influences the perception of masstige brands. Second, only a few studies have focused on brand/line extensions in the masstige brand context, and none has examined the brand extension concerning a Disney collaboration. Boisvert and Ashill (2018), for example, examined the effect of types of line extensions on brand perceptions, but their research was limited to luxury brands and they focused only on types of line extension strategies (direct vs sub vs new brands). Third, there are some ambiguities in types of masstige terms, which have not been empirically tested in the literature. Specifically, Silverstein and Fiske (2003), who initially defined the concept of luxury for mass markets, described the type of luxury brands for the mass market (e.g. old-luxury brand extension and mass prestige), although their terms are now considered ambiguous. To our knowledge, no study has investigated the masstige brand perceptions of consumers based on the type of masstige brands. In response to the limitations in the current literature, the objective of this study is to explore the influence of a Disney collaboration on the brand luxury perceptions of masstige brands. We also examine the price effects of Disney collaborated products (i.e. an upward vs horizontal line extension) on brand luxury perceptions. We further reidentified the types of masstige brands as born-masstige (those created as masstige brands, such as Coach) and luxury-masstige (those created via a downward brand extension, such as Louis Vuitton) and investigated their moderating effect in the context of a Disney collaboration. Our findings have implications for practitioners concerned with brand positioning and pricing strategy when collaborating with Disney or similar companies. 2. Conceptual framework 2.1 Born-masstige brands vs luxury-masstige brands To clarify any ambiguities between luxury brands and masstige brands, it is important to define what luxury brands and masstige brands are. Luxury brands refer to products or services that consumers perceive as providing authentic value and prestige image – they connect with the consumer, offer high quality and are worth a premium price (Ko et al., 2019). While there is no single definition of a luxury brand, previous scholars have used several characteristics to define a luxury brand, including exclusivity, uniqueness, premium price and high quality (Kapferer, 2012; Nueno and Quelch, 1998; Vigneron and Johnson, 2004). Although luxury products were once consumed only by the wealthy, middle-class consumers have begun consuming luxury products as they gain purchasing power (Kapferer, 2012). In response, luxury brands have broadened their accessibility to middle-class consumers while maintaining their quality and price (Paul, 2018; Mansoor and Paul, 2022). Inspired by the democratization of luxury, Rambourg (2014, p. 44) developed the “Mass Lux Pyramid,” which presents a hierarchical model of luxury brands ranked by accessibility to middle-market consumers. At the top of the pyramid are premium core brands, such as Hermes and Rolex, which are rarely purchased by middle-class consumers (perhaps once or twice in their lifetimes). The next level consists of the accessible core brands (e.g. Louis Vuitton, Gucci) that middle-class consumers purchase several times in their lifetimes. At the bottom are the affordable luxury brands, such as Coach and Michael Kors, which are occasionally purchased by middle-class consumers. Although the pyramid applies to luxury brands only, researchers who have focused on masstige brand contexts have considered accessible core and affordable luxury brands as masstige; many researchers have categorized affordable luxury as only masstige brands but not luxury brands (Heine, 2011; Lee et al., 2018). Because there is no definite borderline separating luxury and masstige brands, we considered both accessible core and affordable luxury brands as masstige brands because a key element of defining masstige brands is their association with middle-market consumption. Masstige – a portmanteau of “mass” and “prestige” – products are characterized as “premium but attainable” goods; that is, they are prestigious goods positioned between a middle and premium price range (Kumar and Paul, 2018). Based on the masstige theoretical model, brands that successfully build mass prestige can expect consumers to accept relatively higher prices for their products than for strictly mass-market brands (Kumar et al., 2020). Masstige marketing is described as a marketing strategy in which products are marketed at a marginally high price to many consumers by promoting mass prestige without reducing prices or offering price discounts (Baber et al., 2020). While masstige brands usually offer less expensive products than traditional luxury brands, which generally offer exclusivity in terms of price and accessibility (Truong et al., 2009), they have emerged as major brands in their own right due to the trading-up of consumers to premium bridge-line products that offer prestigious brand value at Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 139

affordable prices (Kim and Ko, 2010). For many goods, the global market has brought the democratization of luxury, in which premium products are no longer reserved for the wealthy but are available to a larger segment of aspirational consumers (Granot et al., 2013). This democratization of goods means that products formerly too expensive for most consumers are now accessible to greater numbers through mass premium brands, line extensions and brand collaborations (Okonkwo, 2007). Although masstige brands offer some luxury goods to a mass market, not all masstige brands are created equally. An early study by Silverstein and Fiske (2003) divided luxury brands for the masses into “old-luxury brand extensions” and “mass prestige” brands (p. 49), which are similar to the accessible core and affordable luxury brands in Rambourg’s (2014) hierarchy of luxury brands. The former are traditional luxury brands that offer lower-priced products via a downward extension, while mass prestige brands are newly emerged brands that offer products that generally target middle-market consumers, having positioned their prices above conventional but below old-luxury products. For instance, Bath and Body Works and Coach were created as original masstige brands, while BMW, Burberry and Tiffany began offering lower-priced masstige goods to middle-income consumers long after the companies were known for their luxury goods (Silverstein and Fiske, 2003). Although the early masstige literature differentiated the types of luxury brands for the masses (Silverstein and Fiske, 2003), this differentiation received little attention in the later masstige brand literature (Kumar et al., 2020). In other words, although the concept of different types of masstige brands exists, no study to the best of our knowledge has empirically examined the different types of masstige brands. This lack of attention led to ambiguous distinctions between old-luxury brand extensions and mass prestige brands by referring to both as masstige brands. For example, Paul (2019) used Louis Vuitton to measure masstige brand value, but Vogel et al. (2019) considered Louis Vuitton and Gucci to be traditional luxury brands and Coach, Kate Spade and Michael Kors to be masstige brands. Because the present study focuses on the positioning of masstige brands, we adopted Silverstein and Fiske’s (2003) categorization. However, due to the term’s ambiguity, we redefine masstige brands as either “born” – i.e. those new to the market – or “luxury” – those that expanded from traditional luxury brands to target mass consumers. We discuss their differences below. Born- and luxury-masstige brands differ in origin, heritage and price positioning. First, compared to born-masstige brands, luxury-masstige brands usually have a long history in which the brand acquired a cachet of quality, artisanship (Kim et al., 2019) and brand pedigree (Wuestefeld et al., 2012). Because a brand’s heritage enhances its authenticity (Morhart et al., 2015), luxury-masstige brands generally have an established image of luxury, artisanship and quality. In contrast, born-masstige brands, having recently appeared, tend to have a relatively shorter history and heritage. Thus, the two types have different origins and heritage and, consequently, may be valued differently by consumers. Second, price positioning differs between born- and luxurymasstige brands. Luxury-masstige brands typically offer products with a higher price range and target both high- and middle-class consumers. Traditional luxury brands (e.g. Louis Vuitton and Gucci) originally targeted only wealthy consumers with products at premium prices, but now, as a way of joining masstige markets and increasing their sales, they offer accessories such as wallets and keyrings via downward line extensions at lower prices (Boisvert and Ashill, 2018; Paul, 2019). Still, while prices for their accessories moved into the affordable range, those for most of their other products remained high. Indeed, the luxury companies kept their premium pricing strategy to enhance their exclusivity, brand power and high quality. High prices also set their products apart from other mass-market fashion brands (Okonkwo, 2007). Many luxury-masstige brands cover a wide range of prices, starting with small accessories for about $200, to items costing several thousand or even tens of thousands of dollars for exclusive or runway collections (Fitzpatrick, 2020; Stokes, 2018). In contrast, born-masstige brands appeal primarily to the mass market (Truong et al., 2009). Almost all masstige products are moderately priced (up to several hundred dollars) and target middle-class consumers. The products of bornmasstige brands offer exclusive premium experiences at a price that is above the range of middle-income consumers but generally below the price range of traditional luxury products (Das et al., 2022). Silverstein and Fiske (2003) argue that bornmasstige products (i.e. old-luxury products) are priced below the luxury-masstige products. For example, comparing a product in the same product category (e.g. a shopper bag) of a luxury-masstige brand such as Louis Vuitton (Paul, 2018) and a born-masstige brand such as Kate Spade, the price difference is significant – $1,540 and $358, respectively. Because prices for most luxury-masstige products are positioned higher than those of born-masstige products, consumers will likely see luxury-masstige brands as more luxurious than their bornmasstige counterparts. Because of several underlying differences between the two brand types, consumers may develop different luxury perceptions of them over time. 2.2 Masstige fashion brand 3 Disney collaboration A fashion brand collaboration is a strategic partnership between two or more parties to create innovative and unique products, whose purpose is to benefit all parties by enhancing brand value, sales, brand awareness and brand image (Kim et al., 2014). Since the beginning of the 21st century, diverse collaboration strategies have become common in the fashion industry. These collaborations have included using designers, celebrities and artists to appeal to a particular market segment and are classified as intra- or inter-business partnerships (Kim et al., 2014). The former consists of a collaboration between two fashion brands or designers, such as H&M and luxury fashion designers (e.g. Marni and Balmain), while the latter is a brand collaboration with business sectors outside fashion, such as artists, celebrities (Kim et al., 2014) or other parties (e.g. Prada-LG cell phones). Luxury brands have chiefly engaged in inter-business collaboration, especially art collaboration, which several studies say increased consumer perceptions of product exclusivity while helping to expand the brand’s personality (Kim et al., 2018). Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 140

Although Disney collaborations are similar to art partnerships, differences exist in how consumers respond to Disney characters. Compared to other contemporary arts used for fashion brand collaborations, Disney animations offer rich storylines and familiar personalities, which resonate with people’s emotions and relate to childhood fantasies (Hosany et al., 2013). For example, consumers are likely to develop an emotional attachment to Disney characters when they are young and these attachments may elicit a sense of nostalgia in adulthood for products featuring them. This encourages consumers to relive or revisit pleasant childhood memories (Yano, 2011). Indeed, consumers may transfer their childhood emotions and memories to fashion products that represent their childhood (Choi and Lee, 2020). Furthermore, animals and non-human objects with humanlike characteristics – often found in Disney characters (e.g. Mickey Mouse and Bambi) – are viewed as attractive and familiar (Hosany et al., 2013; Choi and Lee, 2020). Their humorous personalities and physical features can increase the character’s likeability and hence the consumer’s interest in them (Hosany et al., 2013). The big, rounded ears and childlike shape of Mickey Mouse, for example, may elicit warm feelings of childhood and increase Mickey’s warmth and playfulness (Callcott and Phillips, 1996). Because animated characters can have a positive effect on brand perceptions, many marketers have applied these characters to their brands and products (Choi and Lee, 2020). According to the brand character literature, the personalities of brand characters (e.g. humor, excitement, sincerity and competence) appeal to many consumers, which increases positive attitudes to the brand, deepens brand trust and rationalizes paying premium prices (Callcott and Phillips, 1996). This is particularly true for nostalgic characters, which can lead to consumers developing brand trust, positive attitudes and a strong emotional attachment to the brand (Phillips, 1996). However, while animated characters generally have a positive effect on brands and product perceptions, Disney characters with enjoyable and exciting characteristics may not immediately enhance the perceived value and quality expected from masstige consumers. The literature on brand character and art fashion collaborations consistently shows that congruency between characters and brands is crucial for successful brand partnerships (Callcott and Phillips, 1996; Kim et al., 2018; Hosany et al., 2013). For this reason, Disney characters that tend to target mass audiences are less likely to transfer easily to luxury images. Moreover, the image of a luxury brand may be diluted due to an incongruent fit between Disney and the masstige brand. Kim et al. (2018) found that when the personalities of a luxury-masstige brand (i.e. Burberry) and a collaborating artist were incongruent, the collaboration diluted the brand’s original image and implanted the artist’s personality on the brand instead. In contrast, when an artist has a similar personality as the luxury brand (i.e. personality congruency), the original brand’s personality remained after the collaboration (Kim et al., 2018). Further, Hosany et al. (2013) argued that by collaborating with Anna Sui, a fashion designer, the brand Hello Kitty was successful in implementing her image of sweet, feminine and nostalgic fashion. Because the perceived fit between Hello Kitty and Anna Sui was high, the former kept a consistent brand personality while introducing new products. According to several studies, Disney characters tend to align with mass audiences but are unlikely to transfer an image of luxury. Indeed, a fashion brand’s personality and image (e.g. prestige, exclusivity and tradition) may be diluted due to an incongruent fit between Disney and the brand. 3. Hypothesis development 3.1 Effects of Disney collaboration on perceptions of masstige brand luxury This study investigates the influence of a Disney collaboration on perceived luxury as an outcome because building the prestigious (luxury) brand image is an important branding strategy for masstige brands. According to Vigneron and Johnson (2004), diverse factors contribute to the perception of “luxury,” including conspicuousness (i.e. presentation of social status or wealth), quality (i.e. desire for quality and performance of a product), extended-self (i.e. communication of an individual’s identity and success), hedonism (i.e. the sensory pleasure of using a product) and uniqueness (i.e. exclusivity and rarity). We use these five dimensions of perceived brand luxury to examine the effects of a Disney collaboration on consumers’ luxury perceptions of luxurymasstige brands and born-masstige brands to develop our hypotheses. Although many Disney characters are playful and exciting, such images may be incongruent with the image of luxury expected from typical masstige consumers. Masstige seekers may value the brand’s traditional logo or timeless design without an animated Disney character. In place of a masstige brand logo, Disney characters being a focal point on a luxury product may be perceived as being less attractive (i.e. hedonism) or less expensive, which may imply low quality (Rao and Monroe, 1989). Indeed, because Disney characters are universally known – Mickey Mouse, for example, has a 97% name recognition in the USA (Segran, 2019) – such ubiquity on masstige products may be perceived as being too accessible and reduce the brand’s uniqueness (e.g. exclusivity and rarity). These assumptions, supported in the literature, suggest that product extensions may dilute a brand’s image and value when the brand’s attributes are inconsistent with consumer expectations (John et al., 1998; Kim et al., 2001). We, therefore, expect a Disney collaboration to harm the perceived luxury of a masstige brand. Although a Disney collaboration may be viewed as lessening the perceptions of luxury of a masstige brand, we expect such negative effects to be stronger for born-masstige brands than luxury-masstige brands. The latter usually have a long history and brand heritage, using logos and designs that indicate the brand’s core meaning, as well as an established value and consistency (Wuestefeld et al., 2012). Due to a well-established luxury brand image, a Disney collaboration may not jeopardize the luxury and prestige images of luxury-masstige brands. In contrast, born-masstige brands, which emerged due to the democratization of the luxury market (Truong et al., 2009), tend to have a relatively short history and heritage. Thus, we can assume that consumers are less familiar with the luxury of born-masstige brands, either through direct or indirect experience; that is, they may have a lower degree of firmly Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 141

established perceptions of luxury in association with bornmasstige brands in comparison to luxury-masstige brands. As a result, while a Disney collaboration may harm the overall perceptions of both born-masstige brands and luxury-masstige brands, the effect may be greater for the former: H1. The negative effects of a Disney collaboration on perceptions of luxury (i.e., (a) conspicuousness, (b) quality, (c) extended-self, (d) hedonism and (e) uniqueness) are greater for born-masstige brands than luxury-masstige brands. 3.2 Effects of line extension type on perceptions of masstige brand luxury A common strategy for introducing new products is through the line extension, which develops new products within the same product category (e.g. liquid form of Tide; Sinapuelas and Sisodiya, 2010). Disney’s collaboration with masstige brands is an example of product line extension because the product categories (i.e. fashion items) remain the same as the core brand. Line extensions can occur “vertically” (either upward or downward) or “horizontally,” differing in price, quality and/or level of service (Keller and Aaker, 1998). For vertical line extensions, the goal is to create a quality/prestige differential to target new customer segments, e.g. Toyota’s Lexus (an upward line extension) and Hilton’s Embassy suites (a downward line extension) (Boisvert and Ashill, 2018). Horizontal extensions, on the other hand, occur when an existing brand introduces new products in a similar product class or category at the same price and quality (e.g. Coca-Cola’s Diet Coke and Cherry Coke; Kim et al., 2001). Among the various factors that companies have applied for line extensions, a price-based line extension is one of the more common researchers use to investigate vertical and horizontal line extensions (Randall et al., 1998; Kirmani et al., 1999). Aligned with the previous literature, the present research distinguishes between horizontal and upward line extensions based on price: ! a horizontal line extension of a Disney collaborated collection having a similar price position as the traditional collection; and ! upward line extensions having a higher price position of a Disney collaborated collection compared to the price of the traditional collection. However, we did not consider the downward extension because, in practice, masstige brands typically add a price premium to their limited-edition collections, such as a Disney collaborated collection, or keep prices the same as other products rather than lowering them. Because a high price usually indicates quality and luxury, masstige brands tend to use a premium pricing strategy to express the consumer’s relative success and status (Kapferer, 2012; Parguel et al., 2016). The premium price of a luxury brand is justified not only by high quality but also by intangibles that include the brand’s history, prestige and legend compared to other similar products (Kapferer et al., 2014). Aspirational price points are a characteristic of luxury brands (Doss and Robinson, 2013), and an upward line extension operationalized by increasing the price will likely have a positive influence on the consumer’s perceptions of luxury. According to the wellestablished price-quality relationship (Rao and Monroe, 1989), Disney collaborated products with a price premium may lead consumers to suppose high quality. As the price increases, not everyone can afford the product and a premium price may also increase the consumer’s perception of the product’s exclusivity and rarity (i.e. perceived uniqueness; Verhallen and Robben, 1994). Consumers may also believe that high-priced Disney collaborated products can be a way to display their wealth and class, increasing the perceived conspicuousness and the extended-self (Bearden and Etzel, 1982). When luxury perceptions are chiefly evaluated by price premiums, an upward extension via price should increase the consumer’s perceptions of luxury more than a horizontal extension. Still, due to the different characteristics of bornmasstige and luxury-masstige brands, the influence of the type of line extension on perceptions of luxury is expected to differ between the two brand types. Luxury-masstige brands have a prestigious image formed by qualities such as artisanship that are considered worthy of a premium price (Ko et al., 2019). Further, a luxury brand’s heritage has a significant influence on the brand’s overall perceived value, i.e. economic, affective and social (Wuestefeld et al., 2012). Thus, the high price positioning of luxury-masstige brands is associated in the consumer’s mind with luxury and prestige brands, which limits the room to increase the perceived luxury due to the upward extension of a Disney collaboration (Parguel et al., 2016). In contrast, because most born-masstige brands, unlike luxurymasstige brands, have relatively less history and heritage and a moderate price positioning strategy, consumers may have less established perceptions of luxury for those brands. Thus, due to a lack of an established luxury brand image, the influence of an increase in the product’s price on perceived luxury may be significant for born-masstige brands. This is supported by Parguel et al. (2016) in a study that showed that displaying higher prices than the consumer’s reference price for a masstige brand’s watch increased the perception of luxury more than not displaying the price, while for the high-end luxury brand, a displayed price did not influence the perception of luxury significantly. We propose, therefore, that for born-masstige brands, the upward extension of a Disney collaborated collection will increase perceptions of luxury more than a horizontal extension, but the type of extension will have no significant influence on perceptions of luxury for luxurymasstige brands. H2. Types of masstige brands (luxury-masstige vs bornmasstige) moderate the relationship between line extension type (upward vs horizontal) of a Disney collection and perceptions of luxury: (a) for bornmasstige brands, perceptions of luxury are higher for upward than horizontal line extensions; and (b) for luxury-masstige brands, there is no significant influence of the type of line extension on perceptions of luxury. 3.3 Mediating effect of perceptions of luxury of Disney collaborated collection and consumer’s purchase intention for masstige brands To purchase luxury and masstige goods, consumers must be willing to pay a price premium not only to own products but Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 142

also to achieve such diverse values as superior quality, feeling of specialness and to parade their economic power and status (Laurent and Dubois, 1996). By perceiving the diverse dimensions of luxury from masstige brands (e.g. conspicuousness, quality and uniqueness), many consumers believe they can achieve the luxury value via the masstige brand’s products, which consequently increases their brand purchase intentions. Previous studies consistently found that perceptions of luxury have a positive influence on brand purchase intentions and a mediating role on perceptions of luxury. For example, Mansoor and Paul (2022) found that, in the masstige context, when consumers had high luxury perceptions (particularly uniqueness and quality) associated with the masstige brands, they were likely to be happy with buying masstige brands. Further, Lee and Youn (2020) found that positive luxury brand experiences from social media videos elicited perceived luxury, which in turn increased purchase intentions. Parguel et al. (2016) similarly showed that displaying the price on a masstige brand’s product increased the uniqueness and conspicuousness dimensions of the perceptions of luxury, leading consumers to desire the brand’s products and purchase them. In line with previous literature, we propose that perceptions of luxury in masstige brands generated by a Disney collaborated collection will increase the consumer’s interest in purchasing the product: H3. Perceptions of luxury mediate the relationship between a Disney collaborated collection and brand purchase intention for masstige brands. The present research consists of three studies. Study 1 investigates whether a Disney collaborated collection leads to negative perceptions of luxury and, if so, how it differs across masstige brand types (born- vs luxury-masstige brands) (H1). Study 2 examines the price effect via different types of line extension of a Disney collaboration (upward vs horizontal) on luxury brand perceptions. The study also investigates the moderating role of masstige brand types on this relationship (H2) and the mediating role of perceptions of luxury on the relationship between line extension type and brand purchase intention (H3). Third, to address the limitations of Study 2, we conducted a further study (Study 3), which used six masstige brands to increase its generalizability and developed the stimulus to control the color and size of the handbags and the image of Mickey Mouse on them. 4. Study 1 We designed Study 1 to test how a Disney collaborated collection, compared to a traditional collection, influenced perceptions of luxury of born- and luxury-masstige brands (H1). 4.1 Stimulus development A pretest was conducted to select appropriate luxury-masstige brands and born-masstige brands. Because we wanted to reflect the masstige brand images and perceptions that consumers had already developed, we selected three well-known luxurymasstige brands (i.e. Gucci, Louis Vuitton and Burberry; Luxury Makers, 2020) and three born-masstige brands (i.e. Coach, Michael Kors and Marc Jacobs; Segura, 2019). A total of 49 responses were collected using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). All participants were female, lived in the USA and were aged between 18 and 40. Each participant was randomly assigned to three out of six masstige brands. For each brand, participants were asked about the brand’s history (e.g. “Brand X has a rich history”; Roux et al., 2017), brand familiarity (“I am familiar with brand X”; Simonin and Ruth, 1998), Disney collaboration familiarity (“I had heard of and/or seen brand X’s Mickey Mouse products before”; Simonin and Ruth, 1998) and the brand-Disney fit (“The Mickey Mouse collection is a good fit for brand X”; Boisvert and Ashill, 2018) on a fivepoint Likert-type scale. Based on the pretest results, we selected two brands whose history significantly differed because we assumed that history and heritage are crucial factors for differentiating luxurymasstige brands from born-masstige brands. To control other confounding effects, we selected two masstige brands that did not differ in brand familiarity, Disney collaboration familiarity and brand-Disney collaboration fit. Using these criteria, we selected Gucci for the luxury-masstige brand and Coach for the born-masstige brand. Participants perceived a higher brand history for Gucci than Coach (t = 2.65, p " 0.01, MGucci = 4.41, MCoach = 3.86), while two brands did not differ in brand familiarity (t = 0.60, p > 0.05, MGucci = 4.09, MCoach = 4.20), Disney collaboration familiarity (t = 0.76, p > 0.05, MGucci = 2.96, MCoach = 3.26) and fit between the brand and Disney collaboration (t = 0.98, p > 0.05, MGucci = 3.16, MCoach = 3.52). As both Gucci and Coach had Disney collaborated collections in 2020 and 2021, we selected products from their existing collections to avoid any doubts about product authenticity. We collected images of all products with Mickey Mouse from the websites of Gucci and Coach. We then found equivalent products with traditional logos (without Mickey) for the traditional collection. We excluded Disney collaborated products that did not have equivalent or similar traditional products. Also, among these products, we selected eight handbags of similar shape and size offered by Gucci and Coach. Finally, we created four images by collaging images of eight handbags and three accessories: Gucci and Coach products with and without Mickey (see Appendix 1). By showing a collection instead of one product, we tried to avoid specific perceptions due to the likability of and/or preference for a specific product. 4.2 Procedures and instruments A between-subjects experimental design was conducted with 2 (Disney collaborated vs traditional products)# 2 (bornmasstige brand: Coach vs luxury-masstige brand: Gucci), yielding four conditions. Because Disney collaborated products from women’s collections and masstige brands are of particular interest to young female customers, those who live in the USA and aged between 18 and 40 were eligible to participate in the survey (Loureiro et al., 2018). We collected data using MTurk because its participants are a relatively representative sample of the US population (Paolacci et al., 2010). To ensure the quality of our data, we distributed a questionnaire to those MTurk workers with over 1,000 approvals and a 97% approval rate. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions. After reviewing the assigned image, Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 143

they were asked about perceptions of luxury, which includes the five dimensions of conspicuousness, quality, extended-self, hedonism and uniqueness (Doss and Robinson, 2013). For the manipulation check, participants were asked about brand history (Roux et al., 2017), brand familiarity (Simonin and Ruth, 1998), Disney collaboration familiarity (Simonin and Ruth, 1998) and brand-Disney fit (Boisvert and Ashill, 2018), which were consistent with the pretest. After asking about their perceptions of luxury and questions related to a manipulation check, to ensure that the assigned stimulus (image) was seen by the participants, we asked, “What color were the bags that you saw in the image?” Further, we embedded four attention check questions by asking them to select simple indicated answers (e.g. Please select “Somewhat Agree.”). We recorded all answers using a five-point scale. 4.3 Results We initially collected 348 responses. After removing responses that had been submitted unreasonably quickly and incorrect answers concerning bag color and attention check items, we had 312 responses for further data analyses. The number of responses was between 76 and 80 per condition. All participants were female, lived in the USA and aged between 18 and 40. Most respondents were Caucasian (75%) and had some college education (69%). Most of the respondents’ household incomes ranged between $30,000 and $49,999 (20%) and between $90,000 and $149,999 (20%). As for masstige shopping behavior, 49% of participants owned one to five masstige brand products. Most participants purchase masstige fashion products less than once a year (34%) and two– three times a year (20%). For the manipulation check, we confirmed that Gucci had a higher brand history than Coach (t = 2.38, p " 0.01, MCoach = 3.93, MGucci = 4.17). Gucci and Coach did not differ in brand familiarity (t = 0.02, p > 0.05, MCoach = 4.47, MGucci = 4.48), Disney collaboration familiarity (t = 0.80, p > 0.05, MCoach = 2.45, MGucci = 2.32) and brand-Disney fit (t = 1.20, p > 0.05, MCoach = 2.49, MGucci = 2.68). Because Gucci and Coach have different level of brand histories, which manipulated luxury- vs born-masstige brands, and because brand familiarity, Disney collaboration familiarity and brand-Disney fit were consistent and controlled, the manipulation of born and luxury-masstige brands was successful. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess the measurements of each construct including the five dimensions of perceived luxury (i.e. conspicuousness, quality, extended-self, hedonism and uniqueness). We excluded one item from conspicuousness and three items from quality due to low factor loadings (below 0.50). After excluding these items, the model fits well into the data [X2 /df = 2.05, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.98, normed fit index (NFI) = 0.95, Tucker Lewis index (TLI) = 0.96, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.05]. All factor loadings for corresponding constructs were over 0.74; the composite reliabilities (CRs) were over 0.86, and the average variance extracteds (AVEs) were over 0.60, confirming convergent validity (Hair et al., 2010). The square root of the AVE for each construct was larger than the corresponding correlation coefficient between the factors, confirming discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2010; see Table 1). To test the hypotheses, a two-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and planned contrasts were conducted, which allowed us to statistically test the mean differences between groups that received different stimuli. First, brands and types of the collection were coded as dummy variables: 0 = Coach, 1 = Gucci; 0 = traditional collection, 1 = Disney Table 1 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) Correlation matrix Factor/items Factor loading CR AVE CP QU ES HD UQ Conspicuousness (CP) 0.87 0.68 0.83a Accessible–Elitist 0.84 Affordable–Expensive 0.78 For the non-wealthy–For the wealthy 0.85 Quality (QU) 0.88 0.79 0.45 0.89a Poor quality–Best quality 0.85 Inferior–Superior 0.92 Extended-self (ES) 0.92 0.79 0.55 0.70 0.89a Uninfluential–Influential 0.89 Not powerful–powerful 0.90 Low regarded–Highly regarded 0.87 Hedonism (HD) 0.95 0.85 0.38 0.83 0.72 0.92a Not tasteful–Exquisite 0.91 Unattractive–Glamorous 0.93 Unflattering–Stunning 0.94 Uniqueness (UQ) 0.86 0.60 0.52 0.70 0.53 0.67 0.77a Everywhere–Exclusive 0.85 Cheap–Precious 0.68 Widely available–Rare 0.74 Common–Unique 0.82 Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 144

collaborated collection. Levene’s test for homogeneity of variance indicated insignificant results for all five dimensions of perceived luxury, showing approximately equal variances across groups. The MANOVA result shows significant main effects of a Disney collaboration on conspicuousness (F(1, 308) = 22.27, p " 0.001), quality (F(1, 308) = 27.17, p " 0.001), extendedself (F(1, 308) = 24.94, p " 0.001), hedonism (F(1, 308) = 31.60, p " 0.001) and uniqueness (F(1, 308) = 4.78, p " 0.05). Specifically, participants perceived higher luxury for the traditional collection compared to the Disney collaborated collection: conspicuousness (MTraditional = 4.17, MDisney = 3.74), quality (MTraditional = 4.03, MDisney = 3.54), extendedself (MTraditional = 4.27, MDisney = 3.79), hedonism (MTraditional = 3.78, MDisney = 3.08) and uniqueness (MTraditional = 3.45, MDisney = 3.24). Further, all five dimensions of perceived luxury were higher for Gucci over Coach: conspicuousness (F(1, 308) = 52.64, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.62, MGucci = 4.29), quality (F(1, 308) = 35.14, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.50, MGucci = 4.06), extended-self (F(1, 308) = 29.38, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.76, MGucci = 4.29), hedonism (F(1, 308) = 23.55, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.14, MGucci = 3.73) and uniqueness (F(1, 308) = 26.10, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.09, MGucci = 3.60). Also, there were interaction effects between the Disney collaboration and masstige brand types on conspicuousness (F(1, 308) = 4.42, p " 0.05), quality (F(1, 308) = 14.43, p " 0.001), extended-self (F(1, 308) = 3.77, p " 0.05), hedonism (F(1, 308) = 7.14, p " 0.01) and uniqueness (F(1, 308) = 4.30, p " 0.05), supporting H1. The results are shown in Table 2. By further analyzing the interaction effects, the planned contrast results show that participants exposed to the Coach traditional collection had higher perceptions of luxury than those exposed to the Coach Disney collection: conspicuousness (t = 4.78, p " 0.001, MTraditional = 3.93, MDisney = 3.29), quality (t = 6.31, p " 0.001, MTraditional = 3.92, MDisney = 3.05), extendedself (t = 4.86, p " 0.001, MTraditional = 4.10, MDisney = 3.41), hedonism (t = 5.81, p " 0.001, MTraditional = 3.64, MDisney = 2.59) and uniqueness (t = 2.98, p " 0.01, MTraditional = 3.30, MDisney = 2.87). In contrast, for Gucci, the participants’ luxury perceptions of conspicuousness (t = 1.87, p > 0.05, MTraditional = 4.41, MDisney = 4.16), quality (t = 1.01, p > 0.05, MTraditional = 4.13, MDisney = 3.99) and uniqueness (t = 0.08, p > 0.05, MTraditional = 3.60, MDisney = 3.59) were not different for the traditional and Disney collections, while participants’ luxury perceptions of extended-self (t = 2.18, p " 0.05, MTraditional = 4.44, MDisney = 4.14) and hedonism (t = 2.11, p " 0.05, MTraditional = 3.92, MDisney = 3.54) were higher for the Gucci traditional than Gucci Disney collections. 4.4 Discussion Study 1 revealed a significant effect on perceptions of luxury for the Disney collection, compared to the traditional collection. This indicates that consumers evaluate masstige brands as being less luxurious after seeing a Disney collaborated collection than they do with a traditional collection with traditional patterns and logos. This is consistent with previous studies that focused on artist and character collaborations in which the congruency between artist/character and brand was an important factor for successful brand collaborations (Callcott and Phillips, 1996; Kim et al., 2018; Hosany et al., 2013). The fun, cute and child-like Disney characters do not fit with the luxurious masstige brand image, which consequently lowered perceptions of luxury of masstige brands. A unique finding of Study 1 was the moderating effect of the masstige brand type. Specifically, the negative effect of a Disney collaboration on perceptions of luxury was stronger for the born-masstige brand than the luxury-masstige brand. The results can be explained by the latter having well-established brand images, long histories and high-price positioning. As luxury-masstige brands expanded from traditional luxury brands to target middle-class consumers via downward Table 2 Mean values and MANOVA result for traditional vs Disney collaborated collections across masstige brand type (Study 1) Mean F (ANCOVA) Predictors Born-masstige (Coach) Luxury-masstige (Gucci) Traditional vs Disney (A) Brand (B) A # B Outcome: conspicuousness 22.27*** 52.64*** 4.42* Traditional 3.93 4.41 Disney 3.29 4.16 Outcome: quality 27.17*** 35.14*** 14.43*** Traditional 3.92 4.13 Disney 3.05 3.99 Outcome: extended-self 24.94*** 29.38*** 3.77* Traditional 4.10 4.44 Disney 3.41 4.14 Outcome: hedonism 31.60*** 23.55*** 7.14** Traditional 3.64 3.92 Disney 2.59 3.54 Outcome: uniqueness 4.78* 26.10*** 4.30* Traditional 3.30 3.60 Disney 2.87 3.59 Notes: ***p " 0.001; **p " 0.01; *p " 0.05 Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 145

extensions, they built on their heritage. Also, because luxurymasstige brands offer high-priced products and target wealthy consumers, their customers might categorize them as being more luxurious than masstige brands (Boisvert and Ashill, 2018). Thus, due to their well-established brand image, they are not easily weakened by a Disney collaborated collection. However, born-masstige brands have a relatively short history and chiefly target middle-class consumers. Lacking a wellestablished luxury image negatively impacts their persona of luxury more than it does luxury-masstige brands. The results also show that for luxury-masstige brands, conspicuousness, quality and uniqueness did not differ between traditional and Disney collections, while extended-self and hedonism were lower for a Disney than a traditional collection. We can explain these results using the categorization by Vigneron and Johnson (2004) of dimensions as nonpersonal perceptions (i.e. conspicuousness, quality and uniqueness) and personal perceptions (i.e. extended-self and hedonism). Because consumers’ beliefs about the quality and exclusivity of products are inferred from the high prices of luxury-masstige brands (Vigneron and Johnson, 2004), these non-personal dimensions of luxury remain equivalent when consumers see either Disney or traditional collections. On the other hand, compared to traditional collections, consumers may be concerned more with social acceptance and conformity with a reference group that includes child-like Disney characters on luxury-masstige products, which may lower perceptions of luxury of the extended-self and hedonism. 5. Study 2 Having supported H1 (negative effects of a Disney collection on perceptions of luxury), we designed Study 2 to test whether using an upward pricing strategy for a Disney collaboration would be effective in increasing perceptions of luxury toward masstige brands. Consistent with Study 1, we examined the moderating role of masstige brand type (H2). Additionally, Study 2 tested the mediating role of perceptions of luxury on the relationship between line extension type and brand purchase intention (H3). 5.1 Stimulus development To determine appropriate prices for the upward line extension, we conducted a pretest. A total of 27 responses were collected using MTurk. We used the same brand as Study 1 (Gucci and Coach) and each participant was randomly assigned to either Gucci or Coach. The questionnaire then asked about price perceptions for the Disney collaborated products for either Gucci or Coach with a 0% to 60% higher price than the traditional products (e.g. “Compared to the price of brand Gucci’s traditional bag, a 10% higher price for the bag with Mickey is [...]”), answered on a five-point Likert-type scale anchored by “not high at all” and “extremely high.” First, to select a price with significantly higher price perceptions (upward line extension) than the condition with the same price as traditional products (0%; horizontal line extension), we selected 20% (Gucci: M0% = 1.64, M20% = 2.79, p " 0.001; Coach: M0% = 2.23, M20% = 3.15, p " 0.01) because there was no significant difference in price perceptions between 0% and 10% for Coach. Participants also perceived that a 20% increase in price is close to “moderately high” for both Coach and Gucci. Second, we selected a 40% increase for the second level of an upward line extension price; the price perception of a 40% higher price was significantly higher than the 20% increase for both Gucci and Coach (Gucci: M20% = 2.79, M40% = 3.93, p " 0.001; Coach: M20% = 3.15, M40% = 3.85, p " 0.01). Because we did not consider the extreme level of an upward extension, a 40% increase, where price perceptions were close to “very high” for both Gucci and Coach, was suitable for this study. Therefore, 20% and 40% price increases were used for the two levels of upward line extensions for the Disney collaborated collection. 5.2 Procedures and instruments The experimental design used a three-type line extension (horizontal, 20% upward and 40% upward) # two types of masstige brands (born-masstige: Coach vs luxury-masstige: Gucci) between-subjects design. Using the prices of handbags and accessories from the traditional collections of Coach and Gucci, we determined the price range of the products to be $70–$690 for Coach and $630–$2,590 for Gucci. Based on the pretest results, prices for the horizontal, 20% upward and 40% upward extensions were manipulated. After calculating a 20% and 40% higher price than those in the traditional collection, we rounded up the last digit of the price to make a zero-ending price to avoid any confounding effects due to the different price endings (Chang and Chen, 2014). Thus, for Coach, we used $70–$690 for the horizontal extension, $80–$830 for the 20% upward extension and $100–$970 for the 40% upward extension; for Gucci, $630–$2,590 for the horizontal extension, $760–$3,110 for the 20% upward extension and $880–$3,630 for the 40% upward extension were used. For the born-masstige and luxury-masstige brands, we used Coach and Gucci, consistent with Study 1. The data were collected via MTurk, and the questionnaire was distributed to MTurk workers with over a 97% approval rate and over 1,000 approvals. Participants were eligible to participate in the survey if they were female, aged between 18 and 40 and lived in the USA. Subjects were assigned randomly to one of the six conditions. They were asked to imagine that they were searching for handbags and found either Coach’s or Gucci’s new product line featuring Mickey Mouse. They were asked to look at the images of the handbags and accessories from both the traditional and Mickey Mouse collections, where we used the same images as Study 1. The participants were then randomly assigned either horizontal, 20% upward or 40% upward price ranges (e.g. “The Gucci’s handbags and accessories featuring Mickey Mouse are priced between $760 and $3,110, which are above Gucci’s traditional collection price range of $630 and $2,590.”). After reviewing the information, respondents were asked about the five dimensions of perceived luxury (Doss and Robinson, 2013), which were consistent items with Study 1. We also asked about brand purchase intentions (e.g. “If I were going to purchase a masstige fashion product, I would consider buying brand Gucci.”; Dodds et al., 1991). For the manipulation check, we measured price perception, brand history (Roux et al., 2017), brand familiarity (Simonin and Ruth, 1998), Disney collaboration familiarity (Simonin and Ruth, 1998) and brandDisney fit (Boisvert and Ashill, 2018). Consistent with Study 1, Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 146

we included an item asking about the color of the bag and attention check items to ensure the quality of the data. All items were answered on a five-point scale. 5.3 Results A total of 445 responses were collected using MTurk. After removing invalid answers that were incorrect about bag color attention check items and were completed in unreasonably short time, 402 answers were used for the analyses. The number of respondents in each group was between 66 and 72. All participants were female, lived in the USA and aged between 18 and 40. The majority of participants were Caucasian (72%) and had some college education (70%). Most had an annual household income between $100,000 and $149,999 (14%). The results of a manipulation check showed that the participants perceived that the price of a 20% upward extension was higher (t = 2.75, p " 0.01, Mhorizontal = 3.36, M20% upward = 3.74) than a horizontal extension and lower than a 40% upward extension (t = 4.67, p " 0.001, M20% upward = 3.74, M40% upward = 4.24). Further, we confirmed the successful manipulation of masstige brand type; participants perceived that Gucci has a richer brand history than Coach (t = 3.08, p " 0.01, MCoach = 3.95, MGucci = 4.20), while brand familiarity (t = 1.19, p > 0.05), Disney collaboration familiarity (whether they have heard of the Disney collaboration with the brand) (t = 0.32, p > 0.05) and the fit between Disney and the brand (t = 0.09, p > 0.05) were not different. Therefore, manipulations of the line extension type (horizontal vs 20% upward vs 40% upward extensions) and brand type (born- vs luxury-masstige) were successful. Consistent with the CFA result in Study 1, one item from conspicuousness and three items from quality were excluded due to low factor loadings. After excluding these items, all factor loadings for corresponding constructs were between 0.71 and 0.95; the values of CR ranged between 0.76 and 0.96, and AVE values ranged from 0.59 to 0.87, confirming convergent validity (Hair et al., 2010). The square root of the AVE for each construct was larger than the corresponding correlation coefficient between the factors, confirming discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2010). The model demonstrated a good fit to the data (X2 /df = 1.88, CFI = 0.98, NFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.04). A two-way multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) and planned contrasts were conducted to test the moderating effect of masstige brand type on the relationship between extension type and perceptions of luxury. The line extension type was coded as 0 = horizontal, 1 = 20% upward and 2 = 40% upward extensions; brand type was coded as 0 = Coach and 1 = Gucci. Although we controlled the brand-Disney fit between Gucci and Coach, individual differences in perception within the brands may have remained. Thus, the brand-Disney fit was included as a covariate (control variable). Levene’s test for homogeneity of variance showed no significant difference in variance across groups for all five dimensions of perceptions of luxury and purchase intention. The MANCOVA result shows significant main effects of line extension type (horizontal vs 20% upward vs 40% upward extensions) on conspicuousness (F(2,395) = 8.48, p " 0.001) and uniqueness (F(2,395) = 4.80, p " 0.01), while the effects of line extensions on quality, extended-self and hedonism were not significant. Masstige brand type (Coach vs Gucci) had significant influences on all five dimensions of perception of luxury. Specifically, the participants’ perceptions of conspicuousness (F(1,395) = 71.12, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.90, MGucci = 4.54), quality (F(1,395) = 30.22, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.38, MGucci = 3.76), extended-self (F(1,395) = 43.02, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.91, MGucci = 4.36), hedonism (F(1,395) = 21.52, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.15, MGucci = 3.58) and uniqueness (F(1,395) = 16.88, p " 0.001, MCoach = 3.46, MGucci = 3.79) were higher for Gucci than Coach. Further, there were significant interaction effects of line extension type and masstige brand type on all five dimensions of perceptions of luxury: conspicuousness (F(2,395) = 3.69, p " 0.05), quality (F(2,395) = 3.63, p " 0.05), extended-self (F(2,395) = 5.08, p " 0.01), hedonism (F(2,395) = 6.84, p " 0.001) and uniqueness (F(2,395) = 5.64, p " 0.01). The results are shown in Table 3. To further analyze the interaction effects, a planned contrast was conducted. The results indicated that, for Coach, participants perceived higher luxury for the 20% upward than the horizontal extension for all five dimensions: conspicuousness (t = 4.69, p " 0.001, MHorizontal = 3.55, M20% upward = 4.14); quality (t = 2.31, p " 0.001, MHorizontal = 3.14, M20% upward = 3.45); extended-self (t = 2.64, p " 0.001, MHorizontal = 3.64, M20% upward = 3.98); hedonism (t = 2.25, p " 0.05, MHorizontal = 2.83, M20% upward = 3.25); uniqueness (t = 3.79, p " 0.001, MHorizontal = 3.07, M20% upward = 3.63). Specifically, all five dimensions of luxury perceptions of Coach were higher for the 40% upward line extension than the horizontal extension: conspicuousness (t = 3.70, p " 0.001, MHorizontal = 3.55, M40% upward = 4.03); quality (t = 3.07, p " 0.01, MHorizontal = 3.14, M40% upward = 3.56); extended-self (t = 3.68, p " 0.001, MHorizontal = 3.64, M40% upward = 4.11); hedonism (t = 2.98, p " 0.01, MHorizontal = 2.83, M40% upward = 3.40); and uniqueness (t = 4.06, p " 0.001, MHorizontal = 3.07, M40% upward = 3.68). Although, for Coach, there was no difference in perceived luxury between the 20% and 40% upward extensions, all dimensions of perceived luxury were higher for upward (20% and 40%) than horizontal extensions. In other words, participants perceived that Coach’s Disney products with upward pricing (20% and 40% higher price than traditional products) transferred higher luxury values than those products with horizontal pricing (same price as the traditional products). The results support H2a. In contrast, for Gucci, conspicuousness, quality, extendedself and uniqueness did not differ across line extension type, while hedonism was the only dimension that differed across line extension types. Hedonism was lower for the 40% upward extension than the horizontal (t = 2.61, p " 0.01, MHorizontal = 3.77, M40% upward = 3.26) and 20% upward extension (t = 2.65, p " 0.01, M20% upward = 3.76, M40% upward = 3.26), while the horizontal and the 20% upward extension did not significantly differ in terms of hedonism. Participants perceived that the pleasure of consuming Gucci’s Disney products (i.e. hedonism) was lower when the products were marked as 40% more expensive than traditional Gucci products, compared to those marked as 20% higher or the same price as their traditional products. Thus, the results partially support H2b. Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 147

Further, using PROCESS analysis (Preacher and Hayes, 2008), we tested the mediating effects of perceptions of luxury on the relationship between line extension type and brand purchase intentions. For Coach, four dimensions of perceived luxury (except extended-self) were significant mediators between line extension type and brand purchase intention (conspicuousness: 0.23 < CI < 0.04, quality: 0.02 < CI < 0.13, hedonism: 0.01 < CI < 0.10 and uniqueness: 0.01 < CI < 0.11). This result indicates that participants’ luxury perceptions increased as the price of the Disney collection increased via upward line extensions (20% and 40% upward pricing), which consequently increased the intention to purchase Disney collaborated products from Coach. In contrast, for Gucci, none of the perceived luxury mediated the effect of line extension type on brand purchase intentions. Therefore, H3 was partially supported. 5.4 Discussion The results of Study 2 show a significant moderating effect of masstige brand type on the relationship between the type of Disney product line extension and perceptions of luxury. Specifically, for born-masstige brands, an upward extension enhanced the consumers’ perceptions of luxury more than the horizontal extensions did, while there was no difference between upward and horizontal extensions for luxury-masstige brands (except for the hedonic dimension). Because this study used price to define upward and horizontal extensions, the results of the born-masstige brand are consistent with previous studies showing that a high price is closely related to perceptions of luxury, such as the product’s high quality and exclusivity (Vigneron and Johnson, 2004; Rao and Monroe, 1989). Also, an upward extension may lead consumers to perceive that Disney collaborated collections offer aspirational price points that not everyone can afford. Thus, they may believe they can present their wealth and status better via Disney collaborated products with a price premium (Kapferer, 2012; Parguel et al., 2016). Further, for Coach, we found no difference between moderately high (20%) and very high (40%) levels of upward extension, which indicates that the perceived luxury of aspiration price points does not grow continuously but stop at a certain level. In contrast, luxury perceptions of luxury-masstige brands do not suffer from a horizontal extension compared to an upward extension. The absence of an upward extension’s positive effect may be explained by the price point of the traditional collection being already high, which carries perceptions of luxury. As a result, there is no further room to elevate the perception of luxury via an upward extension of a Disney collaborated collection (Parguel et al., 2016). However, unlike the widely accepted positive relationship between price and perception of luxury, the hedonism dimension moved in the opposite direction; that is, hedonism was lower for the very high level of an upward extension (40% upward pricing) compared to the horizontal extension. This may be due to consumers using the price of the traditional collection as a reference price, and the unreasonably large difference in prices between Disney and a traditional collection may create negative perceptions and make consumers feel that the company is profiteering (Bechwatiet al., 2009). 6. Study 3 Study 3 improved the generalizability of Study 2 and addressed some of its limitations. Because Study 2 used one bornTable 3 Mean values and ANCOVA result for horizontal vs upward line extensions across masstige brand type (Study 2) Mean F (ANCOVA) Predictors Born-masstige (Coach) Luxury-masstige (Gucci) Extension (A) Brand (B) A # B Outcome: conspicuousness 8.48$$$ 71.12$$$ 3.69$ Horizontal 3.55 4.46 20% upward 4.14 4.57 40% upward 4.03 4.57 Outcome: quality 1.30 30.22$$$ 3.63$ Horizontal 3.14 3.82 20% upward 3.45 3.79 40% upward 3.56 3.68 Outcome: extended-self 2.04 43.01$$$ 5.08$$ Horizontal 3.64 4.42 20% upward 3.98 4.44 40% upward 4.11 4.25 Outcome: hedonism 1.48 21.52$$$ 6.84$$$ Horizontal 2.83 3.77 20% upward 3.25 3.76 40% upward 3.40 3.26 Outcome: uniqueness 4.80$$ 16.88$$$ 5.64$$ Horizontal 3.07 3.82 20% upward 3.63 3.90 40% upward 3.68 3.67 Notes: $$$p " 0.001, $$p " 0.01 and $p " 0.05 Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 148

masstige brand and one luxury-masstige brand, we cannot apply its findings to other masstige brands. Also, by using existing collections from two masstige brands, we could not control the stimulus (handbag color and Mickey Mouse graphic) in Study 2. Study 3 addresses these limitations by testing six masstige brands and controlled the stimulus regarding the size and shape of the handbags and the Mickey Mouse graphic. 6.1 Procedures and instruments Study 3 used three luxury-masstige brands (i.e. Gucci, Louis Vuitton and Burberry) and three born-masstige brands (i.e. Coach, Michael Kors and Marc Jacobs), all well-known masstige brands reported by Luxury Makers (2020) and Segura (2019). To develop the stimuli, we selected a black leather shopper bag similar in size, material and shape from each of the six masstige brands. We then added the same image of Mickey Mouse to the left bottom side of each bag (see Appendix 2). The experiment for Study 3 included 12 conditions: 6 brands (three born-masstige brands and three luxury-masstige brands) # 2 types of line extension (horizontal and 20% upward). We did not include a 40% upward extension because Study 2 revealed no difference in perceptions between a 20% and 40% upward extension. To determine the price of the bags, we averaged the prices of bags from the three born-masstige brands and three luxury-masstige brands and rounded the last digit to make a zero-ending price to avoid any confounding effects (Chang and Chen, 2014). The prices for the bags were $290 for born-masstige brands and $1,980 for luxury-masstige brands. The 20% upward extension prices were calculated accordingly: $350 for born-masstige brands and $2,380 for luxury-masstige brands. The measurement items and data collection process in Study 3 were identical to those used in Study 2. MTurk participants were randomly assigned to one of 12 conditions. After reviewing the assigned stimulus, participants were asked to answer about the five dimensions of perceived luxury (Doss and Robinson, 2013) and brand purchase intentions (Dodds et al., 1991). Manipulation check measures were also included: price perception, brand history (Roux et al., 2017), brand familiarity (Simonin and Ruth, 1998), Disney collaboration familiarity (Simonin and Ruth, 1998) and brand-Disney fit (Boisvert and Ashill, 2018). Attention check items were included, consistent with Study 2. All items were measured on a five-point scale. 6.2 Results We collected 343 responses via MTurk. After excluding invalid answers, 298 responses remained for analyses. All participants were female, lived in the USA and aged between 18 and 40. A majority of participants were Caucasian (74%) and had some college education (70%). Most had an annual household income between $40,000 and $59,999 (25%). The manipulation check shows that participants perceived that a 20% upward extension was a higher price than a horizontal extension (t = 2.16, p " 0.01, Mhorizontal = 3.38, M20% upward = 3.66). Further, the three luxury-masstige brands were perceived to have a richer brand history than the three born-masstige brands (the highest p-value was 0.05; MCoach = 3.88, MMarcJacobs = 3.87, MMichaelKors = 3.76; MGucci = 4.23, MBurberry = 4.19, MLouisVuitton = 4.36). Brand familiarity (F(5,292) = 1.97, p > 0.05), Disney collaboration familiarity (F(5,292) = 1.11, p > 0.05) and the fit between Disney and the brand (F(5,292) = 0.59, p > 0.05) were not different across the six born- and luxury-masstige brands. Thus, manipulations of line extension and type of masstige brands were successful. Consistent with Study 1 and Study 2, the CFA results, excluding one item from conspicuousness and three items from quality, show that all factor loadings for corresponding constructs were over 0.71, the values of CR were over 0.80, and AVE values were over 0.57, confirming convergent validity (Hair et al., 2010). The square root of the AVE for each construct was larger than the corresponding correlation coefficient between the factors, confirming discriminant validity (Hair et al., 2010). The model had a good fit to the data (X2 /df = 2.38, CFI = 0.96, NFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.05). To check whether there were differences across each of the three born-masstige and three luxury-masstige brands, twoway analysis of variance (ANOVA) were conducted separately for the three born-masstige brands and three luxury-masstige brands. The result shows that there were no main effects for the three born-masstige brands and no interaction effects between the brands and line extension types on five dimensions of perceived luxury (the lowest p-value was 0.68). The results were similar to those for the three luxury-masstige brand conditions (the lowest p-value was 0.51). As all five dimensions of perceived luxury did not differ across the three bornmasstige brands and the three luxury-masstige brands, we merged the three born-masstige brands and the three luxurymasstige brands and coded the former as 0 and the latter as 1 for further analysis. A two-way ANCOVA was conducted to test the hypotheses (consistent with Study 2, the perceived fit was used as a covariate). Levene’s test for homogeneity of variance indicated insignificant results, confirming approximately equal variances across the groups. The ANCOVA result shows that there were main effects of type of masstige brands on conspicuousness (F(1,294) = 38.49, p " 0.001), quality (F(1,294) = 3.50, p " 0.05), extended-self (F(1,294) = 10.30, p " 0.001) and uniqueness (F(1,294) = 19.95, p " 0.001). Also, the main effects of extension type on conspicuousness (F(1,294) = 4.99, p " 0.05) was significant. The interaction effects between the type of masstige brands and extension type on all five dimensions of perceived luxury were significant: conspicuousness (F(1,294) = 6.95, p " 0.01), quality (F(1,294) = 5.97, p " 0.05), extendedself (F(1,294) = 3.96, p " 0.05), hedonism (F(1,294) = 7.38, p " 0.01) and uniqueness (F(1,294) = 5.16, p " 0.05). The results are shown in Figure 1. By further analyzing the interaction effects, the planned contrast results show that for the born-masstige brands (Coach, Michael Kors and Marc Jacobs), compared to the horizontal extension, the 20% upward extension led participants to perceive higher conspicuousness (t = 3.55, p " 0.001, MHorizontal = 3.33, M20% upward = 3.85), quality (t = 2.11, p " 0.05, MHorizontal = 3.34, M20% upward = 3.66), extended-self (t = 3.35, p " 0.001, MHorizontal = 3.37, M20% upward = 3.89), hedonism (t = 2.60, p " 0.01, MHorizontal = 3.02, M20% upward = 3.50) and uniqueness (t = 2.83, p " 0.01, MHorizontal = 3.02, M20% upward = 3.47), which supports H2a. In contrast, none of Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 149

Figure 1 Effect of type of line extension and brand type on perceptions of luxury (Study 3) Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 150

the differences between horizontal and upward extensions in terms of the dimension of perceived luxury were statistically significant for the luxury-masstige brand condition (Gucci, Louis Vuitton and Burberry), which supports H2b. Consistent with Study 2, the PROCESS analysis shows significant mediating effects of the four dimensions of perceived luxury, except extended-self, on the relationship between line extension type and brand purchase intentions for born-masstige brands: conspicuousness (0.07 < CI < 0.33), quality (0.01 < CI < 0.32), hedonism (0.04 < CI < 0.34) and uniqueness (0.01 < CI < 0.26). In contrast, for luxury-masstige brands, the mediating effects of the five dimensions of perceived luxury were not significant. Thus, H3 is partially supported. All of the results of Study 3 are consistent with Study 2. 6.3 Discussion Study 3 was conducted to improve the generalizability of the results by using a total of six masstige brands (three born-masstige and three luxury-masstige brands). We also increased control of the stimuli in Study 3 by using the same colored and similarly shaped bags across the brands and the same Mickey Mouse graphic and placement. The results of Study 3 show no significant differences in luxury perceptions across the three born-masstige and three luxury-masstige brands, which allowed us to merge the three of each born-masstige and luxury-masstige brands for further analyses. After merging, we found moderating effects of the type of masstige brand on the relationship between the Disney product line extension and perceptions of luxury, which is consistent with the results of Study 2. Specifically, when participants are assigned one of the born-masstige brands (Coach, Michael Kors or Marc Jacobs), they perceived that the Mickey Mouse shopper bag with a 20% upward price provided higher luxury value than the bag with the same price as the traditional shopper bag. On the other hand, when participants were exposed to a luxury-masstige brand (Gucci, Louis Vuitton or Burberry), their luxury perceptions did not depend on a pricing strategy via line extension (i.e. there was no difference in luxury perceptions between horizontal and 20% upward line extensions). The difference in results due to the type of masstige brands can be explained by the previous literature. Because the traditional product price range of born masstige-brands is reasonably or affordably high, consumers would associate the price premium of Disney products as high quality, unique and/or better at expressing success and/or status (Kapferer, 2012; Parguel et al., 2016). This is supported by the well-developed relationship between price and quality (high price is viewed as high quality; Rao and Monroe, 1989). However, for luxury-masstige brands, consumers already have high luxury perceptions of those brands, which may leave little room to increase luxury perceptions using an upward pricing strategy (Parguel et al., 2016). Although Study 3 expanded the number of masstige brands and used different stimuli (more controlled) than those in Study 2, the results of Study 3 were consistent with Study 2. Therefore, Study 3 confirmed the findings of Study 2 and showed the potential generalizability of the present study’s findings. 7. Conclusion Although luxury and masstige brands have collaborated with Disney to develop unique and interesting collections, previous scholars have found little evidence for how Disney collaboration influences their brand images. To address this issue, we investigated the effects of a Disney collaborated collection (Study 1) and type of Disney product line extension (Studies 2 and 3) on the consumer’s perception of luxury and brand purchase intention. We also reidentified two types of masstige brands and investigated whether consumers respond differently to a Disney collaboration across different masstige brand types. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to investigate consumer responses to a Disney collaborated collection across two types of masstige brands, by focusing on the type of product line extensions of masstige brands. 7.1 Implications 7.1.1 Theoretical implication The present study contributes in several ways to the research on masstige brands, brand collaboration and brand extension literature. Although research on masstige brand strategies has garnered little interest in the literature, perhaps due to its relatively recent appearance (Kumar et al., 2020), masstige marketing is expected to play a significant role in brand management in the future. Already, there are indications of this in the literature, where it has been suggested that further research is needed to develop masstige branding into a robust and comprehensive theory for a growing middle-class consumer market by 2050 (Kumar and Paul, 2018; Kumar et al., 2020). Therefore, we believe this study contributes to the literature by identifying masstige brands as either born-masstige or luxurymasstige and by showing how the categorization of masstige brands can influence brand collaborations, particularly with Disney, and product line extension type on consumer perceptions of masstige brands. Our findings have implications for both scholars and practitioners. We offer four theoretical contributions. First, we contribute to the literature by providing a clear definition of masstige brands and by redefining and differentiating born-masstige brands and luxury-masstige brands. There have been ambiguities in dividing masstige brands and luxury brands in the previous research. Some researchers have referred to brands like Gucci and Louis Vuitton as masstige brands and others have said they are luxury brands depending on the context of the study (Vogel et al., 2019; Paul, 2019). Although we recognize that there is no clear line dividing luxury from masstige brands, we explain how masstige brands should be defined and categorized. We also recommend categorizing masstige brands as either born-masstige or luxury-masstige brands. While different types of masstige brands were defined by Silverstein and Fiske (2003), to the best of our knowledge a more nuanced categorization has not been explored in the literature. Thus, we redefined the masstige brands as either born-masstige or luxurymasstige and identified their characteristics based on heritage, history, price and target market. This categorization and definition of two types of masstige brands will add to the literature on masstige literature and help future researchers to choose appropriate masstige brands for their research. Second, this study has theoretical implications for the literature on brand collaboration. While previous scholars have often examined art collaborations (Kim et al., 2018) and less frequently character collaborations (Hosany et al., 2013; Choi and Lee, 2020), there is a lack of research into a Disney Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 151

collaboration. It is important to investigate the Disney collaboration because Disney characters can evoke childhood emotions and memories, which can be perceived differently from other cartoon characters (Hosany et al., 2013; Choi and Lee, 2020). Further, this study raises questions about character collaborations, especially in a masstige brand context, because most research in this area had favorable marketing outcomes (Choi and Lee, 2020; Hosany et al., 2013), while we found negative effects in the masstige brand context. Thus, the study provides empirical evidence for how character collaboration, particularly with Disney, impacts the luxury brand images of masstige brands and contributes to the literature on masstige brand marketing. Third, the present study is the first attempt to provide empirical evidence of the central role of the moderator – the type of masstige brand – in examining the relationship between a Disney collaboration on perceptions of luxury in masstige brands. By distinguishing between born-masstige and luxurymasstige brands, we can see that not all masstige brands are perceived by consumers in the same way. Our study shows that consumers’ luxury perceptions of born-masstige brands are more influenced by a Disney collaboration and upward line extension compared to luxury-masstige brands due to the absence of a wellestablished luxury brand image. This is an important finding, generating new knowledge for the masstige branding literature, scholars and branding specialists that the type of masstige brand is a crucial factor to consider for masstige research. Fourth, by incorporating line extensions in the Disney collaboration context, particularly upward and horizontal extension via pricing strategy, we build upon the body of knowledge of line extension literature. To the best of our knowledge, no study has incorporated a Disney collaboration in the product line extension context. What is more, the present study is the first to consider the additional variable of the masstige brand type in this context. Our research confirms that perceptions of luxury based on line extension vary for bornmasstige and luxury-masstige brands. The study’s results suggest that it is important to consider the type of masstige brand and its characteristics when investigating line extension. Therefore, this study contributes to the line extension literature by examining the previously unexplored context of Disney collaboration combined with types of masstige brands. 7.1.2 Practical implication The study’s results provide insights for both luxury-masstige and born-masstige brands and their brand managers to implement masstige strategies through brand collaboration. From a practical perspective, particularly, masstige brands that have collaborated or plan to collaborate with Disney may benefit from this study. One general implication is that managers need to understand that a specific strategy should be developed based on whether the brand is a born-masstige brand or luxury-masstige brand because their implications differ. Our findings suggest that born-masstige brands with a relatively short history, limited brand recognition and/or lack of an established luxury image should take care with character collaborations, including Disney, because they might harm the brand’s image of luxury. Although Disney characters are universally familiar and loved by many, they may not have a positive effect on born-masstige brands. There are, however, other practical suggestions for luxury-masstige brands. Due to the long heritage of luxury brands, our findings reveal that consumers’ perceptions of luxury-masstige brands were not jeopardized as much as they were for born-masstige brands. This suggests that maintaining a brand’s strong traditional image of luxury is important when expanding its collections through collaborations with Disney and other companies. In other words, a brand collaboration with Disney is less risky for masstige brands with a well-established luxury image than for masstige brands without a long luxury history and heritage. Based on our findings, we suggest that masstige brands and brand managers consider whether they have an established luxury brand image, whether their brands are included in luxury-masstige or born-masstige brand category, to develop better strategies for a successful Disney collaboration. Further, our study’s findings have specific implications for brand managers of luxury-masstige brands that are or are considering collaborating with Disney. Although the findings of this study show that a Disney collaboration can develop a new creative collection without jeopardizing the consumers’ perceptions of luxury (i.e. quality and uniqueness) of luxurymasstige brands, perceptions of luxury relating to personal dimensions (i.e. extended-self and hedonism) were lowered due to the Disney collaboration. A similar idea has been suggested in the literature: that a successful way to position a masstige brand is to emphasize its uniqueness while being admired by the middle majority (Das et al., 2022; Mansoor and Paul, 2022). Based on our findings and previous studies, we believe that brand collaborations should indeed combine uniqueness and mass acceptance. Also, brand managers and product designers should weigh the importance of enabling consumers to achieve social acceptance and conformity with their reference group when selecting a collaborative partner and designing their products. For example, designers can develop handbags by including Disney characters subtly instead of big and distinct images of the characters while still emphasizing traditional brand logo and patterns, which may help achieve consumers’ desires of social acceptance regarding luxury-masstige brands and keep admiration from middle-class consumers. Our findings also provide implication for luxury-masstige brands when their marketers decide prices for Disney collaborated collection. The results also show that perceptions of luxury relating to hedonism decreased at the very high level of an upward extension, so marketers should carefully strategize when establishing price points with upward extensions rather than set them significantly higher than those of traditional collections. Finally, our findings have practical implications for bornmasstige brands and their brand managers about which pricing strategies to use to prevent lowering the consumers’ luxury perceptions of new products collaborating with Disney. Although many masstige brands have incorporated Disney characters into their designs to embrace youth cultures and build a young brand image to attract younger consumers, our findings suggest that a Disney collaborated collection tends to lower luxury perceptions of born-masstige brands. For bornmasstige brands, a Disney collaboration can be a double-edged sword, helping to develop a young brand image but also lowering the luxury brand image. As an alternative, the present study encourages brand managers and marketers to use an Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 152

upward pricing strategy for a Disney collaborated collection, which can reduce negative effects on the luxury perceptions of consumers. Because higher prices have aspirational and prestige appeal (Steenkamp et al., 2003), marketers can expect to increase perceptions of luxury by implementing an upward extension with Disney collaborations. 7.2 Limitations and future research The present study has several limitations that may identify important areas for future research. One relates to the masstige brands used in this research. Although we conducted Study 3 to increase the generalizability of the results, a total of six masstige brands were used to represent luxury-masstige brands and bornmasstige brands. Therefore, the results may not be generalized to other masstige brands or other product categories. Furthermore, the sample was limited to female participants within a single country. To expand the findings’ generalizability, future research of masstige markets should consider other brands from various product categories and include participants of both genders from diverse backgrounds. Future research should also investigate other inter-business collaborations with artists, characters and celebrities, as well as intra-business collaborations among fashion brands and designers to broaden our understanding of how consumers perceive luxury. References Baber, R., Upadhyay, Y., Kaurav, R.P.S. and Baber, P. (2020), “Application of ‘masstige’ theory and approaches for the marketing of smartphone brands in India”, International Journal of Business and Emerging Markets, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 296-312. Bearden, W.O. and Etzel, M.J. (1982), “Reference group influence on product and brand purchase decisions”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 183-194. Bechwati, N.N., Sisodia, R.S. and Sheth, J.N. (2009), “Developing a model of antecedents to consumers’ perceptions and evaluations of price unfairness”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 62 No. 8, pp. 761-767. Boisvert, J. and Ashill, N.J. (2018), “The spillover effect of downward line extensions on US consumers’ evaluation of a French luxury parent brand: the role of branding strategies, authenticity, and fit”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 10, pp. 740-751. Callcott, M. and Phillips, B. (1996), “Observations: elves make good cookies: creating likable spokes-character advertising”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 73-79. Chang, H.H. and Chen, F.P. (2014), “When is a 9-ending price perceived lower than a 0-ending price? The moderating role of price consciousness”, International Journal of Business and Information, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 89-116. Choi, Y.H. and Lee, K.H. (2020), “Informatics analysis of consumer reviews for frozen 2 fashion collaboration productssemantic networks and sentiment analysis”, The Research Journal of the Costume Culture, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 265-284. Das, M., Saha, V. and Roy, A. (2022), “Inspired and engaged: decoding MASSTIGE value in engagement”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 781-802. Dodds, W.B., Monroe, K.B. and Grewal, D. (1991), “Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 307-319. Doss, F. and Robinson, T. (2013), “Luxury perceptions: luxury brand vs counterfeit for young US female consumers”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 424-439. Fitzpatrick, E. (2020), “Every single Gucci item that’s under $250”, available at: www.whowhatwear.com/gucci-itemsunder-250/slide2 Granot, E., Russell, L. and Brashear-Alejandro, T. (2013), “Populence: exploring luxury for the masses”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 31-44. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Heine, K. (2011), The Concept of Luxury Brands, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin. Hosany, S., Prayag, G., Martin, D. and Lee, W.Y. (2013), “Theory and strategies of anthropomorphic brand characters from Peter Rabbit, Mickey Mouse, and Ronald McDonald, to Hello Kitty”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 29 Nos 1/2, pp. 48-68. Hoshikawa, K. (2016), “Hey, quick question: what’s with all these Disney fashion collaborations?”, available at: https:// fashionista.com/2016/07/disney-fashion-collaborations John, D.R., Loken, B. and Joiner, C. (1998), “The negative impact of extensions: can flagship products be diluted?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 19-32. Kapferer, J.N. (2012), “Abundant rarity: the key to luxury growth”, Business Horizons, Vol. 55 No. 5, pp. 453-462. Kapferer, J.N., Klippert, C. and Leproux, L. (2014), “Does luxury have a minimum price? An exploratory study into consumers’ psychology of luxury prices”, Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 2-11. Keller, K.L. and Aaker, D.A. (1998), “The impact of corporate marketing on a company’s brand extensions”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 356-378. Kim, C.K., Lavack, A.M. and Smith, M. (2001), “Consumer evaluation of vertical brand extensions and core brands”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 211-222. Kim, E.Y. and Ko, E. (2010), “Achieving brand power: Bean Pole of Samsung”, Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 61-70. Kim, H. and Park, H. (2020), “The characteristics and meaning of art collaboration in the luxury Louis Vuitton brand-focusing on bags since 2000”, Journal of Fashion Business, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 100-118. Kim, K., Ko, E., Lee, M.A., Mattila, P. and Kim, K.H. (2014), “Fashion collaboration effects on consumer response and customer equity in global luxury and SPA brand marketing”, Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 350-364. Kim, J.E., Lloyd, S., Adebeshin, K. and Kang, J.Y.M. (2019), “Decoding fashion advertising symbolism in masstige and luxury brands”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 277-295. Kim, P., Vaidyanathan, R., Chang, H. and Stoel, L. (2018), “Using brand alliances with artists to expand retail brand Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 153

personality”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 85, pp. 424-433. Kirmani, A., Sood, S. and Bridges, S. (1999), “The ownership effect in consumer responses to brand line stretches”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 88-101. Ko, E., Costello, J.P. and Taylor, C.R. (2019), “What is a luxury brand? A new definition and review of the literature”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 99, pp. 405-413. Kumar, A. and Paul, J. (2018), “Mass prestige value and competition between American versus Asian laptop brands in an emerging market – theory and evidence”, International Business Review, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 969-981. Kumar, A., Paul, J. and Unnithan, A.B. (2020), “Masstige’ marketing: a review, synthesis and research agenda”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 113, pp. 384-398. Laurent, G. and Dubois, B. (1996), “The functions of luxury: a situational approach to excursionism”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 23, pp. 470-477. Lee, J.E., Hur, S. and Watkins, B. (2018), “Visual communication of luxury fashion brands on social media: effects of visual complexity and brand familiarity”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 449-462. Lee, J.E. and Youn, S.Y. (2020), “Luxury marketing in social media: the role of social distance in a craftsmanship video”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 826-845. Loureiro, S.M.C., Maximiano, M. and Panchapakesan, P. (2018), “Engaging fashion consumers in social media: the case of luxury brands”, International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 310-321. Luxury Makers (2020), “Meet the top 10 most luxurious fashion brands of 2020”, available at: https://theluxurymakers.com/2020/ 11/09/meet-the-top-10-most-luxurious-fashion-brands-of-2020/ Mansoor, M. and Paul, J. (2022), “Mass prestige, brand happiness and brand evangelism among consumers”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 144, pp. 484-496. Morhart, F., Malär, L., Guèvremont, A., Girardin, F. and Grohmann, B. (2015), “Brand authenticity: an integrative framework and measurement scale”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 200-218. Mroz-Gorgo ! n, B. (2016), ! “Co-branding as a strategy-fashion market perspective: prestige or masstige?”, International Journal of Sales, Retailing & Marketing, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 49-59. National Intelligence Council (NIC) (2012), “Global trends 2030: alternative worlds”, available at: www.dni.gov/files/ documents/GlobalTrends_2030.pdf Nueno, J.L. and Quelch, J.A. (1998), “The mass marketing of luxury”, Business Horizons, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 61-61. Okonkwo, U. (2007), Luxury Fashion Branding: Trends, Tactics, Techniques, Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire, UK. Paolacci, G., Chandler, J. and Ipeirotis, P.G. (2010), “Running experiments on amazon mechanical Turk”, Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 5 No. 5, pp. 41-49. Parguel, B., Delécolle, T. and Valette-Florence, P. (2016), “How price display influences consumer luxury perceptions”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 341-348. Paul, J. (2018), “Toward a ‘masstige’ theory and strategy for marketing”, European Journal of International Management, Vol. 12 Nos 5/6, pp. 722-745. Paul, J. (2019), “Masstige model and measure for brand management”, European Management Journal, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 299-312. Phillips, B.J. (1996), “The role of advertising trade characters in forming product perceptions”, in Wilcox, G.B. (Ed.), Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising Conference, University of TX, pp. 171-179. Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2008), “Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 879-891. Rambourg, E. (2014), The Bling Dynasty: Why the Reign of Chinese Luxury Shoppers Has Only Just Begun, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. Randall, T., Ulrich, K. and Reibstein, D. (1998), “Brand equity and vertical product line extent”, Marketing Science, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 356-379. Rao, A.R. and Monroe, K.B. (1989), “The effect of price, brand name, and store name on buyers’ perceptions of product quality: an integrative review”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 351-357. Roux, E., Tafani, E. and Vigneron, F. (2017), “Values associated with luxury brand consumption and the role of gender”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 71, pp. 102-113. Segran, E. (2019), “How Disney grew its $3 billion Mickey Mouse business-by selling to adults”, available at: www. fastcompany.com/90324660/how-disney-grew-its-3-billionmickey-mouse-business-by-selling-to-adults Segura, A. (2019), “The fashion pyramid of brands”, available at: https://fashionretail.blog/2019/03/11/the-fashion-pyramidof-brands/ Silverstein, M. and Fiske, N. (2003), “Luxury for the masses”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 81 No. 4, pp. 48-57. Simonin, B.L. and Ruth, J.A. (1998), “Is a company known by the company it keeps? Assessing the spillover effects of brand alliances on consumer brand attitudes”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 30-42. Sinapuelas, I.C. and Sisodiya, S.R. (2010), “Do line extensions influence parent brand equity? An investigation of supermarket packaged goods”, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 18-26. Steenkamp, J., Batra, R. and Alden, D.L. (2003), “How perceived brand Globalness creates brand value”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 53-65. Stokes, W. (2018), “Gucci’s most expensive items–handbag, belt, boot”, available at: https://thefrisky.com/guccis-mostexpensive-items/ Truong, Y., McColl, R. and Kitchen, P.J. (2009), “New luxury brand positioning and the emergence of masstige brands”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 16 Nos 5/6, pp. 375-382. Verhallen, T.M. and Robben, H.S. (1994), “Scarcity and preference: an experiment on unavailability and product evaluation”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 315-331. Vigneron, F. and Johnson, L.W. (2004), “Measuring perceptions of brand luxury”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 484-506. Vogel, A.T., Cook, S.C. and Watchravesringkan, K. (2019), “Luxury brand dilution: investigating the impact of renting Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 154

by millennials on brand equity”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 473-482. Ward, K. and Neumann, F. (2012), “The consumer in 2050: the rise of the EM Middle class”, available at: www.lampadia.com/ assets/uploads_documentos/0abb2-hsbc_report_consumer_in_ 2050_en.pdf Wuestefeld, T., Hennigs, N., Schmidt, S. and Wiedmann, K.P. (2012), “The impact of brand heritage on customer perceived value”, Der Markt, Vol. 51 Nos 2/3, pp. 51-61. Yano, C.R. (2011), “Reach out and touch someone: thinking through Sanrio’s social communication empire”, Japanese Studies, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 23-36. Further reading James, L. (2019), “How to keep your brand magic: the Disney formula for success”, available at: www.forbes.com/sites/sap/ 2019/05/28/how-to-keep-your-brand-magic-the-disney-formulafor-success/?sh=3d75ec11658b Library of Congress (LOC.gov) (2012), “Web archive: Walt Disney company”, available at: www.loc.gov/item/lcwaN0015612/ (accessed 20 December 2021). Swant, M. (2020), “The 2020 world’s most valuable brands”, available at: www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuablebrands/#55b12a33119c Vlessing, E. (2019), “Disney consumer products hits $54.7B in retail sales as top global licensor of 2018”, available at: www.forbes.com/sites/sap/2019/05/28/how-to-keep-yourbrand-magic-the-disney-formula-for-success/?sh=3d75ec11658b About the authors Jung Eun Lee is an Associate Professor of Fashion, Merchandising and Design at Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA. She holds a PhD in Fashion and Retail Studies from The Ohio State University. Her research strives to gain new insights on how customers evaluate luxury brands, advertisements, promotions and product designs. Her works provide important implications for marketers how to communicate with their customers effectively and appropriately. Jung Eun Lee is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Jung Rim Cho received her PhD in Fashion and Retail Studies from The Ohio State University. She is currently a researcher at the Office of Program Evaluation, Education, and Research (PEAR), School of Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Her research interests include sustainability, consumer behavior, retailer-supplier relationships, and global retailing. Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 155

Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Figure A1 Stimulus used in Study 1 and Study 2: (a) Coach’s traditional collection; (b) Coach’s Disney collection; (c) Gucci’s traditional collection; and (d) Gucci’s Disney collection Figure A2 Stimulus with Mickey Mouse used in Study 3: (a) Stimulus for born-masstige brands (from left, Coach, Michael Kors and Marc Jacobs); and (b) stimulus for luxury-masstige brands (from left, Gucci, Louis Vuitton and Burberry) Disney masstige brand collaboration Jung Eun Lee and Jung Rim Cho Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 32 · Number 1 · 2023 · 138–156 156

As good as new – valuing fashion brands in the online second-hand markets Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Department of Marketing, University of Vaasa, Vaasa, Finland Abstract Purpose – Brand management and marketing have focused on brand-new goods, thus largely neglecting the emergence of markets for used products. This study sheds light on how consumers determine the perceived value of fashion brands in online flea markets. In addition, this study aims to illustrate how fashion brands are perceived when sold second-hand in Facebook flea markets. Design/methodology/approach – Empirical data, consisting of internet discussions, were collected for this study from seven Facebook flea market forums between Fall 2014 and Fall 2015. The discussions were analyzed by means of qualitative content analysis. Findings – In the context of flea markets, the perceived value is negotiated and evaluated through six antecedents: perceived quality, price, design, origin, authenticity and brand availability. Not surprisingly, price and quality appear as focal aspects when determining the value of a used brand in second-hand markets. However, the aspects of availability, origin and design complicate the considerations of the perceived value and can distinguish between different flea markets for fashion brands. In online second-hand markets for fashion brands, the passing of time appears to be an important factor grounding the consumers’ considerations of the perceived value. Originality/value – This study brings forward novel viewpoints to brand marketing by discussing the formation of the consumer-perceived value in the growing field of online second-hand sales of fashion brands. Keywords Fashion marketing, Customer value, Perceived value, Online marketing, Second-hand Paper type Research paper Introduction Second-hand markets represent an interesting and growing arena for consumers to buy and sell brands. Online fashion sales in particular have gained ground in recent years, in terms of both business-to-consumers (BtoC) and consumersto-consumers (CtoC). The latter is evidenced by the growth in the number of, for example, Facebook flea markets, which have thousands of members in Finland alone. This paper focuses on the little researched area of second-hand markets from the viewpoint of the perceived value of brands. Even though the main interest of brand managers lies in what happens in BtoC markets, it should be borne in mind that customers are not always buying products for themselves, but instead may be considering future uses of the product and its resale value. Quality and durability are among the key criteria for many people when buying clothes, even if they do not have any further interest in the cycle of consumption. Therefore, consumers are ever more interested in hearing and reading about the brand experiences and opinions of their fellow consumers. This makes it worthwhile for a brand manager to listen to what consumers think of the quality of brands that they have used and how they evaluate the resale value of such goods. Virtual points of sale differ from traditional ones, especially with regard to their emphasis on visual perception, as the shopper cannot touch the product to appreciate its tactile qualities. Therefore, in online markets, consumers have to rely on extrinsic cues such as brand name, store name, price and country of origin (Teas and Agarwal, 2000). Moreover, prior literature suggests that trust plays an important role in online shopping (Dennis et al., 2009). This is especially true in the case of CtoC markets, where private online vendors are typically strangers to buyers. Regarding the consumer experiences of brands, the presence of specialized vendors and the standard of service are missing, and thus do not bring any added value to the brand. In contrast, online consumers tend to perceive risk in terms of privacy and security concerns, which is likely to impact their purchasing intentions (D’Alessandro et al., 2012). Purpose of study The purpose of this study is to give insights into how consumers determine the perceived value of fashion brands in online flea markets. First, we aim to identify the plethora of possible antecedents that produce the perceived value by identifying how consumers discuss the perceived value of fashion brands in online flea markets. Second, we aim to illustrate how fashion brands are perceived when sold second-hand in Facebook flea markets. Second-hand markets offer a fresh and under-researched area (Guiot and Roux, 2010; Turunen and LeipämaaLeskinen, 2015). Prior literature on second-hand consumption includes a small number of studies that discuss second-hand buying and its different forms, such as flea markets and auctions (Cervellon et al., 2012; Roux and Korchia, 2006; Guiot and Roux, 2010). These previous The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/1061-0421.htm Journal of Product & Brand Management 25/3 (2016) 285–295 © Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421] [DOI 10.1108/JPBM-06-2015-0894] 285

studies have discussed second-hand goods, particularly in the case of fashion and clothing. However, the consumerperceived value has not been discussed in the context of used goods, with the exception of a few studies that adopted an economic perspective to the resale of durables, such as used cars (Andrews and Benzing, 2007). The concept of “second-hand goods” refers to previously owned and used items. The financial value of such goods is often lower than that of new products (Guiot and Roux, 2010; Carrigan et al., 2013; Cervellon et al., 2012; Roux and Korchia, 2006). Vintage is often used as a parallel concept, which differs from second-hand in several ways; vintage refers to a previously owned, but not necessarily used item. It also represents a specific style of couturier or era, and the monetary value of a vintage item is linked to its age and condition, which is why the price might be considerably higher, as the item can no longer be bought as a brand-new item (Gerval, 2008; Cervellon et al., 2012, Guiot and Roux, 2010). Thus, in the current study, second-hand goods are in focus, as the aim is to uncover how consumers evaluate the perceived value of previously owned and used goods that are purchased for actual use and consumption (instead of as collectibles). The paper is structured as follows. First, the existing literature concerning the perceived value is elaborated and discussed in the light of acquiring used items and second-hand consumption. Then, the methodology of this study is explained together with the research context by describing the features of Finnish second-hand markets, particularly in the online environment. The Findings section elaborates the antecedents that drive the perceived value. Finally, critical factors against which the perceived value is evaluated in the context of second-hand sales of fashion brands are outlined. In addition, theoretical and managerial implications are discussed, and avenues for further studies are suggested. Literature review Value creation is a widely discussed topic in the marketing literature (Holbrook, 1999; Desarbo et al., 2001; Gale, 1994; Ravald and Grönroos, 1996; Nilson, 1992; Yang and Peterson, 2004). Perceived value can be regarded as the “consumer’s overall assessment of the utility of a product based on perceptions of what is received and what is given” (Zeithaml, 1988, p. 14). Thus, the consumer plays a pivotal role in the creation of value. In essence, a brand can only make a value offering to consumers, but cannot decide to what extent the value of the brand is realized subjectively by the consumers (Merz et al., 2009). The value for a consumer can emerge prior to purchase, at the moment of purchase, in actual use of the product and after its use (Sánchez-Fernández et al., 2006). The perceived value concept has evolved from two pivotal dimensions: economic (tradeoff between quality and price/ sacrifice, i.e. the transaction value) (Zeithaml, 1988; Dodds et al., 1991) and psychological (related to the emotional and experiential aspects of consumption) (Sheth et al., 1991; Babin et al., 1994). The latter perspective highlights that understanding the formation of the perceived value calls for the recognition of the plurality of the possible outcomes and widens the scope of the perceived value from transaction costs to considerations related to brand use and disposal. The discussion on the perceived value has extended to more elaborated dimensions such as emotional (affective), social, quality/performance (functional) and price/value for money (economic) (Sweeney and Soutar, 2001; Wuestefeld et al., 2012). Overall, the perceived value has been recognized as a multifaceted construct that is relative because of its subjective, comparative and context-dependent nature (SánchezFernández and Iniesta-Bonillo, 2007). However, the theory of the perceived value is not yet fully developed, as the dimensionality of the construct remains contested and the antecedents or consequences of the customer-perceived value are not yet clear (Gallarza et al., 2011). Woodall’s (2003) conceptual review of the research conducted on the topic of the perceived value identified that there are in fact five distinct notions of the value concept, demonstrating different perspectives on how value can be perceived by a consumer. The net value for the customer refers to utilitarian balancing between benefits and sacrifices; the sale value for the customer points to a cheap price or lower sacrifice; the rational value for the customer addresses benefits in terms of the units of exchange; the derived value for the customer points to the outcomes, i.e. the value perceived post-purchase; and the marketing value for the customer is concerned with (product) attributes that produce value. In this study, we focus on the last notion of the value concept when addressing how fashion brands are perceived and analyze what constitutes the value and purchase intentions in second-hand markets at the time of purchase. The dominant view in prior research has posited that a product’s quality and price are the key antecedents of the customer-perceived value (Sánchez-Fernández and IniestaBonillo, 2007). However, these are not the only considerations. For example, Sweeney et al. (1999) included the role of perceived risk in the formation of the perceived value, and Wuestefeld et al. (2012) showed that brand heritage has an impact on the customer-perceived value. The effect of brand heritage on the consumer-perceived value takes into account the history, values and symbols important to the identity of the brand. Kovács et al. (2014) discovered in the context of restaurants that the perception of authenticity affects the customer-perceived value. Moreover, Lloyd and Luk (2010) found some differences in the drivers of the perceived value between luxury and mass fashion consumption. Indeed, different product categories and market environments are likely to play a role in the formation of consumers’ value perceptions. Perceived value has been the subject of research in the traditional retail environment (Sweeney and Soutar, 2001), but only few studies have referred to the perceived value construct in the context of second-hand markets, where the retailer is left in a more minor role (Guiot and Roux, 2010; Belk, 2001; Belk et al., 1988). In CtoC markets, consumers may apply different ways of negotiating the perceived value of a branded product when facing many types of uncertainties, e.g. when trusting a seller or when trying to determine the condition or authenticity of goods, but at the same time, they are able to take more empowered roles than in traditional markets. The buyer’s responsibilities are more extensive in deals between private individuals than in deals with Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 286

companies, as the Consumer Protection Act is not applied (Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority, 2014). Considerations of the perceived value in second-hand shopping become even more complicated when considering the case of online flea markets. Research on consumer behavior suggests that consumers behave and perceive value differently in an online environment than in an offline environment because of CtoC interactions (Chan and Li, 2010) and the task-specific use of online shopping (Overby and Lee, 2006). Previous research concerning shopping in an online environment has typically stressed the relevance of the functionality and accessibility of the online platform and website (Jiang et al., 2013) and e-trust (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001; Ha, 2004), as well as online shopping convenience, e.g. operability of delivery (Beauchamp and Ponder, 2010; Jih, 2007). Thus, trust in the online environment relates to brand trust and the company’s performance. In this study, however, we are interested in the perceived value of brands in online markets, not the process of online shopping. All flea markets investigated in this study use the same platform, Facebook. Holistically, we could define that the perceived value of a brand is a consumer’s subjective assessment of many different qualities and meanings related to that brand (Holbrook, 1999). Moreover, the perceived value relates to the willingness to pay for the brand. Indeed, Netemeyer et al. (2004) suggest that perceived quality, the perceived value for the cost and brand uniqueness can be the direct antecedents of a consumer’s willingness to pay a premium price for a brand. Berthon et al. (2009) stress that aesthetic sensibility is of relevance, especially when it comes to valuing luxury brands. When it comes to second-hand items that are previously used and owned, the goods may not be flawless. Because of this fact, the price is often lower than that of brand-new goods (Denegri-Knott and Molesworth, 2009). In that vein, the previous life of goods and their pre-used conditions are taken into account when determining the transaction value. However, this is the case only for second-hand goods, not for vintage items. It is interesting to ask whether consumers are only motivated to purchase second-hand goods because they are looking for cheap prices or do they also have non-price-related considerations. For example, the increase in interest toward the retro style, history and nostalgia is apparent in the contemporary consumer society (Wuestefeld et al., 2012). According to Sherry (1990), consumer behavior related to second-hand marketplaces is a comprehensive experience, combining searching, dickering and socializing. In this vein, the value is seen to be co-created rather than existing in a branded product. In addition, Guiot and Roux (2010) suggest that second-hand consumption is often connected to recycling, sustainability and the environmentally conscious behavior of consumers. Thus, discovering used products can be seen as rewarding, and consumers may be highly involved in finding treasures, not only because they want to save money but also because of other motivations (Turunen and Leipämaa-Leskinen, 2015). Research to date has not revealed which brand attributes consumers look for and how they evaluate and negotiate the perceived value of branded products purchased as secondhand. This study is unique as it combines three areas of research: the perceived value, online environment and second-hand/used fashion brands. Next, the methodological choices and empirical data are discussed, and the empirical context of our research is described. Methodology Data for this study were collected from several Facebook forums established for flea markets in Finland. The Finnish context may be limited in terms of making generalizations, but it offers an interesting view on a marketplace in which frugality has been traditionally considered a virtue (Huttunen and Autio, 2010). In general, the purchasing power of Finnish consumers is relatively high, and the retail market is well developed; consumers are not limited to low-priced options, but have the freedom to choose from different alternatives in the market. Second-hand markets are growing in Finland, which is also evident when looking at the steady increase in the number of new members within a one-year period in each of the flea markets analyzed in this study (Table I). Besides physical flea markets and vintage shops, online flea markets are booming. To reach larger audiences, even vintage shops (BtoC) are extending their sales online. In the CtoC market, more internet platforms are available for selling and buying online; examples include the auction site huuto.net and online flea market tori.fi. Diverse auction and online flea market platforms also exist internationally, such as Ebay, which is also used in Finland. On these diverse online platforms, you can buy and sell if you create a profile on that specific internet site. In this study, we chose to concentrate on flea market groups created on Facebook. Mutual trust is a common feature of these flea market groups; one has to be accepted into the group and sell and buy via one’s own Facebook profile (including name and picture). This procedure is built on the premise that buyers and sellers participate in the transactions in earnest. Each flea market group also has administrator(s) who ensure(s) that everyone follows the rules. Administrators are consumers (also sellers and buyers in the group) who have a passion and personal interest toward these fashion goods and brands. They are volunteers and do not get any benefits or income from serving as administrators. The chosen flea market groups were purposefully selected to represent the variety of Finnish Facebook flea markets where clothes and accessories can be sold. Accordingly, flea markets in this study include second-hand sales of adults’ and kids’ clothes with different price levels and styles from luxury items to fast fashion and retro pieces. The chosen Facebook forums were: ● flea market for kids’ brand clothes (Muksujen merkkituotekirppari); ● flea market for children’s brand clothes (Lasten merkkivaatekirppis); ● flea market for branded products for adults (Aikuisten merkkituotekirppis); ● flea market for quality brands (Laatumerkkien flea market); ● flea market for semi-brands (Semi-merkkien flea market); ● flea market for Vero Moda, Only and Gina Tricot (Vero Moda, Only and Gina Tricot kirppis); and ● flea market for rags and retro clothes (Rättei, lumpui ja retroi). Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 287

Most of the participants in all of these flea market groups are women. More detailed information about the flea markets, i.e. the number of members, the typical brands sold and the price range of the goods, is described in Table I. There are certain interesting facets in how online flea markets for fashion brands are formed and differentiated from each other. Instead of stating what brands are allowed to be sold in each flea market, many of the flea market groups list the “banned brands” that may not be sold in that specific flea market group. These restrictions are intended to maintain the quality and style of the flea market and make it easier for consumers to join a specific group in which they think they can find products they want to buy. Moreover, when looking at the naming of the flea markets per se, it can be seen that the names of the flea markets guide the sellers and buyers in the valuation of the fashion brands. Thereby, a certain level of quality and image of the brand is actually already determined when accepting an item to be sold in a flea market meant for “quality brands” or “semi-brands”. However, the boundaries between which brands to sell on which flea market are not clear, but are in fact under negotiation in the flea market forums. Buyers, sellers and administrators tend to have discussions concerning which brand suits which flea market, especially according to the brand quality. The sellers and buyers on each flea market are expected to possess a certain level of expertise to manage the valuation of brands. Yet, this is not an easy task, as can be seen from this quote from an administrator: Administrator: Drawing the line is really difficult when everyone seems to have a different opinion on what is a brand garment and what is not. How about we just go with these [list of brands not to be sold]. No one is forcing you to buy a garment if it doesn’t meet your standards for brands. (Flea market for children’s brand clothes) Overall, the items sold in the online flea markets are usually more valuable and priced higher than goods in traditional flea markets. This may be due to additional costs such as postage, which usually varies from €1.6 to €7.90 depending on the size and weight of the posted item (Posti, 2015). In addition, online sellers need to make some extra effort compared with offline sellers, such as to take a picture of the item to be sold and describe it in detail. The analyzed sample size is 683 messages, which were purposefully selected out of numerous messages during the sample collection period of October 2014 –October 2015. It is impossible to calculate the total number of messages in each forum because messages are removed from the forum after sales are finalized. The chosen messages for this study represent a theoretical sample consisting of messages and Table I The flea market descriptions Flea market Members Brands sold in the flea market! Price range (shirts) Flea market for kids’ brand clothes (Muksujen merkkituotekirppari) October 2014: 33 522 members Benetton, Calvin Klein, Esprit, Elle, Gant, Gap, Metsola, Me&I, Mexx, Polarn O. Pyret, Pomp de Lux, Tommy Hilfiger, Zara, etc. Price range: from €4 to 24 October 2015: 38 114 members Mean price: €10.25 Sample: see!! Flea market for children’s brand clothes (Lasten merkkivaatekirppis) October 2014: 9 143 members Ralph Lauren, Burberry, Marc O’Polo, Timberland, Kenzo, Mayoral, Dolce&Gabbana, Paul Frank, Ticket 2 Heaven, etc. Price range: from €4 to 50 October 2015: 12 350 members Mean price: €15.90 Sample: see!! Flea market for branded products for adults (Aikuisten merkkituotekirppis) October 2014: 19 390 members Tommy Hilfiger, Abercrombie & Fitch, Guess, Hollister, Boomerang, Peak Performance, Diesel, Gant, etc. Price range: from €12 to 40 October 2015: 23 338 members Mean price: €20.60 Sample: see!! Flea market for quality brands (Laatumerkkien flea market) October 2014: 7 891 members Burberry, Gant, Ralph Lauren, Tommy Hilfiger, Filippa K, Henry Lloyd, Sand, Lexington, Lacoste, Zoe Karssen, etc. Price range: from €18 to 100 October 2015: 9 714 members Mean price: €37.75 Sample: see!! Flea market for semi-brands (Semi-merkkien flea market) October 2014: 6 173 members Zara, River Island, Cubus, Lindex, Esprit, Naf Naf, Your Face, Only, H&M, etc. Price range: from €3.5 to 35 October 2015: 7 081 members Mean price: €12.00 Sample: see!! Flea market for Vero Moda, Only and Gina Tricot (Vero Moda, Only and Gina Tricot kirppis) October 2014: 20 280 members All brands are allowed to be sold Price range: from €3 to 25 October 2015: 21 111 members Mean price: €6.50 Sample: see!! Flea market for rags and retro clothes (Rättei, lumpui ja retroi) October: 2014: 16 289 members All old goods are allowed to be sold. Platform particularly for retro, vintage and new-retro goods Price range: from €7 to 50 October 2015: 10 043 members Mean price: €15.60 Sample: see!! Notes: ! The products allowed to be sold in the flea markets were often defined through what brands are not allowed to be sold there. Almost every flea market had their own “banned brands” list; !! the prices are counted from a random sample of 50 shirts sold in this flea market. Postage is not included in the prices Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 288

discussions sparked by sales announcements that include detailed descriptions or discussions related to the characteristics and valuation of the second-hand goods. The flea market is a place for CtoC actions, where members often have twofold roles, that is, they are both sellers and buyers. Thus, the consumers participate in different actions that take place in these flea market groups, i.e. sales descriptions, sales discussions and discussions on the flea market’s guidelines. As the sellers and administrators are also consumers (and buyers), the sales announcements were included in the sample, as they can be seen to be an element of value creation. The names of all sellers and buyers discussing on these forums have been removed from the analysis to ensure anonymity. The empirical study was conducted first by pinpointing the existing categories of online flea markets and second by analyzing the content, that is, the discussion concerning the rules on what brands to sell, sales discussions and the selling prices of these brands. These discussions were analyzed by means of qualitative content analysis (Belk et al., 2013). Four steps can be pointed out in the process of our inductive data analysis. First, the collected online discussions were read and reread, after which codes were created to structure and highlight the ways through which consumers discuss the perceived value of second-hand goods. Thereafter, the codes were compared and reconsidered. Finally, six distinct antecedents describing the perceived value considerations in the second-hand markets of brands were created by following an inductive research logic, that is, without presuming the number or type of antecedents to be found. Findings Content analysis of the online flea markets yielded six antecedents of the perceived value. These highlight that the perceived value is negotiated diversely in the context of online flea markets for fashion goods. Perceived quality, price, design, brand availability, origin and authenticity will be discussed next in detail. First, the perceived quality relates to the product attributes and condition. Sellers often referred to the condition of the old product as being “as good as new”. Here, a picture and material descriptions are essential for the buyer to evaluate the quality of the product. However, sometimes the second-hand sellers found it difficult to evaluate the quality and condition of the garment they are selling, as the second quote below exemplifies: Seller: New Tommy Hilfiger bag, price tags are still attached! Measurements: width 30 cm, height 24 cm, width of the bottom 6 cm. Length of the band approx. 124 cm. Inside two smaller pockets, two pockets, e.g. for a lipstick or a pen, one bigger pocket with a zipper and one bigger pocket with a snap in front. Inside, there’s a key ring, too. Price 50 euros ! mailing costs. (Flea market for quality brands): Seller: 92/98 cm Molo skirt. Better fit with the smaller size. We got it used and have used it few times. I am not sure about the light blue color, whether it’s faded or not. But it’s in good used condition! 15 euros, including mailing costs. (Flea market for kids’ brand clothes) A brand name provides a shorthand extrinsic cue for quality (Zeithaml, 1988); however, in our data, it was evident that consumers often had to deal with disagreements about what brand belongs to which flea market: Administrator: The list [of saleable items] is voted by the group members brand by brand. Bogi and Girandola aren’t apparently considered to be good enough in terms of quality. (Flea market for kids’ brand clothes) Buyer/seller: I have to ask why Boden is forbidden, although it represents good quality, but a relatively inexpensive Gap and Gymbore are fine. It doesn’t make sense to me [. . .] Boden is quite an expensive English brand. (Flea market for children’s brand clothes) Second, price is a salient clue of the value of the product sold. The price was emphasized in sales discussions and was often compared with the price of its brand-new counterpart, particularly when the item was expensive. Among second-hand goods, the sellers clearly highlighted that the item in question was a “good deal” to help convince the prospective buyer to make a purchase decision, whereas different rules would likely apply to the pricing of vintage treasures (which are not in the core of analysis in this study): the older, the more expensive: Seller: Halti Tanja 2013 downhill skiing jacket, size 40, corresponds better with size 38, new, only tried on, price was plus 600 euros, bought this year at the beginning of winter. Price 300 euros. (Flea market for branded products for adults). It was common that the price of a fashion brand dropped to at least half of its original price when sold second-hand, as in the quote above. However, again, the more expensive the brand, the more difficult it was to determine its selling price. Many consumers interested in higher-priced flea markets seem to view fashion purchases as investments, and therefore appreciate clothes that are timeless and transcend seasons, and low-priced fast-fashion brands are more commonly seen as disposable goods. The following quotes from the flea market for branded products for adults show that the price of a Louis Vuitton bag sparked a lot of discussion about what would be the right selling price and also about how to value luxury: Seller: Currently the recommended list price of the bag is around 1,200 euros. I’ll take REASONABLE offers. Buyer 1: Why don’t you put a price on the product? It would be easier to make an offer if you gave a price. Buyer 2: Where does that recommended list price come from? I checked the LV site, and found that model is worth 980 euros in Spanish prices [. . .] Buyer 3: In my opinion, the price of the item decreases by half when you walk out the store where you bought it. So, I wouldn’t pay more than 400 to 500 euros for it. Buyer 1: Even if the price tag was still on, the value of the item drops when sold on secondary markets, and should be nowhere near the recommended list price. Seller: The prices of LV rise every year, and these bags retain their value pretty well [. . .] I am aware of the value of what I sell [. . .] This is obviously the wrong place for this [selling the LV bag]. Buyer 4: The resale price of quality brands is not comparable to that of ordinary market brands, whose price drops by more than half when you have bought them. That is why it is very inappropriate to sneeringly comment on another person’s sales announcement, when you have no clue about Vuitton’s pricing policy. Third, design is an inherent aspect of valuing fashion brands. In flea markets for lower-priced brands, it seemed to be more important to inform the buyer which season the garment represents. In addition to a picture of the brand, the sellers often wanted to provide a more subjective evaluation about their product, such as to praise its great fit or “wonderfulness”. Therefore, sometimes, the perceived value was not determined by price and quality, but by the trendiness of the brand, as was the case in the flea market for Vero Moda, Only and Gina Tricot: Administrator: You may sell Only, Vero Moda, Gina Tricot, Vila, H&M, Cubus, Nelly & BikBok clothes BUT ALL shoes, accessories, and bags. In other words, when you sell clothes here, all of them must be on the list of permitted items – not so that one is permitted and one is from Halpahalli cheap store [. . .] such pictures will be removed immediately! (Flea market for Vero Moda, Only and Gina Tricot) Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 289

The flea market for Vero Moda, Only and Gina Tricot is a market for fast-fashion brands that are relatively inexpensive also when sold firsthand in stores. Interestingly, the style of sales announcements was found to differ from that of other flea markets analyzed in this study. In this flea market, the descriptions did not relate to the quality or material that could boost the value of the product. Instead, the descriptions were related to the style and trendiness or how many times the product had been used. Overall, the sales announcements on this forum were typically shorter than announcements elsewhere. This may be due to the low price of the products, which lessens the perceived risk of buying, and the familiarity of the brands being sold. Thus, the consumers already have a general understanding of quality and size issues concerning the brands (e.g. H&M, Vero Moda, Gina Tricot and Only) sold in this forum, as the quote below also indicates: Seller: H&M trousers, used once. Size 36, corresponds well with the H&M sizes. They are from the fall/winter 2015 collection. Price 10 euros ! postal charge. (Flea market for Vero Moda, Only and Gina Tricot) Design played a clear role in the fundamental identity of the flea market groups. For example, the Finnish high-quality brand Marimekko was not accepted for sale in one of the flea markets that did not favor Marimekko’s characteristic retro design: Seller/buyer: I’m so glad that this flea market doesn’t feature any of those hideous overly colorful new-retro clothes, which every store and auction is full of [. . .] Hooray for classic and beautiful clothes. (Flea market for children’s brand clothes) Administrator: In my opinion, there’s a difference between a brand garment and a design garment. Metsola, etc. represent new retro, which we do not consider as brand garments . . . Metsola and Burberry have different users. (Flea market for children’s brand clothes) It was also noticeable that the boundaries of brands can be blurred, as in the case of cooperation with fashion designers. Cooperation can add the perceived value to fast-fashion brands. For example, Alexander Wang for H&M was accepted for sale on the flea market for quality brands, whereas plain H&M was listed among the unsuitable brands on that flea market. Chain stores’ own brands (i.e. private labels), for one, were generally perceived to be lower-valued brands, as in the quote below, as they neither have a specific design element nor are expensive when bought new. Moreover, it became evident that brand availability is related to the formation of the perceived value: Administrator: Kaxs – that is, Kappahl’s clothes do not belong here [. . .] ” (Flea market for children’s brand clothes) The fourth identified antecedent, brand availability, refers to how unique or rare the brand is perceived to be. The sales announcement quoted below highlights that the bag being sold has a high perceived value not only because of its trusted origin and good condition but also thanks to its level of uniqueness, as it is no longer available in stores. If many consumers can access a brand because of its low price in a great number of distribution channels, high availability lessens the perceived value of the brand. On the contrary, scarce brand availability brings value, as pointed out in the next quote from the discussion forum of the flea market for children: Seller: Authentic vintage leather bag from Mulberry on sale! Back in the day, I bought this beauty from huuto.net (an online auction site), and I am now selling it. The previous lady told me that the bag was bought in London in 1980. I do not have an original receipt. The bag is in very good condition in relation to its age. The straps have been repaired once by a shoemaker. Price is 180 euros. (Flea market for quality brands) Seller: Can one sell clothes by Monsoon? It is a more expensive brand, with only one store in Helsinki. (Flea market for children’s brand clothes) The age of a garment also affects its availability. In contrast to many other items, the old age and the look of leather products were evaluated as positive characteristics: “Used and beautifully patinated Mulberry bag on sale! It’s a hard-to-find treasure – this model has been sold out” (Flea market for quality brands). Usually, the goods sold in flea markets under analysis in this study were regarded as just old and used, not as vintage. When it came to older items, age played a central role. The older the item, the harder it is to find, especially in a good shape. The flea market for rags and retro clothes had a strict policy on the age of items sold, explicitly stating that acceptable items for sale are “original clothes, older than 1985”. However, they also had certain “allowable exceptions” for fabrics having a retro style despite being new. Interestingly, the flea market group members also had to discuss how to define what is retro, as it appeared that some items older than 1985 were not accepted for sale because of their non-retro style. Fifth, the origin of a brand can be identified as an antecedent of the perceived value that refers to three different aspects: the brand’s country of origin, the place of purchase and the previous user of the branded product. Teas and Agarwal (2000) point to several studies showing that the country of origin is a particularly important extrinsic cue of the perceived value of a brand. The country of origin was noticed to play a role, especially when the brand is unfamiliar to the buyers. Here, the country could be used to describe the quality of the product when the brand is not enough to assure it: Seller/Buyer: iDo is the same as Dodipetto, Italian quality clothes. Don’t you really sell those here? (Flea market for children’s brand clothes) On some occasions, the price of a brand sold in the flea markets was justified based on the well-known brand of the retailer, not the brand of the product, which was likely to be rather unknown to buyers. In addition to the country of origin of the brand, in some cases, the sellers also highlighted the place or country of purchase. For example, sellers want to emphasize that they originally bought the item in Paris or New York. This refers to the product’s history or story, which plays a role when evaluating the perceived value of the second-hand item. The next quote implies that Dubai may not be the most reputable place of purchase, which is why the seller needs to specifically point out the authenticity of the brand. In contrast, the seller in the second example quoted below feels no need to comment on the authenticity of the garment, perhaps because the place of purchase is considered more reliable: Seller: Guess bag. Only used once, and then realized that it does not fit my own style. Bought from Dubai. 100 per cent authentic. Comes with a dust bag. 80 euros or best offer. (Flea market for quality brands) Seller: Gant’s blouse 104 cm. The blouse is as good as new and bought from Kamppi Gant store [located in Helsinki]. 20 euros. (Flea market for kids’ brand clothes) Besides the place of purchase, the perceived value of a product may be influenced by its previous owner, for example, a celebrity. From the quote below, we can notice Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 290

that the previous owner affects the perceived value positively, thanks to his/her careful use of the garment, but can also possibly affect in a negative way because he/she owns a dog, which may cause the new owner of the garment to have an allergic reaction: Seller: Pomp de Lux 92 cm t-shirt. In a very good shape, we bought it as new and have kept it as a better shirt. Slightly fuzzy because of washing. A dog household! 8 euros including mailing costs. (Flea market for kids’ branded clothes) The sixth antecedent, authenticity, was frequently discussed and referred to in sales discussions. The authenticity of a branded item seems to become a more crucial issue in online second-hand markets than usually. The prerequisite of authenticity was underlined in the flea markets’ guidelines and referred to as a simplified and straightforward construct: objective authenticity (Grayson and Martinec, 2004; Leigh et al., 2006). Accordingly, authenticity was used as a descriptive attribute to differentiate authentic products from fakes, as do the quotes below imply: Administrator: It is forbidden to sell fake items here [. . .] If you spot such an item, do not hesitate to send a message to the administrator, and the announcement and person in question will be immediately removed from this group. (Flea market for semi-brands) Buyer: Can anyone recommend a nice and decent flea market on Facebook that does not sell fake items? I have already left the flea market for branded products for adults as well as Veromoda&only&ginatricot, and some other flea market with a similar name, because fake products were being sold and the administrators did nothing about it [. . .] (Flea market for semi-brands) It is noteworthy that some sales announcements still highlighted authenticity; in particular, the higher the price of the item, the more likely it was that authenticity was underlined in the discussions, which is likely to relate to the higher perceived risk involved in the purchase. In these sales announcements, authenticity referred to a deeper and more complex construct than a mere division between fake and authentic. Perceived authenticity is an interpretation of brand-related attributes and dimensions that are part of the perceived value, e.g. brand heritage, product’s availability (scarcity) and quality were seen as characteristics that enhance perceived authenticity and add credibility to the brand’s perceived value (Wuestefeld et al., 2012; Napoli et al., 2014). This is why it was evident that consumers perceive some brands to be more authentic than others. In the discussion quoted below, we may notice how the aspect of authenticity is actually entwined with many of the aforementioned antecedents of the perceived value: availability, quality and origin: Seller: I am selling a rare, authentic beauty: Louis Vuitton Theda. Limited edition 2004. The bag is only a little used, and in very good condition in my opinion. The only marks of use can be seen inside the bag, where there is a small ink-spot. Price 1,650 euros (includes postage). I accept offers. Swapping is also a possibility! Buyer: Where did you buy this? Did you buy it brand new? Seller: I bought it from my friend. At that time, it was less than one year old. Originally it was bought from Paris. (Flea market for quality brands) In the previous quote, scarcity (enhanced by its status as a limited edition) is considered to boost the perceived value of the otherwise widely available Louis Vuitton brand. The seller does not refer to the original price in this announcement, possibly because of the value that limited editions can have as collector’s items. Although Louis Vuitton bags are sold only in their own stores, the buyer was concerned about the origin and background of the bag. Thus, here, the perceived authenticity is a combination of the scarcity, the origin (place of purchase and previous owners) and the perceived quality that the brand manifests. To conclude, as in the BtoC markets for brand-new goods, it is important in the CtoC market for second-hand goods to offer a good bargain with a high customer-perceived value. In essence, the sellers need to explain why they want to get rid of the garment, e.g. because it does not fit their own style or because the size of the garment is wrong for them, thus implying that they are still offering a good bargain. Moreover, they make value suggestions, such as referring to the good-as-new condition of the product and its affordable price, good quality, design, availability and authenticity, as in the quote below: Seller: New UGG W BIANKA boots in mahogany color. Price 150 euros or best offer ! mailing costs. Size 38. Inner measurement 23.5-24 cm. 12 cm heels, plateau 1-2 cm. Perfect shoes for the autumn! This model is not produced anymore. You’ll get the authenticity certificate and own box for the shoes. These have never been worn, only tried on – they are too small for me. Inside, there is a wonderful soft and warm insole, as shown in the extra pictures. (Flea market for branded products for adults) The six antecedents of the perceived value have now been elaborated. However, in the end, what has to be noticed is that other issues may be involved in consumers’ purchase decisions, such as ideological concerns. For example, a sales announcement for a Burberry jacket with an original fox collar was soon criticized with comments such as “Fur is murder!” and “I could never wear such a thing” by those who were strictly against fur farming. (Flea market for quality brands). These kinds of quotes show that fashion is also linked to values beyond the level of product attributes. Discussion and conclusions This study was set to shed light on how consumers determine the perceived value of fashion brands in online flea markets. First, it was concluded in the literature review that the perceived value is a multifaceted construct, which is relative in nature because of its subjectivity and context-dependency. The CtoC second-hand context has its peculiarities in comparison with the traditional retail setting for fashion brands. Yet, it appears as versatile when it comes to different antecedents of the consumer-perceived value. In the online second-hand sales of fashion, we suggest that consumers perceive and determine the value of fashion brands through six antecedents: quality, price, design, brand availability, origin and authenticity. Especially, the call for authentic goods on sale and the pre-used condition of fashion goods are to be taken into account to understand the rationale behind the antecedents of the customer-perceived value in this study’s context. When compared with traditional retail environments and brand-new products, the time aspect plays a crucial role in second-hand markets because of the prior life of the brands being sold. The elaboration of the role of time helps us to understand why the six antecedents become relevant for the second-hand sales of fashion brands. First, the passing of time has to be on the seller’s side, meaning that the product on sale can either benefit or suffer from being bought and/or used in the past. Accordingly, time considerations relate to all six identified antecedents. Quality is viewed against the age of the product. The sellers often stated in the sales announcements Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 291

that the product was in a “good-as-new” condition. When it comes to the relation between price and time, it was noticed that the perceived value of a product is compared with its price before (in stores) and its condition after being used. In contrast, the design dimension reflects time in a different way. Retro and vintage items, as well as timeless classics, were valued higher over time and when they gained a patina of age, whereas fast-fashion products lost part of their appeal when they were off-season. Availability relates to time rather directly. When time passes, the availability of the product decreases, making it rarer. That is why the product may become a more highly valued “treasure” because it is no longer available in stores. The dimension of origin refers to the previous life of the product being sold. The life story of the product entwines issues such as its country of origin, place of purchase, prior users and prior use and can either enhance or diminish the perceived value of a brand in second-hand markets. Also, perceived authenticity is a time-related issue, as it is concerned with the formation of brand heritage over time. Theoretical contribution This study advances the literature on the perceived value by focusing on second-hand fashion goods sold in an online context. The findings support the previous literature on the perceived value when it comes to the significant role of quality and price, as concluded by Sánchez-Fernández and Iniesta-Bonillo (2007), but also enrich it by introducing new antecedents – design, availability, origin and authenticity – stemming from the fresh research setting of this study. However, further research focusing on other product categories sold secondhand in an online context is needed to evaluate the relative emphasis of each of these identified antecedents. First, we notice that quality is an important antecedent of the perceived value, referring to product attributes and condition. Quality appeared as a focal aspect in the second-hand sales of fashion brands, which was indicated also in the naming of the flea markets, such as flea market for quality brands. Second, price is a salient cue of the perceived value. It was noticed that the higher the recommended retail price of the product, the more likely it is that the price will also be mentioned when reselling it. On the contrary, low-cost fashion brands are not valued against their original price; instead, other aspects such as design and condition are considered. The pivotal roles of price and quality have been well-justified already in previous literature concerning the perceived value (Sánchez-Fernández and Iniesta-Bonillo, 2007; Zeithaml, 1988; Dodds et al., 1991; Sweeney and Soutar, 2001). The design antecedent makes another clear distinction with respect to how consumers perceive the value of fashion brands. This aspect is inherent to this branch of the industry, but is likely to play a role also in other kinds of products sold online. Moreover, the access to and availability of a branded product becomes a key issue in second-hand markets, for example, when determining the value of a market brand or a luxury brand (Phau and Prendergast, 2000; Vigneron and Johnson, 2004). The origin of the brand (and even the story behind a specific product, i.e. place of purchase) plays a role in second-hand markets, as it is often specifically pointed out in the sales announcements. Findings from prior literature argue that online consumers (Sweeney et al., 1999), as well as luxury fashion consumers, (Lloyd and Luk, 2010) tend to perceive risk, and the trust between buyers and sellers becomes a sensitive issue. In line with these notions, it was realized in this study that the authenticity of a product remained a clear concern for both sellers and buyers in second-hand markets. It was a key issue that was highlighted in many of the sales discussions, although according to the rules of the flea markets, the sale of fake items was not permitted. Authenticity can be regarded as a driver of its own, as found by Kovács et al. (2014), but it also intervenes in the relationship between other antecedents and the perceived value so that consumers value products that are perceived to possess properties of authentic quality, authentic luxury, authentic design, authentic rareness and/or authentic originality. Thus, authenticity plays a role in terms of both objective and perceived authenticity. All the six identified antecedents can either enhance or diminish the value of a specific brand sold secondhand (i.e. high vs low quality, high vs low original price, appealing vs. not appealing design, high vs low availability, interesting origin vs product without a story and perceived authenticity vs perceived risk related to product authenticity). As online second-hand shopping embeds various considerations and subjective experiences, it is evident that the motivations of online second-hand shoppers are varied, which is in line with the findings of Turunen and Leipämaa-Leskinen (2015) from the offline second-hand context. The passing of time grounds the realization of the customer-perceived value in online second-hand markets for fashion brands. Time is a factor that changes the perspective on how people look at the product and brings about a certain history/story for the product. As identified by Wuestefeld et al. (2012), the brand heritage of luxury brands is built over time, and therefore adds value by signaling enduring quality in the consumers’ perspective. In contrast, some categories of fashion, such as fast fashion, suffer from aging of the product. The consumers reflect the six antecedents against the passing of time. Although brand managers can affect the formation of brand authenticity, the lives of the products after sale are out of their hands. The eventual life story of second-hand products represents an interesting and powerful factor in the formation of the perceived value. Practical implications When it comes to practical implications for fashion branding, we may notice that the antecedents of the perceived value actually relate to different kinds of fashion brands sold secondhand. It appears that these antecedents serve as means of distinguishing and explicating the brand categories in the flea markets. The right flea market for selling a specific brand is determined on the basis of not only the store price but also the style of the brand. The diverse brand categories, e.g. fast-fashion brands, luxury brands, authentic semi-brands, private labels and design brands, were apparent constructions when evaluated against price, design, authenticity, quality, Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 292

availability and origin. For example, although private labels represent low-priced brands without a grand story of origin, “semi-brands” gain the perceived value among second-hand consumers through their origin and quality aspects. However, the antecedents are not exclusive; for example, the category of luxury brands may be evaluated also in terms of design and price and not only availability and quality. Thus, the perceived value of second-hand goods emerges from the interpretation of the antecedents that a consumer regards as being of central importance. This study provides a better understanding of the positioning of brands in CtoC markets for second-hand fashion brands in Finland. Regarding brand management, the findings shed light on consumers’ perceptions of the quality differences and resale values of brands. This study brings forward novel viewpoints on value discussion by highlighting the consumers’ (inter)active roles in negotiating and determining the antecedents of the perceived value of fashion brands in the online second-hand context. Limitations and future research directions The study is not free from limitations: empirical data were collected from Finland and online flea markets for which Facebook membership is required. Therefore, it cannot be argued that this study covers every consumer’s perspective on the perceived value of fashion brands. Moreover, the findings are limited to the chosen fashion context, so the conclusions may not be generalized to represent the dimensions of the consumer-perceived value in other product categories. Further studies focusing on international forums such as Ebay are encouraged. In the future, it would be interesting to study if online secondary markets differ from traditional flea markets in terms of the perceived value of different fashion brands. Like in traditional settings, the image of the online seller/forum should play a role as a contextual factor when consumers are valuing brands and making purchase decisions. Based on this research, it can be concluded that a certain social pressure seems to rigidly define each of the online flea markets in terms of which brands they sell and for which price. In addition, there is a need to clarify whether e-consumers, especially those buying secondhand, differ from traditional shoppers when it comes to their underlying shopping orientations that are likely to have an influence on what they value in brands and which kind of online stores they want to visit. As online shopping is continuously growing in importance, greater attention must be paid to this field of research. The six antecedents that emerged from this explorative research could be validated and studied more precisely by conducting a survey study. Consumers on flea markets could be interviewed to study the relative emphasis of the antecedents this study pinpointed. Particularly, the role of authenticity in the field of second-hand goods and its construction in an online environment is worth studying in more detail. Moreover, as the aspect of time appeared to play a significant role in the formation of the perceived value, time-related constructs such as brand heritage could be further explored in this context. References Andrews, T. and Benzing, C. (2007), “The determinants of price in internet auctions of used cars”, Atlantic Economic Journal, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 43-57. Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R. and Griffin, M. (1994), “Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 644-656. Beauchamp, M. and Ponder, N. (2010), “Perceptions of retail convenience for in-store and online shoppers”, Marketing Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 49-65. Belk, R., Fischer, E. and Kozinets, R.V. (2013), Qualitative Consumer and Marketing Research, Sage Publications, London. Belk, R.W. (2001), Collecting in a Consumer Society, 2nd ed., Routledge, London. Belk, R.W., Sherry, J. and Wallendorf, M. (1988), “A naturalistic inquiry into buyer and seller behavior at a swap meet”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 449-470. Berthon, P., Pitt, L., Parent, M. and Berthon, J.P. (2009), “Aesthetics and ephemerality: observing and preserving the luxury brand”, California Management Review, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 45-66. Carrigan, M., Moraes, C. and McEachern, M. (2013), “From conspicuous to considered fashion: a harm-chain approach to the responsibilities of luxury-fashion businesses”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 29 Nos 11/12, pp. 1277-1307. Cervellon, M.C., Carey, L. and Harms, T. (2012), “Something old, something used: determinants of women’s purchase of vintage fashion vs second-hand fashion”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 40 No. 12, pp. 956-974. Chan, K.W. and Li, S.Y. (2010), “Understanding consumer-to-consumer interactions in virtual communities: the salience of reciprocity”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63 Nos 9/10, pp. 1033-1040. Chaudhuri, A. and Holbrook, M.B. (2001), “The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 81-93. D’Alessandro, S., Girardi, A. and Tiangsoongnern, L. (2012), “Perceived risk and trust as antecedents of online purchasing behavior in the USA gemstone industry”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 433-460. Denegri-Knott, J. and Molesworth, M. (2009), “‘I’ll sell this and I’ll buy them that’: eBay and the management of possessions as stock”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 305-315. Dennis, C., Merrilees, B., Jayawardhena, C. and Wright, L.T. (2009), “E-consumer behaviour”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43 Nos 9/10, pp. 1121-1139. Desarbo, W.S., Jedidi, K. and Sinha, I. (2001), “Customer value analysis in a heterogeneous market”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22 No. 9, pp. 845-857. Dodds, W.B., Monroe, K.B. and Grewal, D. (1991), “Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyer’s product Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 293

evaluations”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 307-319. Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority (2014), “Liability for defects in second-hand goods”, available at: www.kkv.fi/en/facts-and-advice/defects-and-delays/ defective-goods/liability-for-defects-in-second-hand-goods/ (accessed 26 August 2015). Gale, B.T. (1994), Managing Customer Value, Vol. 29, The Free Press, New York, NY. Gallarza, M.G., Gil-Saura, I. and Holbrook, M. (2011), “Value of value: further excursions on the meaning and role of customer value”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 179-191. Gerval, O. (2008), Fashion: Concept to Catwalk, Bloomsbury, London. Grayson, K. and Martinec, R. (2004), “Consumer perceptions of iconicity and indexicality and their influence on assessments of authentic market offerings”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 296-312. Guiot, D. and Roux, D. (2010), “A second-hand shoppers’ motivation scale: antecedents, consequences, and implications for retailers”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 86 No. 4, pp. 355-371. Ha, H.Y. (2004), “Factors influencing consumer perceptions of brand trust online”, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 329-342. Holbrook, M.B. (1999), Consumer Value: A Framework for Analysis and Research, Routledge, London. Huttunen, K. and Autio, M. (2010), “Consumer ethoses in Finnish consumer life stories –agrariarism, economism and green consumerism”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 146-152. Jiang, L., Yang, Z. and Jun, M. (2013), “Measuring consumer perceptions of online shopping convenience”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 191-214. Jih, W.J. (2007), “Effects of consumer-perceived convenience on shopping intention in mobile commerce: an empirical study”, International Journal of E-Business Research, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 33-48. Kovács, B., Carroll, G.R. and Lehman, D.W. (2014), “Authenticity and consumer value ratings: empirical tests from the restaurant domain”, Organization Science, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 458-478. Leigh, T.W., Peters, C. and Shelton, J. (2006), “The consumer quest for authenticity: the multiplicity of meanings within the MG subculture of consumption”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 481-493. Lloyd, A.E. and Luk, S.T. (2010), “The devil wears Prada or Zara: a revelation into customer perceived value of luxury and mass fashion brands”, Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 129-141. Merz, M.A., He, Y. and Vargo, S.L. (2009), “The evolving brand logic: a service-dominant logic perspective”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 328-344. Napoli, J., Dickinson, S.J., Beverland, M.B. and Farrelly, F. (2014), “Measuring consumer-based brand authenticity”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 6, pp. 1090-1098. Netemeyer, R.G., Krishnan, B., Pullig, C., Wang, G., Yagci, M., Dean, D., Ricks, J. and Wirth, F. (2004), “Developing and validating measures of facets of customer-based brand equity”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 209-224. Nilson, T.H. (1992), Value-added Marketing: Marketing Management for Superior Results, McGraw-Hill, London. Overby, J.W. and Lee, E.-J. (2006), “The effects of utilitarian and hedonic online shopping value on consumer preferences and intentions”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59 Nos 10/11, pp. 1160-1166. Phau, I. and Prendergast, G. (2000), “Consuming luxury brands: the relevance of the ‘rarity principle’”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 122-138. Posti (2015), “Postal charges in Finland”, available at: www. posti.fi/liitteet/hinnatjamaksutavat/hinnastot/yleisimmatvanligaste.pdf (accessed 23 October 2015). Ravald, A. and Grönroos, C. (1996), “The value concept and relationship marketing”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 19-30. Roux, D. and Korchia, M. (2006), “Am I what I wear? An exploratory study of symbolic meanings associated with secondhand clothing”, in Pechmann, C. and Linda Price, L. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Association for Consumer Research, Duluth, MN, Vol. 33, pp. 29-35. Sánchez-Fernández, R., Callarisa, L., Rodríquez, R.M. and Moliner, M.A. (2006), “Perceived value of the purchase of a tourism product”, Tourism Management, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 394-409. Sánchez-Fernández, R. and Iniesta-Bonillo, M.Á. (2007), “The concept of perceived value: a systematic review of the research”, Marketing Theory, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 427-451. Sherry, J.F. (1990), “A sociocultural analysis of a midwestern American flea market”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 13-30. Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I. and Gross, B.L. (1991), “Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumption values”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 159-170. Sweeney, J.C. and Soutar, G.N. (2001), “Consumer perceived value: the development of a multiple item scale”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 2, pp. 203-220. Sweeney, J.C., Soutar, G.N. and Johnson, L.W. (1999), “The role of perceived risk in the quality-value relationship: a study in a retail environment”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 71 No. 1, pp. 77-105. Teas, R.K. and Agarwal, S. (2000), “The effects of extrinsic product cues on consumers’ perceptions of quality, sacrifice, and value”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 278-290. Turunen, L.L.M. and Leipämaa-Leskinen, H. (2015), “Pre-loved luxury: identifying the meanings of second-hand luxury possessions”, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 57-65. Vigneron, F. and Johnson, L.W. (2004), “Measuring perceptions of brand luxury”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 484-506. Woodall, T. (2003), “Conceptualizing ‘value for the consumers’: an attributional, structural and dispositional analysis”, Academy of Marketing Science Review, Vol. 2003 Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 294

No. 12, available at: www.amsreview.org/articles/woodall12- 2003.pdf (accessed 31 August 2015). Wuestefeld, T., Hennigs, N., Schmidt, S. and Wiedmann, K.P. (2012), “The impact of brand heritage on customer perceived value”, Der Markt, Vol. 51 Nos 2/3, pp. 51-61. Yang, Z. and Peterson, R.T. (2004), “Customer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: the role of switching costs”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 10, pp. 799-822. Zeithaml, V.A. (1988), “Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 2-22. About the authors Jenniina Sihvonen is an Assistant Professor in Marketing at University of Vaasa, Finland. Her primary research interests are consumer identities and media consumption. Jenniina Sihvonen is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected] Linda Lisa Maria Turunen is a Post-doc Researcher in Marketing at University of Vaasa, Finland. Her primary research interests are luxury brands, fashion and consumer behavior. For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] Valuing fashion brands Jenniina Sihvonen and Linda Lisa Maria Turunen Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 25 · Number 3 · 2016 · 285–295 295

The effect of materialism and impression management purchase motivation on purchase intention for luxury athleisure products: the moderating effect of sustainability Yunjeong Kim and Kyung Wha Oh Department of Fashion Design, College of Art, Chung-Ang University, Anseong, Republic of Korea Abstract Purpose – This study aims to identify the consumption mechanism by which consumers’ materialism creates purchase intentions for luxury athleisure products through impression management purchase motivation and to verify the moderating effect of sustainability in this mechanism. Design/methodology/approach – This study conducted a scenario-based online survey by dividing into two groups according to the sustainability of luxury brand products (non-sustainable vs sustainable). Structure equation modeling (SEM) was performed to verify the hypotheses. Findings – The SEM results showed that materialism has a positive effect on the purchase intention of luxury athleisure products. It was also confirmed that impression management purchase motivation mediates the relationship between materialism and purchase intention. As a result of examining the moderating effect of sustainability, materialism directly affects purchase intention for unsustainable products, but only indirectly affects sustainable products through impression management purchase motivation. Research limitations/implications – This study expanded the research on luxury brands by providing the consumption mechanism of luxury athleisure considering sustainability. Practical implications – Luxury brand marketers should strategically motivate consumers to purchase by activating materialistic tendencies such as ownership and display for general athleisure products and using impression management purchase motivation for sustainable products. Originality/value – This study explored unresolved research areas on the consumption mechanism of luxury athleisure by identifying the mediating role of impression management purchase motivation in the relationship between materialism and luxury consumption and exploring the moderating role of sustainability. Keywords Luxury brand, Athleisure, Materialism, Impression management purchase motivation, Purchase intention, Sustainability Paper type Research paper Introduction Materialism has been regarded as a concept that includes the desire to acquire wealth, social status and power (Richins and Dawson, 1992; Richins, 2004). People who value materialism have used material goods to elevate their status, show a desirable image and feel satisfaction and happiness through acquisition and consumption (Ashikali and Dittmar, 2012). The concept of materialism has been used to study luxury product consumption, which has traditionally been associated with splurge and display (Fitzmaurice, 2008; Goldsmith et al., 2012; Richins, 1994). A previous study found that the higher the level of materialism, the higher the intention to purchase of luxury products (Sun et al., 2017). Bourdieu (1984) argued that the orientation toward luxury reflects the propensity of the upper class (i.e. bourgeois) to purchase luxury goods. He explains that economic capital and cultural capital – a resource possessed by an individual and includes attitudes, knowledge and the education necessary to guarantee social status or the achievement of goals – can influence luxury consumption. These differences in cultural capital indicate differences in consumption. From this point of view, there may be individual differences in the economic power of materialists when it comes to luxury consumption. Even if they have the same economic power, there may be differences in aesthetic taste or consumption pattern. Carfagna et al. (2014) argued that consumers with a new high cultural capital are changing into consumers who consume ethically and consciously. This reflects that sustainability, which pertains to ethical and conscious consumption, can influence materialists’ luxury consumption as a new cultural capital. As sustainability becomes increasingly important in materialistic consumption, luxury fashion brands are using it to promote product purchases and reinforce brand evaluation (Achabou and Dekhili, 2013; Chang et al., 2019). The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/1061-0421.htm Journal of Product & Brand Management 31/8 (2022) 1222–1234 © Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421] [DOI 10.1108/JPBM-07-2021-3578] This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No. 2020R1A2C2004502) and the Chung-Ang University Research Grants in 2020. Received 25 July 2021 Revised 4 January 2022 26 March 2022 Accepted 11 April 2022 1222

Many previous studies on the relationship between materialism and sustainability showed that there was a negative relationship between the two; specifically, materialism was found to be an obstacle to sustainable consumption (Dittmar et al., 2014; Hurst et al., 2013; Kilbourne and Pickett, 2008; Moldes and Ku, 2020; Polonsky et al., 2014; Srikant, 2013). Sustainability is related to altruism, moderation and ethics (Achabou and Dekhili, 2013). It is a concept opposite to materialism, which is related to splurge and display. In general, materialism is understood to be contradictory to sustainable consumption as it is believed to hinder environmentalist efforts, as well as pro-social and publicwelfare dispositions (Kilbourne and Pickett, 2008; Podoshen and Andrzejewski, 2012). However, compared to previous studies on the negative association between materialism and sustainability, the findings from other research have shown that expensive ecofriendly products can lead to consumption as they can reflect wealth or status (Dastrup et al., 2012; Griskevicius et al., 2010; Sexton and Sexton, 2014). When the functional value of sustainable luxury goods is recognized, materialism can lead to the purchase of such goods (Talukdar and Yu, 2020), making its negative impact on eco-friendly behavior in a public context disappear (Wang et al., 2019). These results confirm that the relationship between materialism and sustainability cannot be viewed negatively. The conflicting results of research on the relationship between materialism and sustainability raise the need for continuous exploration of these relationships. Scott et al. (2014) suggested that materialism may have a negative impact on sustainable consumption, but this may be a narrow disciplinary perspective. They propose a concept of “new materialism” that emphasizes holistic monism and broadens the view of complex relationships. In this study, the complex relationship between materialism and sustainability is to be newly investigated in the context of luxury athleisure consumption. With the COVID-19 pandemic resulting in an increased consumer interest in athleisure (Arnett, 2020), which is defined as “casual, comfortable apparel designed to be suitable both for exercise and everyday wear” (Watts and Chi, 2019), luxury brands are trying to create more sustainable goods and introducing a variety of athleisure products (F-trend, 2021). As claims of sustainability become the new normal in the fashion industry, sustainable athleisure products can become more attractive to consumers who want to pursue a sustainable lifestyle that values the environment and society. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the consumption mechanisms of nonsustainable and sustainable luxury products together. If this is the case, the following question arises: How do materialism and sustainability affect the purchase of luxury athleisure products? The current study focuses on the role of impression management in the purchase of luxury athleisure products. One of the main motivations of consumers when buying from luxury brands is to “purchase to impress others.” Luxury brands have applied this as a strategic principle for marketing management (Dittmar, 1994; O’Cass and Frost, 2002; Tsai, 2005; Vigneron and Johnson, 1999). The increased presence of athleisure products in luxury brands reflects the desire of consumers to show that “they live a healthy lifestyle, exercise and take pride in themselves” (Zlatanova et al., 2017). The reason luxury products may eventually stand out in the athleisure market could be due to their impression management strategy. Although non-face-to-face situations have become the new norm during the pandemic, the social exposure of athleisure products worn in various settings, including exercise, work and daily life, through social networking service (SNS) has increased; therefore, impression management has become important for luxury athleisure consumers. As impression management can play an important role in the purchase of luxury athleisure products, this study attempts to test the role of impression management purchase motivation in the relationship between materialism and luxury athleisure consumption. As materialists value impression management motives more than non-materialists (Wang et al., 2019), sustainability can induce more materialists to consume luxury products through impression management purchase motivation. The reason is that sustainability can convey wealth and virtue, driving materialist consumption. Expensive sustainable products signal altruistic behavior (Griskevicius et al., 2010), which indicates one’s ability to pay extra for the benefit of the environment and society (Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ib!añez, 2012); therefore, consumers can flaunt their wealth by consuming sustainable products. In addition, sustainability can provide signals for virtue, as well as wealth (Kervyn et al., 2012). Studies suggesting that materialism affects overconsumption (Srikant, 2013), but is less associated with eco-friendly activities (Kilbourne and Pickett, 2008), which suggests that materialists can give others an impression of their wealth, but not an impression of virtue. However, sustainable luxury products can positively convey their social impressions of both wealth and virtue. In other words, the sustainable consumption of luxury products can convey to others that they are a class equipped with not only economic capital, but also cultural capital. As a result, sustainability can be preferred as a means for impression management for consumers with high materialism, which can lead to more purchases of sustainable rather than general luxury products. Based on the above deduction, the purpose of this study is to understand the consumption mechanism by which consumers’ materialism creates a purchase intention for luxury athleisure products. In the creation of this purchase intention, the mediating effect of impression management purchase motivation and the moderating effect of sustainability are investigated. This study can contribute to developing the theory of materialism from the perspective of sustainability. The study examines the mechanism of luxury fashion consumption by expanding the scope of existing research to include luxury athleisure products, which have received increased consumer interest due to lifestyle changes. By comparing the differences between non-sustainable and sustainable luxury products, the study can shed light on patterns of luxury consumption. Theoretical background Materialism and luxury consumption Belk (1985) described materialism as the belief that the consumption or possession of material things will bring happiness or satisfaction to human life. Materialism is a concept that indicates the importance of and extent to which material possessions play a role in an individual’s life (Richins, 2004). For individuals with high materialism, product The moderating effect of sustainability Yunjeong Kim and Kyung Wha Oh Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 31 · Number 8 · 2022 · 1222–1234 1223

ownership is generally an important part of their lives (Tilikidou and Delistavrou, 2004). Materialists consider acquisition to be one of the most important because they believe that their success can be measured by the possessions they own (Podoshen and Andrzejewski, 2012). Previous studies have revealed that consumers with high materialism have been shown to purchase products in pursuit of self-image, social awareness and status (Chan et al., 2015; Goldsmith et al., 2012; Nepomuceno and Laroche, 2015; Richins, 2004; Tsai, 2005). Consequently, they spend a lot more time shopping and become more conscious consumers (Fitzmaurice, 2008; Podoshen and Andrzejewski, 2012; Sun et al., 2017). Many studies have found that materialism is positively associated with fashion product consumption and has a positive relationship with fashion interest (Johnson and Attmann, 2009), clothing involvement (O’Cass, 2001, 2004), clothing purchases and impulse buying (Joung, 2013). In addition, materialistic consumers tend to use visible clothing to flaunt their status and success to others (Richins, 1994). They are more likely to show off expensive and appearance-enhancing items (Fitzmaurice, 2008). Moreover, Sun et al. (2017) demonstrated that the positive effect of materialism on luxury consumption is mediated by social, emotional and quality values. As the luxury athleisure products in this study are part of the products presented by luxury brands, the influence of materialism was considered in the category of luxury consumption. Therefore, the study proposes the following hypothesis to investigate the positive relationship between materialism and purchase intention of luxury athleisure products. H1. Materialism has a positive impact on the purchase intention of luxury athleisure products. Impression management in luxury product purchase Luxury brands have been using impression management as a strategic principle for marketing management (Tsai, 2005), following Veblen’s (1899) concept of conspicuous consumption. Impression management refers to the process by which people express their persona in the way that they wish to be perceived (Kim and Yi, 2016). White and Peloza (2009) explained that individuals have public self-image concerns, which motivate them to present a positive image to others. These concerns exist both as ongoing personality traits and motives that increase or decrease depending on the specific situation. In this study, “impression management purchase motivation” is defined to the extent to which impression management plays a role in a specific purchase decision. Specifically, its role in the purchase situation of luxury athleisure products is examined. The fact that consumers make purchases to create a favorable social image can be explained using the impression management theory (Sallot, 2002), which indicates people often strategically engage in impression management behavior to create or avoid certain images of themselves from a socially desirable perspective (Ashworth et al., 2005; Leary et al., 1995). In particular, people are more likely to be motivated to make a positive impression on others (Zhang et al., 2019). Because brand ownership is one of the first things to be spotted in a visual encounter (Johar et al., 2005), people often manage their impressions by using brand ownership in public. A related study has shown that external perceivers evaluate a target person as being more competent when they wear highcompetent clothing brands, such as luxury brands, than when they wear low-competent brands (Fennis and Pruyn, 2007). Based on this concept, marketers of luxury brands induce purchases in anticipation of the human desire to impress others, i.e. the effects of impression management, such as social salience and social identification, are used (Tsai, 2005). Materialism can stimulate impression management motives in purchasing situations because people form a relatively unfavorable impression of materialists compared to nonmaterialists (Van Boven et al., 2010). Impression management purchase motivation also leads to the purchase and wear of luxury goods (Cannon and Rucker, 2019). Luxury brands are known to have a more high-competent image than other brands (Fennis and Pruyn, 2007), which can be used strategically by consumers. Thus, people with high materialism may be motivated to manage their impressions through the purchase of luxury goods, which may make them buy more of such products. Therefore, the following hypotheses are established, with the expectation that impression management purchase motivation plays a role in mediating the relationship between materialism and luxury product purchases. H2. Materialism has a positive impact on impression management purchase motivation. H3. Impression management purchase motivation has a positive impact on the purchase intention for luxury athleisure products. H4. Impression management purchase motivation mediates the relationship between materialism and the purchase intention for luxury athleisure products. The moderating effect of sustainability Sustainability refers to business goals that pursue positive environmental, social and economic impacts (Kim et al., 2020). Many previous studies have revealed a negative relationship between materialism and eco-friendly activities. Through meta-analyses, Hurst et al. (2013) showed that materialism and eco-friendly attitudes and behaviors were negatively related, and Dittmar et al. (2014) suggested that there was a negative association between individuals’ materialistic orientation and their personal well-being. Another meta-analysis study by Moldes and Ku (2020) provided evidence that materialism deteriorates personal and social well-being. However, another stream of research has shown that materialism can be positively related to sustainability. The fact that sustainability can further increase the effect of materialism on the consumption of luxury goods can be explained by the following two aspects. First, sustainable products can convey wealth because sustainability makes products more expensive (Lundblad and Davies, 2016; Yan et al., 2012). Because luxury products have the highest prices and quality in the market (Wiedmann et al., 2007), consumers of such products tend to easily absorb sustainable products even if there is a price premium (Davies et al., 2012). Several The moderating effect of sustainability Yunjeong Kim and Kyung Wha Oh Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 31 · Number 8 · 2022 · 1222–1234 1224

studies have found that the consumption of green products can represent wealth if they are expensive (Chi et al., 2021; Griskevicius et al., 2012; Talukdar and Yu, 2020). This suggests that consumers with high materialistic tendencies can increase their purchase of sustainable products. This can be supported by the costly signaling theory, which explains that the purchase of more expensive and less efficient eco-friendly products can be a form of altruistic behavior that sends a signal to others (Griskevicius et al., 2010). According to this theory, it is proposed that the high price of green products influences materialists and plays a role in inducing pro-environmental behavior (Griskevicius et al., 2012; Talukdar and Yu, 2020). Consumers who choose eco-friendly products can obtain psychological rewards by emitting a conspicuous signal that they are interested in environmental protection and can pay additional costs for the benefit of the environment and society (Hartmann and Apaolaza-Ib!añez, 2012). A related qualitative study previously revealed that consumers were willing to pay a higher premium (10%–15%) for sustainable athleisure products (Chi et al., 2021). Recently, Talukdar and Yu (2020) investigated how materialism influences the purchase of sustainable luxury goods and confirmed that the purchase intention of sustainable luxury goods was higher than that of general luxury goods for women. Therefore, it can be expected that sustainable luxury athleisure products deliver a more expensive signal compared to non-sustainable products. In this study, we predict that these expensive signals will increase the intention of materialists to purchase sustainable luxury athleisure products. The second aspect is that sustainable consumption can signal virtue as well as wealth. People want to be seen as wealthy, but also still cultivate a good image for themselves. Kervyn et al. (2012) suggest that consumers perceive brands in the same way they perceive people and identified that well-intentioned brands exhibit higher warmth than ill-intentioned brands. In addition, it was confirmed that luxury brands showed higher competence than general brands. As sustainable luxury brands can display both warmth and competence, consumers can communicate to others a signal of wealth and virtue through the consumption of sustainable luxury products. In this context, sustainable products from luxury brands can act as signals of wealth and virtue, further motivating impression management, which is known to be related to the purchase of environmentally friendly products. Impression management purchase motivation motivates consumer preference for ecofriendly products in a public environment (Green and Peloza, 2014). Glazer and Konrad (1996) found that charitable donations also increased as concerns about impression management rose. Shin and Jin (2021) found that the increased perception that status-related fashion products (e.g. fur coats) are socially undesirable causes a decline in such purchases. White and Peloza (2009) examined public self-image concerns, a concept similar to impression management purchase motivation and found that other-benefit appeals led to more charity than self-benefit appeals in situations that raised public self-image concerns. For consumers with high materialism, the consumption of sustainable products, which signals moderation and ethics, may seem contradictory (Kapferer and Michaut-Denizeau, 2017). However, sustainable luxury products can lead to positive changes in the eco-friendly perceptions of materialists and send expensive signals to others. Therefore, they can stimulate the motivation for impression management to form a positive image of themselves. Thus, when luxury athleisure products are sustainable, the mediating role of impression management purchase motivation on the relationship between materialism and purchase intention may be greater. In other words, when luxury athleisure products are sustainable, the higher the materialism and the impression management purchase motivation, which aim to present a positive image through product consumption. In addition, as impression management purchase motivation increases, so does the purchase intention toward sustainable luxury athleisure products. Therefore, H5, H6 and H7 were established as follows: H5. When luxury athleisure products are sustainable, the impact of materialism on purchase intention is more positive. H6. When luxury athleisure products are sustainable, the impact of materialism on impression management purchase motivation is more positive. H7. When luxury athleisure products are sustainable, the impact of impression management purchase motivation on purchase intention is more positive. The model of this study constructed to examine the influence of materialism on luxury athleisure wear is shown in Figure 1. Materials and methodology Procedure and materials The questionnaire for this study consisted of a scenario-based between-subject design. Assuming the purchase situation of luxury athleisure products, an online survey was conducted after dividing the survey group into two according to the sustainability of luxury brand products (non-sustainable vs sustainable). Participants were randomly assigned to one of two types of questionnaires. Sustainability used as a moderator in this study means whether the product uses sustainable materials (e.g. recycled polyester, organic cotton) and is made in an eco-friendly process. First, respondents were asked to enter their favorite luxury brand name, and then the corresponding brand name was automatically displayed in the questionnaire. Next, the respondents encountered a scenario in which the luxury brand Figure 1 Research model The moderating effect of sustainability Yunjeong Kim and Kyung Wha Oh Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 31 · Number 8 · 2022 · 1222–1234 1225

they listed had launched new athleisure products. Respondents were asked to imagine a purchase situation based on a scenario. Scenarios were divided into two groups: purchasing sustainable and non-sustainable luxury athleisure products and respondents were exposed to scenarios in a randomly assigned group. After reading the scenario, the participants responded to questions around materialism, impression management purchase motivation, purchase intention and demographic variables. The questionnaire had four questions about materialism (Alzubaidi et al., 2020; Talukdar and Yu, 2020), six questions about impression management purchase motivation (Green and Peloza, 2014; White and Peloza, 2009) and three questions about purchase intention (Cho, 2015; Cho and Baskin, 2018), modified and supplemented from previous studies. We measured all items using a seven-point Likert scale (1 = completely disagree, 7 = completely agree). The detailed items are presented in Table 2. Participants To empirically verify the hypotheses, an online survey was conducted from May 20 to May 27, 2021. Among the panel of specialized research institutes at the time of the survey, female consumers in the age group of 20–49 years living in metropolitan areas in South Korea who knew the concept of sustainability and had purchased both luxury and athleisure products in the past year were targeted. This study was conducted on female consumers because it was found in previous studies that female consumers are more environmentally conscious than males and are more interested in clothing, fashion and brands (Gam et al., 2010; O’Cass, 2004). In addition, Korea’s luxury market continues to grow as one of the key markets in Asia (Lee et al., 2018), and the age group in their 20s and 40s has a high level of materialism and luxury consumption (Giovannini et al., 2015). Therefore, respondents who met these criteria were recruited by an online survey firm. A total of 323 responses (non-sustainable: n = 161, sustainable: n = 162) were used for the analysis. Among the respondents, 110 (31%) were in their 20s, 108 (33.4%) were in their 30s and 115 (35.6%) were in their 40s. In addition, there were more unmarried (n = 176, 54.5%) than married (n = 147, 45.5%) participants, and most of the participants had obtained a college degree (77.1%). Table 1 shows the details of the respondent data collected in this study. The collected responses were analyzed using SPSS 23.0 and AMOS 21.0. As a result of conducting the x2 test to confirm the differences between the questionnaire groups, there was no difference in the questionnaire with respect to the respondents’ age, education, occupation, marital status and monthly household income. As an individual’s environmental concerns can play an important role in behavioral change during eco-friendly research (Fransson and Gärling, 1999), before conducting the structural equation model analysis, it was checked whether there was a difference in environmental concerns between the two groups. Environmental concerns were measured using five items from the study of Polonsky, Kilbourne and Vocino (2014). As a result of the independent sample t-test, responses to environmental concerns did not differ between the sustainable (M = 5.8309) and the non-sustainable group (M = 5.8373) (t = 0.074, p > 0.05). Results Manipulation checks Prior to the hypotheses testing, it was verified whether sustainability was perceived differently between the groups. The difference in sustainability perception between the nonsustainable and sustainable group of luxury athleisure products was tested through an independent sample t-test analysis. It was found that the sustainable group perceived sustainability higher than the non-sustainable group (Mnon-sustainable = 4.44, Msustainable = 4.78, t = 2.447, p < 0.05). As a result, it was confirmed that the experiment of this study on sustainability was manipulated. Therefore, in the later moderation effect analysis, the group classified by sustainability (non-sustainable vs sustainable) was used as the moderator variable to analyze the difference in influence between the variables. Afterward, the measurement model and structural equation model were analyzed for the entire set of responses to verify the relevant hypotheses. Table 1 Sample description Characteristics Frequency (%) Characteristics Frequency (%) Age Occupation 20s 110 31.0 Office work 163 50.5 30s 108 33.4 Housewife 53 16.4 40s 115 35.6 Student 30 9.3 Marital status Management/professional 30 9.3 Single 176 54.5 Functional 16 5.0 Married 147 45.5 Freelancer 19 5.9 Education Etc. 12 3.6 Less than high school 10 3.1 Monthly household income (Unit: 10,000 won) College student 25 7.7 Less than 200 14 4.3 College degree 249 77.1 More than 200–less than 400 82 25.4 Master’s/doctoral degree 39 12.1 More than 400–less than 600 75 23.2 More than 600–less than 800 54 16.7 More than 800–less than 1,000 49 15.2 More than 1,000 49 15.2 The moderating effect of sustainability Yunjeong Kim and Kyung Wha Oh Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 31 · Number 8 · 2022 · 1222–1234 1226

Testing of measurement model First, confirmatory factor analysis was performed using AMOS 21.0 to confirm the validity of the overall measurement model according to the procedure of Anderson and Gerbing (1988). Table 2 shows the results of confirmatory factor analysis for the measurement model and the major model fit indices were within the appropriate range (x2 (df) = 137.335(62), normed x2 = 2.215, GFI = 0.937, CFI = 0.974, TLI = 0.967, RMSEA = 0.61). Therefore, the measurement model was found to be acceptable. And, Cronbach’s a values of the constructs ranged from 0.861 to 0.918, supporting the reliability of the measurement model. Subsequently, validity tests (convergent and discriminant validity) were conducted. Convergent validity means the degree to which two or more items theoretically related to a construct are actually related. Methods for evaluating convergent validity include average variance extracted (AVE) and construct reliability (CR) (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The variables in this study all showed AVE values in the range of 0.610 to 0.768, which are above the reference value of 0.5, and CR also showed a value higher than the reference value of 0.7, indicating that the measures had convergent validity. Discriminant validity requires testing whether concepts or measures that should not be associated actually differ from one another and how much one factor actually differs from another. The verification of discriminant validity is performed through the comparison of AVE and the squared correlation estimate (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). If AVE is greater than the squared correlation estimate, it can be said that there is a discriminant validity between the two variables. The squared correlations between the latent variables of the research model were all smaller than AVE for each variable, confirming the discriminant validity of the three variables (Table 3). As such, in this research model, all latent variables (materialism, impression management purchase motivation and purchase intention) are well explained by individual measurement items, and it was confirmed that each potential variable is a different concept. Testing the structural equation model To confirm the influence of materialism, impression management purchase motivation and purchase intention on this study, the overall structural model was verified. The research structural model and results are shown in Figure 2. The model fit indices were found to be acceptable (x2 (df) = 137.335 Table 2 Results of confirmatory factor analysis Construct items Standardized factor loading t-value Cronbach’s a AVE CR Materialism 0.861 0.610 0.978 I admire people who own expensive homes, cars and clothes 0.756 – The things I own say a lot about how well I am doing in life 0.780 13.819!!! Buying things gives me a lot of pleasure 0.779 13.812!!! My life would be better if I owned certain things I do not have 0.809 14.356!!! Impression management purchase motivation 0.918 0.658 0.987 I want to buy this product because I care about how positively others view me 0.861 – I want to buy this product because I want to present myself in a positive way 0.791 17.504!!! I want to buy this product because I want to make a positive impression on others 0.865 21.404!!! I want to buy this product because I want to make myself look good to others 0.832 19.041!!! I want to buy this product because I want to do what other people think is right in this situation 0.730 15.452!!! I want to buy this product because I want to do what others approve of 0.780 17.128!!! Purchase intention 0.908 0.768 0.984 If I want to buy a luxury athleisure product, I am willing to purchase the product of this brand 0.879 – If I want to buy a sportswear product, I am likely to consider purchasing the product of this brand 0.880 20.760!!! I am willing to purchase this sportswear product in consideration of the information indicated on the product of this brand 0.870 20.418!!! Note: !!!p < 0.001 Table 3 Discriminant validity Construct Materialism Impression management concerns Purchase intention Materialism 0.610a Impression management purchase motivation 0.567b 0.667 Purchase intention 0.284 0.213 0.786 Notes: a AVE for constructs are displayed on the diagonal; b Numbers below the diagonal are squared correlation estimates of two variables The moderating effect of sustainability Yunjeong Kim and Kyung Wha Oh Journal of Product & Brand Management Volume 31 · Number 8 · 2022 · 1222–1234 1227