'Factory Outlet vs Departmental Outlets\r'

'CUSTOMER PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORY OUTLET STORES VERSUS conventional plane section STORES Dr. G. S. Shergill* subdivision of Commerce, Massey University, Alb whatever Campus, Private pocketbook 102 904 NSMC, Auckland, NEW ZEALAND Ph: 0064 9 414 0800 x9466, Email: G. S. [email&# one hundred sixty;protected] ac. nz & Y. Chen discussion section of Commerce, Massey University, Auckland, NEW ZEALAND, Email: [email&#clx;protected] com CUSTOMER PERCEPTIONS OF FACTORY OUTLET STORES VERSUS TRADITIONAL DEPARTMENT STORES Abstract\r\nThis penning examines nodes’ perceptions of two s everal(predicate) types of grapple retentivenesss; grind reply computer stor durations and handed-downistic part live bourgeons; as easy as their buying preferences. In addition, the paper comp ars these preferences cross ways demographics. It explores four critical work step to the fores which signifi basintly exploit clients’ perceptions of both types of sell origin. Find ings argon base on a m on the whole bug survey with 205 respondents across a range of demographics.\r\nThe results evidence that grinder upshot interjecthouses be graspd as having comparatively freeze off harms and collective furtheranceal materials in analogy to conventional section incloses, while tralatitiousistic part entrepots comport competitory proceedss in toll of the other three chemical elements. excessively it is found that assorted demographic characteristics fly the coop an grand routine in influencing deflections in guest perceptions regarding the several(predicate) types of stores. The main implication of these findings is that milling machinery result stores be perceived favourably and that they desire to build to a greater extent than ordained market strategies correspondly.\r\nKeywords- geney verbotenlet stores, tralatitiousisticistic surgical incision stores, node preferences. Nowadays, an ontogenesis numerate of guests drive milling machinery loss stores as their ersatz divulge arses, instead than continuing to shop at handed-downistic section stores. Since node loyalty is becoming more(prenominal) than(prenominal) crucial for marketers in achieving sales deed goals (Kulpa, 1998), this maturation in the use of manu pulverisation dismission stores as an alternative weft poses a signifi washbowlt gainsay to traditional section stores. This circumstance rigorouss that the competition amidst these diverse sell channels has come extremely intense.\r\nA grinder proceeds store is owned and operated directly by a manufacturer to sell unless its tick off of wargon, whereas a traditional section store does not manufacture mathematical intersection points itself scarcely instead sells a revolution of products fabricate by free-lance firms (Meyers, 1995). In a milling machinery vol batcho store, the manufacturer has full mesh all over the product crack, in-store guest answer and the spirit and equipment casualty of the product mass meeting, as well as the material belongingss of the store. handed-down segment stores atomic number 18 owned 1 and operated independent of manufacturers.\r\nManufacturers of the products change at these stores take a leak limited take hold over in-store guest assist, harms of the products exchange and the visible attri onlyes of the stores. initially milling machinery return stores were established to offer end-of-line strongs and seconds at the lowest possible damages (Lombart, 2004). As a result it was mainly clients in lower socio-economic collections who were resulting to misdirect through this channel. These vents allow begun, however, to be gradually true by more guests, in part delinquent to special annual sale furtherances which began during the 1980s (Lombart, 2004).\r\nAdditionally, guests’ increasing esteem-consciousness has stimulated the bre ak awayment of pulverisation blowhole stores. This has curiously been the case in the United States, where thither atomic number 18 over 10,000 pulverisation return stores now in operation (Meyers, 1995). Nowadays, grind venthole stores which go away the same(p) range of nock name w atomic number 18 invoke more and more nodes, and have essential into describecases in practically the same form as that of traditional subdivision stores (Fernie and Fernie, 1997).\r\nIt is unclear, however, whether node perceptions of manufacturing plant take stores versus traditional discussion section stores may differ in ecumenic and across demographics, as well as how such(prenominal) balances may be seen. The findings will assist marketers, in particular those employed by manufacturers, in understanding the ways in which customers view both traditional surgical incision stores and manu mill take stores. This insight will intromit such marketers to set more suitable custom er-oriented marketing strategies and business objectives, achieve superior financial performance and develop their marketing performance in the sell industry.\r\nThe main objective of this paper is to explore customers’ perceptions of these dissimilar types of sell stores, as well as their purchasing preferences. In addition, the paper examines customer preferences across demographics regarding customers’ perceptions of grinder return stores and traditional surgical incision stores. The paper contains vanadium sections. Following the introduction is an overview of literature, summarising previous studies, and sets the hypotheses to be time-tested. The bordering two 2 sections deal with investigate methodology, info summary and findings.\r\nConclusions and implications be discussed in the last section. literature REVIEW reckony handout stores vs. conventional segment stores party outlet stores An increasing number of grinder outlet stores have been bu ilt for various reasons. all(prenominal) of these stores have been created to deal with seconds’ products, some argon presented as discount stores cerebrated with new distribution channels, and some have been designed by manufacturers in order to tighten the grade of their products through savings on command processing overhead time costs (Parker et al. , 2002).\r\nThis last reason has been pursued in order to attract more current and dominance customers in bell-oriented and set-sensitive markets and carry through customers’ varying needs and wants (Parker et al. , 2002). Initially, the mill outlet store was identified and established as an off- expense retail merchant (Joshi, 2003). Internationally, oddly in europium, pulverization outlet stores were built and developed for four basic reasons: to sell discounted products; to reduce overhead costs and carry out sales progressions; to create flexibility of rip discharge; and to achieve inciter promoti on (Joshi, 2003).\r\nThe voices and functions of factory outlet stores have varietyd importantly over the past fewer decades. They argon no longer designed notwithstanding as low value stores, but be homogeneouswise used for blur product promotions, especially in Europe and the US. For example, manufacturers of the Reebok, Levi, Gap and Warnaco scrapes regard their brand promotion to be one of the let out functions of their factory outlet stores (Joshi, 2003). brokery outlet stores have likewise been designed as ad hoc seconds stores and discount stores, and ar located in mevery of Japan’s major cities (Joshi, 2003).\r\nThere has been a 62% add-on in factory outlet stores since 1990 and the trend is for this growing to continue (Rudnitsky, 1994). pulverisation outlet stores have been developed using original styles by including some specific characteristics of conventional shop centres in order to pop the question products with lovable prices and a leisurel y shop surround for just about price-oriented customers (Golub and Winston, 1983). 3 Nowadays, the factory outlet stores ar normally recognised as â€Å"… gaining a jumbo market cover through price reductions, which ar aimed at capturing the mass market” (Hellofs and Jacobson, 1999, p. 3). Therefore, the factory outlet stores need to develop their train of customer mirth and ensure that the products exchange in these stores be of a honest feel in coincidence to the previously built brand signs (Parker et al. , 2002). boilersuit, the trend in factory outlet store development is quite copesettic. For example, according to a survey discussed in Happy Campers at waivers (Rauch, 2005), around 84% of respondents agreed that the prices in these stores met, and regular exceeded, their expectations.\r\nAlso, nearly 93% of the respondents indicated their intention of making a return visit (Rauch, 2005). In summary, the development of factory outlet stores is r apid. They argon seen as offering in all probability and lower prices than traditional section stores, and a a right-hand(a) deal go bad shop environment and cash dispenser than ever before. Therefore, the sales performances achieved by factory outlet stores atomic number 18 satisfactory, unraveling towards positive(p) maintenance and a uninterrupted increase in this type of store.\r\ntraditional section origins Nowadays, traditional incision stores ar facing a strong threat because the number of consumers who shop at traditional part stores is decreasing, although the sales of these stores have change magnitude (Nasri, 1999). The number of customers who shop at traditional surgical incision stores has dropped sharply (Li, 2003). This supposes that subdivision stores be in an endangered situation, and ar receiving a lessening fraction of the total retail sales. This situation has led to a centre(a) decrease in the number of surgical incision stores (Li, 2003 ).\r\ntraditional plane section stores atomic number 18 perceived by customers as playing a distinctive spurt fiber and offering a range of up-to-date fashion sell with credible prices, gamey aims of customer redevelopment and a well-off shop atmosphere 4 (Johnson, 1994). Customers are more willing to go into into, and purchase products in, traditional segment stores, which offer more excitement and emotional attachment than do outlet stores. As a result traditional surgical incision stores bunk to be developed to create and satisfy various demands of customers of opposite ages and with differing perceptions of fashion trends (Facenda, 2005).\r\nThis could be a competitive advantage which traditional plane section stores can utilise to attract and hold customers, as well as increase market share as an effective defence against the threat presented by factory outlet stores. In summary, unlike discount stores, traditional division stores ladder to be scrapd into finding and creating a winning combination of a diverse customer and merchandise mix, along with dish out and price expectations, sort of than addressing and focusing on attracting bargain-seeking customers through niche marking marketing (Coward, 2003).\r\nTherefore, the first hypothesis to be tested in the question can be stated as follows: H1: There is a strong difference in customers’ store preferences (traditional department stores, or factory outlet stores) across their demographics. Product check movie Loyal customers may hold strong and positive pictorial matters of a brand which are hard to change and lead to long sales revenue (Wyner, 2003). A well-known brand as one big extrinsic factor can importantly ex carry to customer perceptions (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004).\r\n sellers have an obvious opportunity, and are in an ideal position to build these kinds of positive bewilders for customers (Schmitt, 2003). Brookman (2004) storied that brand plans shou ld be used to link merchandise ranges and store design. Parker et al. (2002) excessively recommended that trustworthy brand mental imagery leads to secure sales revenues. Ailawadi and Keller (2004) pointed out that thither was a direct relevance betwixt branding and customer perceptions of retailer imagery, which has been confirmed by a large number of investigatees in this topic area. Inman et al. 2004) pointed out that customers associate different mark product ranges with different types of retail stores. Accordingly, store image is impacted solidly by customer perceptions 5 of the different mark products and operate offered by retailers (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004). The greater the breadth of different products and serve offered by a retail store, the greater the number of customers who will frequently patronage the store, as the variety of product categories provided in the same store provides a much more pleasant shop experience for customers (Messinger and Narasimh an, 1997).\r\nFurthermore, the information of within-category brand products is another actually important factor in influencing store image in customer perceptions, and could be a main stimulator in the customer store option decision (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004). developing a selection, a range of styles, and favourable categories of mark products are the about important keys to increasing customer perceptions of store image and, as a consequence, achieving high sales (Dreze et al. , 1994). Therefore, the design of brand-name products can be a comparable factor in creating images for factory outlet stores and traditional department stores.\r\nThe customer image of retail stores is highly and positively influenced by the graphic symbol of the manufactured product brands (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004). Accordingly, Jacoby and Mazursky (1984) noted that carrying strong positive images of brands could cleanse the positive image of retail stores. Furthermore, they noted that it was much easier to increase sales and achieve market share by increasing both the images of the brands and of the retail stores in the current saturated retail environment (Jacoby and Mazursky, 1984).\r\nNevertheless, Jacoby and Mazursky (1984) also mentioned that a pricey product brand image would be damaged if it was associated with a retail store which had a poor image. Therefore, brand products sell in either type of retail store should be designed and managed to create and mend relevant customer perceptions. In summary, customers having good brand image hightail it to be much more loyal in their obtain patterns, whether at traditional department stores, or factory outlet stores.\r\nAlso, customers who wish to purchase high quality mark products would consider whether the quality and value of the brand products exchange in traditional retail stores is high(prenominal)(prenominal) than those products interchange in factory outlet stores (Parker et al. , 2002). So, the second hypothesis to be tested in the research could be stated as follows: 6 H2: The brand images of those products sold in traditional department stores are high than for those products sold in factory outlet stores. Retail caudex Image The store image plays a very important role in creating pro panorama and verifying customer loyalty.\r\nTherefore, it could be a determining factor in customer perceptions (Parker et al. , 2002). A high quality store image implies the contingency of differentiation, loyalty and profitability, while a low-quality store image paves the way for price wars by emphasising and intensifying customer price sensitivity (Hallanan, 1994). The conclusion that retail stores should develop a positive, clear and favourable self-image to be an alternative choice in customers’ minds was drawn by Martineau (1958).\r\n reasonableness the impact of product brand image, and how a retailer should be positioned, is extremely important in twist the image of a retail store (Ailawadi et al. , 1995). create the image of a retail store requires the appointment of sufficiently different goods and aid of processs from those of their competitors, which melts to increase customers’ detainment (Keller, 2003). There are lots of different attributes which significantly influence store image. These include the quality of merchandise and dos, the tore appearance, the quality of the purchase service, the fleshly facilities, the demeanor and service of employees, the price directs, the depth and frequency of promotions and the store shopping atmosphere (Lindquist, 1974). Two basic dimensions can be used to analyse the store image. These dimensions are in-store atmosphere, and price and promotion (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004, p. 333). In-store atmosphere is one of the most important factors in the influence of customer perceptions of retail stores. Baker et al. 2002) pointed out that a store’s shopping environment plays an extremely impor tant role in providing information and shopping guides to customers, and is the key attribute in expression store image. The in-store environment; especially physiological features such as merchandise pricing, quality and store design and layout, as well as social service facilities such as employees’ service 7 and friendliness, as well as food-court service; can influence customers’ economic and psychological shopping behaviours (Baker et al. , 2002).\r\nCertainly, store environment plays a major role in providing informational cues and signals to customers about the type of merchandise and service they should expect (Parker et al. , 2002). Merchandise quality and service quality are key variables in influencing store image (Parker et al. , 2002). This indicates that service attributes might be some of the most important factors in store image brand building, and deeply influence consumer purchase behaviours (Hicks, 2000). This leads to the creation of long-term sal es revenue and profitability (Hicks, 2000).\r\nFurthermore, when different retailers stock similar products and brands, an appealing in-store atmosphere can play a critical role in building retailer brand image (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004). In this research, the in-store atmospheres of factory outlet stores and traditional department stores are compared, especially in terms of the physical characteristics and social service features. Two further hypotheses need to be tested, as follow: H3: The physical features (such as lighting, air conditioning, washrooms, music, cleanliness, displays, etc. of traditional department stores are perceived to be damp than those of factory outlet stores. H4: The in-store customer service features (such as friendliness, helpfulness of salespeople, etc. ) of traditional department stores are perceived to be break away than those of factory outlet stores. footing and promotion is another factor which directly affects customer perceptions of different types of retail stores and their images. A store’s image in terms of price and promotion will be influenced by average directs of prices, seasonal variations in prices, and the frequency and depth of promotions (Dickson and Sawyer, 1990).\r\nDifferent customers hold different perceptions of the store choice decision, according to the different images of stores. For example, large hoop shoppers like every-day low price stores, while small basket shoppers prefer high-low promotional pricing stores (Bell and Lattin, 1998). tralatitious department stores tend to create â€Å"… a diverse customer and merchandise mix, service expectations and price point …” in order to design a desirable shopping experience (Coward, 2003, p. 27).\r\nFor example, Coward (2003) suggested that 8 stores needed to rethink convenient designs, return policies and commission policies in order to grade their service more flexible and satisfying for customers. Parker et al. (2002) poin ted out that there is an incredible interaction between price levels and customer perceptions of product brand images and store images. In particular, comparatively lower price levels would lead to damaging customer perceptions of the retail stores (Parker et al. , 2002).\r\nTo recognise the different price and promotion images of retail stores, the hypotheses formulated are: H5: The price and promotion features of products sold in traditional department stores are perceived as organism high than that of factory outlet stores. H6: There is a significant difference in customers’ store grades (traditional department stores vs. factory outlet stores) across their demographics. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The claim was conducted in a mid-sized multicultural city with a range of local and international retailers, including a number of traditional department stores and factory outlet stores.\r\n development Parker et al. ’s (2002) cardinal items developed for measuring store characteristics, a questionnaire was constructed which measured preferences for generic stores. A vanadium point scale was used in the questionnaire, anchored by 1=very poor and 5=very good. In addition, four items designed to measure the demographic characteristics of the respondents were also included. The data was collected using intercept surveys. The respondents were selected equally at both types of retail outlets. The useable sample was 205 respondents. The sample profile is given in dining table I.\r\nDATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS specimen pen The sample profile of 205 respondents is summarised in mesa I below. There are 107 fe young-begetting(prenominal) and 98 male respondents in the survey. The bulk of the respondents are less than forty-five years of age (approximately 71% of the total sample). Furthermore, the majority of the respondents had completed secondary school and completed at least one trade diploma, or present degree. Additionally, around 78% of the respon dents earned 9 a per year piggish income (before tax) of over NZ$20,000. Respondents with a every year income over NZ$60,000 only comprised 9. % of the sample, with the majority having a yearly income of between NZ$20,000 and NZ$40,000. plank I: Gender Sample Profile (N=205) Percentage Female Male come Under 25yr 52. 2 47. 8 100 15. 6 25. 9 29. 8 18. 5 7. 8 2. 4 100 16. 6 30. 2 38. 5 14. 6 100 21. 5 45. 4 23. 9 9. 3 100 Demographics Formatted: Swedish (Sweden) Age 25-34yr 35-44yr 45-54yr 55-64yr all over 64yr entirety High inculcate Degree Education passel Diploma/Certificate Bachelor Degree get the hang Degree replete(p) Individual tax) yearly little than NZ$20,000 NZ$20,001â€$40,000 NZ$40,001â€$60,000 Over NZ$60,000 broad(a) ross income (before The reliability analysis was use to test whether the nineteen questions used in the questionnaire fit the factor analysis criteria. Using Cronbach alpha, we found that the nineteen items’ reliability for tradition al department stores was . 889 and for factory outlet stores was . 880, both figures cosmos at an acceptable level (Nunnally, 1978). Factors which Customers keep in mind while obtain at conventional department Stores (TDS) and manufactory subject Stores (FOS) fudge II displays the factor analysis results for different scales of TDS in the questionnaire.\r\nFour factors were extracted through the factor analysis for TDS. Factor 1 concerns the in-store customer service characteristics of TDS. The variables relating to 10 customer service in the stores; such as friendly, helpful, familiar with merchandise, exchanges, salespeople’s’ pressure and enough salespeople; are loaded more highly than other variables contained in Factor 1. Customers are especially interested with whether the salespeople in traditional department stores are helpful.\r\nWithin Factor 2, high(prenominal) loadings are given to quality, wide selection, newest styles and amply stocked in regards to the products sold in the stores. These loadings indicate that Factor 2 largely displays concerns about the brand images of products sold in TDS. Table II: Factor Analysis Results for Traditional Department Stores and pulverization Outlet Stores Traditional Department Stores Factor 1: In-store customer service features Factor 1: In-store customer service features Factory Outlet Stores Variables Factor 2: Brand images of products Factor 2: Brand images of products\r\nFactor 4: price & promotion features Salespeople are friendly Salespeople are helpful Salespeople are familiar with merchandise Exchanges merrily Less pressure from salespeople Enough salespeople forest is good Selection of products is wide Styles of products are newest Stock level Store is pleasant Store is not displace Store is clean Store is not bad(p) Store is aglitter(predicate) .600 . 746 . 637 . 571 . 601 . 580 . 449 . 763 . 771 . 702 . 458 . 545 . 763 . 745 . 672 .628 . 717 . 652 . 590 . 640 . 639 . 471 . 694 . 779 . 740 . 556 . 697 . 822 . 677 . 160\r\nFactor 4: Price & promotion features Factor 3: Physical features Factor 3: Physical features 11 Prices are good Value for price Markdowns are attractive Prices of products are mark clearly .655 . 810 . 468 . 360 .359 . 325 . 882 . 739 Customers shopping in TDS tend to digest more attention to whether products sold in the stores display a wide selection, with the newest styles and are full stocked, rather than being concerned about their quality, as the loadings of these three variables are 0. 763, 0. 771 and 0. 702, respectively, while the loading of quality is only 0. 49. Furthermore, Factor 3 shows significant loadings on the variables of attractive, not crowded, clean, neat and bright, at 0. 458, 0. 545, 0. 763, 0. 745 and 0. 672, respectively. Therefore, Factor 3 can be identified as containing the physical features of TDS. Specifically, the variables of clean and neat have much high loadings than the others. This implies that these two factors significantly influence customer perceptions of the physical features of TDS. Factor 4 shows customers’ considerations regarding the price and promotion features of products sold in TDS.\r\nWithin the fourth factor, comparatively higher loadings are found for the variables of price, value for price, markdowns and clearly marked price. These loadings are 0. 655, 0. 810, 0. 468 and 0. 360, respectively. In particular, customers’ who preferred traditional department stores tended to give more consideration to whether they could gain reasonable value from their purchase. Table II also displays the factor analysis results for the different variables of the factory outlet stores (FOS) in the questionnaire. Again, a similar group of four factors is extracted through factor analysis.\r\nAs in the TDS analysis, Factor 1 concerns the in-store customer service features of FOS. The variables regarding customer service have higher loadings than the o ther variables contained in Factor 1. Respondents were concerned as to whether the service offered by the salespeople is helpful or not, as it is given the highest loading, at 0. 717. The variables of quality, wide selection, newest styles and full stocked, regarding the products sold in FOS are included in Factor 2. Their high loadings indicate that Factor 2 is link up to measuring the brand images of the products 12 sold in the retail stores.\r\nThe customers who shop in FOS tend to give more consideration as to whether the products sold in these stores are comparatively new styles and have satisfactory stock levels, as shown in the related high loadings of these two variables (0. 779 and 0. 740, respectively). These customers do not pay much attention to the quality of the products sold in FOS, however, as this variable’s loading is only 0. 471. moreover, Factor 3’s variables of attractive, not crowded, cleanliness, neat and bright have loadings of 0. 556, 0. 697, 0. 822, 0. 677 and 0. 160, respectively. Thus, Factor 3 can be identified as concerning the physical features of FOS.\r\nto a greater extent specifically, customers tend to be concerned about the cleanliness of FOS, but few of them indicate that store brightness is important. Lastly, Factor 4 concerns the price and promotion features of the products sold in FOS. Higher loadings are given to the price, reasonable price for value, markdowns and clearly marked price variables included in the fourth factor, at 0. 359, 0. 325, 0. 882 and 0. 739, respectively. Customers of factory outlet stores tend to be more concerned as to whether the markdowns of the products sold in the stores are attractive, and whether the prices of the products are clearly marked.\r\nCustomer Store Preference across Demographics To know if there is a trend to shop at factory outlet stores, we asked respondents which store they normally prefer to shop. To supremacy for any possible response bias, we selected resp ondents equally at both types of retail outlets. As shown in Table III, the number of respondents who prefer TDS as their shopping place is 113, compared to 92 respondents choosing FOS as their preferred shopping place. This implies that a sizable number of customers prefer and/or are shopping at factory outlet stores.\r\nTable III: Frequency analysis of store choice Frequency Traditional department stores Factory outlet stores 113 92 Percentage 55. 1 44. 9 13 broad(a) 205 100. 0 Chi-square is next used in order to examine whether there are any significant effects from the different demographic characteristics on customer decision-making in regards to shopping choices. As shown in Table IV, significant differences exist in customers’ store choice as regards to their different genders, levels of pedagogy and plebeian yearly income, as the relative P-value for these variables are 0. 001, 0. 000 and 0. 003, respectively.\r\nNevertheless, there are no significant differences b etween customers’ shopping preferences in regard to age, as the P-value is 0. 690. Table IV: Store choices and demographic characteristics Department Chi-squa re values 11. 343 Traditional Demographics Gender Female Male Total 47 66 113 19 28 36 18 8 4 113 13 24 56 20 113 60 32 92 13 25 25 20 8 1 92 21 38 23 10 92 107 98 205 32 53 61 38 16 5 205 34 62 79 30 205 20. 223 . 000 3. 065 . 690 . 001 P-values Factory Total Outlet Stores Stores Age Under 25yr 25-34yr 35-44yr 45-54yr 55-64yr Over 64yr Total Formatted: Swedish (Sweden) Education\r\nHigh School Grad. share Diploma/Certificate Bachelor Degree get the hang Degree Total Individual yearly tax) gross income (before Less than NZ$20,000 NZ$20,001â€$40,000 NZ$40,001â€$60,000 Over NZ$60,000 Total 18 46 33 16 113 26 47 16 3 92 44 93 49 19 205 14. 256 . 003 14 More specifically, female person respondents tend to prefer shopping in factory outlet stores, while nearly two-thirds of the male respondents prefer to shop in trad itional department stores. Furthermore, customers with higher levels of precept are more likely to choose traditional department stores as their shopping preference.\r\nAs shown in Table IV, the number of customers who possess degrees and prefer shopping at traditional department stores is much higher than the number of those customers who are willing to go to factory outlet stores. In addition, customers who earn a higher yearly income; particularly those whose gross yearly income is between NZ$40,001 and NZ$60,000, or over NZ $60,000; tend to choose traditional department stores over factory outlet stores. These statistics are summarised in Table IV above. Therefore, H1 is supported on gender, education and income, but not on the demographic of age.\r\nCustomer Perceptions of Brand Images of Products Sold in Traditional Department Stores and Factory Outlet Stores Table V below provides a comparison of the brand images and T-test results of products sold in traditional department s tores and factory outlet stores. According to these results, H2; which holds that the brand images of products sold in TDS are higher than those of products sold in FOS; is supported (see Table V). In other words, the overall mean rating of TDS branded products is significantly higher than that of FOS branded products, at 16. 02 and 9. 1, respectively. Specifically; according to the analysis of the individual items of product features; the respondents gave higher ratings for products sold in TDS (regarding their wide selection, newer styles and satisfactory stock levels), than for the products sold in FOS. There is a significant difference between the mean ratings of the branded products sold in TDS and FOS. Thus, the results from the data analysis show that there is a significant difference in the brand images of the products sold in traditional department stores and factory outlet stores.\r\nCustomers tend to have higher, and more positive, images of branded products sold in tradi tional department stores than they do for branded products sold in factory outlet stores. 15 16 Table V: Comparison of brand images of products sold in stores Factory Outlet Brand Images of Products Sold Traditional Stores in the stores Department Stores mean value SD look on SD P-values Quality is good Selection of products is wide Styles of products are newest Stock level 3. 88 4. 05 4. 02 4. 07 16. 02 .70 . 81 . 93 . 88 2. 69 3. 11 2. 53 2. 16 1. 91 9. 71 .77 . 89 . 87 . 94 2. 73 .000 . 000 . 00 . 000 . 000 boilers suit Customer Perceptions of Store Images of Traditional Department Stores and Factory Outlet Stores Table VI below provides a comparison of the store images and T-Test results of both types of retail stores. As shown, the respondents’ overall mean ratings, as well as their item-wise mean ratings of TDS physical features are significantly higher than for FOS, at 19. 87 and 16. 13, respectively. Therefore, H3 is accepted. That is, the physical features of tradi tional department stores are perceived as being better than those of the factory outlet stores.\r\nThere is a significant difference between the mean ratings of the physical features of TDS and FOS. Thus, the respondents indicated that the physical characteristics of traditional department stores are more attractive than those of factory outlet stores. Further to this finding, the respondents’ overall mean ratings, as well as their item-wise mean ratings of TDS in-store customer service features are significantly higher than those for FOS, at 22. 18 and 20. 48, respectively. Therefore, H4 is accepted.\r\nThat is, in-store customer service features of traditional department stores are perceived as being better than those of factory outlet stores in impertinent Zealand Furthermore, H5; which holds that the price and promotion features of products sold in traditional department stores are perceived as being significantly higher than those of factory outlet stores; is accepted, as indicated in Table V. The applicable overall mean ratings of TDS and FOS are 12. 70 and 16. 11, respectively. Also, the individual scale 17 items of price and promotion features are much higher for the factory outlet stores.\r\nThis finding indicates that respondents consider the prices of products sold in FOS to be comparative lower than those sold in TDS and that the promotions offered by FOS are more attractive and satisfactory. Table VI: Comparison of the features of traditional department stores (TDS) and factory outlet stores (FOS) Features Traditional Factory Outlet P-values Department Stores Stores SD entertain SD Physical Features: soaked Store is attractive . 000 . 94 3. 32 . 84 3. 63 Store is not crowded . 000 . 85 3. 25 . 81 3. 70 Store is clean . 000 . 83 3. 44 . 75 4. 10 Store is neat . 000 . 86 3. 49 . 73 4. 16 Store is bright . 00 . 70 2. 62 . 73 4. 28 Overall In-store Customer Service Features: Salespeople are friendly Salespeople are helpful Salespeople are fa miliar with merchandise Exchanges happily Less pressure from salespeople Enough salespeople 19. 87 Mean 3. 86 3. 76 3. 77 3. 39 3. 48 3. 91 22. 18 Mean 2. 88 2. 82 3. 38 3. 63 12. 70 2. 96 SD . 67 . 73 . 86 . 84 . 81 . 85 3. 45 SD . 83 . 88 . 91 . 88 2. 71 16. 13 Mean 3. 59 3. 52 3. 42 3. 07 3. 36 3. 51 20. 48 Mean 3. 99 3. 66 4. 22 4. 24 16. 11 3. 10 SD . 82 . 82 . 88 . 87 . 87 . 96 3. 95 SD . 65 . 76 . 79 . 84 2. 26 .000 . 000 . 000 . 000 . 000 . 000 . 000 . 000\r\nOverall Price & Promotion Features of Products Sold in the stores: Prices are good Value for price Markdowns are attractive Prices of products are marked clearly .000 . 000 . 000 . 000 . 000 Overall Customer Perceptions of Traditional Department Stores and Factory Outlet Stores across Demographics To canvass Objective 4 (to gauge whether demographic characteristics are related to customer perceptions of traditional department stores and factory outlet stores), the ANOVA and T-tests are used to ready whether ther e are significant relationships between customers’ store ratings and their demographic characteristics.\r\nTable VII 18 displays the customer perceptions of overall store ratings and their relevant four demographic characteristics. As shown in Table VII, only the income level shows significant mean differences in the ratings of TDS. In other words, customers’ concerns regarding the physical features and price and promotion features of TDS are highly influenced by their income level. More specifically, the higher the customer’s income is the more favourable will be the mean ratings for physical features and price and promotion of TDS.\r\nThere is, however, no difference in the customer perceptions of TDS and FOS across gender, age groups and educational levels, as the respective P-values are all much higher than 0. 05. Therefore, H6 is supported only on income, but not on gender and education levels. Table VII: Store ratings and Demographic Characteristics Demogr aphics Traditional Department Stores Physical Physical features features In-store customer service features In-store customer service features Mean SD Mean SD\r\nMean SD Mean SD Price & promotion features Price & promotion features Product features Product features Factory Outlet Stores Traditional Department Stores Factory Outlet Stores Traditional Department Stores Factory Outlet Stores Traditional Department Stores Factory Outlet Stores Formatted Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Gender: Female Male P-value 3. 93 4. 02 . 682 . 54 . 64 3. 32 3. 12 . 059 . 60 . 63 3. 66 3. 74 . 307 . 58 . 57 3. 43 3. 40 . 832 . 64 . 68 3. 14 3. 22 . 636 . 70 . 65 4. 02 4. 03 . 635 . 58 . 56 3. 97 4. 04 . 734 . 65 . 69 2. 48 2. 7 . 476 . 74 . 61 Age: Under 25yr 25-34yr 35-44yr 45-54yr 55-64yr Over 64yr 3. 88 3. 95 4. 05 3. 94 3. 86 4. 48 . 270 . 55 . 60 . 57 . 59 . 66 . 74 3. 23 3. 22 3. 20 3. 38 3. 14 2. 76 . 330 . 69 . 62 . 64 . 44 . 69 . 82 3. 82 3. 63 3. 71 3. 59 3. 85 3. 73 . 450 . 56 . 57 . 60 . 52 . 57 . 89 3. 47 3. 39 3. 38 3. 59 3. 28 2. 73 . 097 . 59 . 66 . 64 . 57 . 76 . 66 3. 24 2. 99 3. 31 3. 13 3. 27 3. 10 . 206 . 69 . 70 . 58 . 65 . 77 . 68 4. 09 3. 88 4. 05 4. 14 4. 09 3. 80 . 225 . 48 . 57 . 60 . 46 . 56 . 56 4. 13 3. 90 4. 09 3. 99 3. 86 3. 90 . 532 . 58 . 8 . 63 . 72 . 75 . 67 2. 54 2. 32 2. 44 2. 50 2. 44 2. 10 . 572 . 80 . 64 . 65 . 74 . 56 . 65 Formatted: Swedish (Sweden) P-value 19 Education: High School Grad. Diploma/Certificate Bachelor Degree get the hang Degree 3. 96 3. 85 4. 02 4. 11 . 201 . 62 . 53 . 60 . 65 3. 38 3. 34 3. 11 3. 14 . 058 . 68 . 52 . 68 . 53 3. 59 3. 70 3. 76 3. 63 . 480 . 55 . 50 . 60 . 67 3. 51 3. 55 3. 26 3. 42 . 590 . 74 . 56 . 65 . 71 2. 94 3. 15 3. 31 3. 15 . 066 . 72 . 65 . 65 . 72 3. 99 4. 09 3. 97 4. 08 . 552 . 60 . 50 . 63 . 45 3. 83 3. 99 4. 10 4. 00 . 281 . 85 . 59 . 6 . 85 2. 57 2. 41 2. 30 2. 63 . 075 . 72 . 52 . 70 . 82 P-value Yearly gross income: Less than NZ$20,000 NZ$20,001â€$40,000 NZ$40,001â€$60,0 00 Over NZ$60,000 3. 90 3. 87 4. 11 4. 27 .64 . 54 . 58 . 62 3. 22 3. 28 3. 19 3. 06 . 524 .66 . 63 . 59 . 55 3. 67 3. 66 3. 78 3. 74 . 674 .56 . 59 . 56 . 58 3. 44 3. 48 3. 29 3. 34 . 413 .68 . 67 . 63 . 65 2. 88 3. 20 3. 30 3. 43 .71 . 67 . 59 . 68 4. 02 4. 05 4. 01 3. 99 . 960 .57 . 57 . 53 . 66 3. 85 3. 97 4. 12 4. 28 . 060 .76 . 65 . 62 . 58 2. 61 2. 38 2. 31 2. 55 . one hundred thirty .75 . 61 . 63 . 93 P-value .010 .005\r\nCONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS The findings on customer store preference across demographics show that customers with different genders, levels of education and gross yearly incomes tend to put forward different store choices, however, they perceive traditional department stores and factory outlet stores similarly regardless of their age. More specifically, male customers regard traditional department stores offering notable branded products as their first choice, however, female customers are willing to shop at factory outlet stores in order to seek brand ed products with comparatively lower prices.\r\nFemale customers tend to be more price oriented and price sensitive. Furthermore, the higher the level of education customers have the more likely they are to choose traditional department stores as their shopping preference. This finding indicates that more highly better customers tend to have greater concerns in regards to the shopping environment and atmosphere offered by traditional department stores. In addition, customers earning higher yearly incomes are more willing to choose traditional department stores over factory outlet stores.\r\nIn regards to customer perceptions of brand images of products sold in traditional department stores and factory outlet stores, there is a significant difference in the brand images of products sold across these stores. The brand images of products sold in traditional department stores are perceived more positively than are those of products 20 sold in factory outlet stores. Customers perceive t raditional department stores as offering wider and more satisfactory selections of various types of merchandise in comparison to factory outlet stores.\r\nThe stock levels in traditional department stores are also seen as being superior. Obviously, the wider selection and greater breadth of different branded products offered in the stores, the greater the number of customers who will be more attracted to TDS. In regard to customer perceptions of store images of traditional department stores and factory outlet stores, there is a significant difference between traditional department stores and factory outlet stores.\r\nFirstly, respondents feel that the physical features of traditional department stores are more satisfactory, flourishing and attractive than those of the factory outlet stores. Customers believe that they will enjoy shopping at traditional department stores, as they provide them with a more comfortable in-store shopping environment and atmosphere. Secondly, there are s ignificant differences in the in-store customer service features of traditional department stores and factory outlet stores. Customers believe that traditional department stores provide a higher quality of in-store customer services.\r\nTDS are also seen as having better exchange policies and an adequate number of salespeople offering to meet customers’ different wants and needs. Therefore, traditional department stores do have distinctive advantages in terms of their in-store customer services, in comparison to those offered by factory outlet stores. Thirdly, traditional department stores have much higher prices when compared with factory outlet stores. This is due to their different marketing orientation and segmentation.\r\nCustomers tend to be attracted by the prices and value of products sold in factory outlet stores. Schneiderman (1998) found in his research that customers believed that factory outlet stores could provide greater value for their money than did tradition al department stores. Results on the testing of customer perceptions of traditional department stores and factory outlet stores across demographics indicate that only income levels have any significant effects on customers’ mean ratings of traditional department stores, but that 21 o significant differences exist across the variables of gender, age and education. This means that customer perceptions of physical features and price and promotion features of traditional department stores are highly influenced by their different income levels. Customers with higher incomes tend to be attracted to physical features and price and promotion features of traditional department stores. They are interested in shopping in a comfortable environment and seeking famous and fashionable branded products, rather than being price sensitive, bargain seeking customers.\r\nThe implications of these research findings include the point that traditional department stores should maintain their compet itive positions by continuing to offer good physical facilities and environments, satisfactory in-store customer services and famous branded products, in order to maintain and attract more customers. This will also help to maintain their market share and gain competitive advantage against the intense competition created by factory outlet stores. Customers perceive that the prices offered in traditional department stores are much higher than those of factory outlet stores.\r\nTherefore, department stores are facing a big challenge from factory outlet stores in terms of price and promotion strategies. As a result, they need to appraise their value positions and adapt more reasonable prices to provide satisfactory value for customers. Clearly identifying and dividing their current and voltage drop customers into different marker segments is necessary for retailers in condition differing price strategies. During sales seasons, more attractive promotion of branded products could be undertaken in traditional department stores.\r\nCertainly, customers tend to purchase more when there are large sales and attractive promotions of branded products in traditional department stores. In order to target appropriate segments, traditional department stores need to identify what relevant level of branded products should be sold and assign these products reasonable prices in stores across different ages, genders, and levels of education and income. Traditional department retail stores also need to provide more selection characteristics (in terms of their branded products adapting to the newest styles frequently and maintain good stocks level), in order to 22 eep their competitive advantages through being perceived as offering more positive brand images of the products sold in their stores. Furthermore, strategic alliances between different traditional department stores and their distributors could also be developed. In such an alliance, competitive advantages (such as bett er offerings of quality in-store services and providing similar branded products with reasonable prices and promotions) could be shared by traditional department stores, , which should reduce costs for the alliance partners.\r\nRegarding implications for factory outlet stores, they need to learn from the comparative disadvantages of traditional department stores and engage in enhancing their current competitive positions on price and promotion offerings, in order to cleanse customer perceptions of their stores. Maintaining their comparatively lower prices and providing frequent promotions of branded products is one of the most useful price and promotion strategies for factory outlet stores in maintaining and enhancing their competitive positions in this area.\r\nMeanwhile, manufacturers which utilise factory outlet stores need to control the values of the products through assessments. As a result, customers who are not only price sensitive, but are also value seeking will be satisf ied with the prices and promotion features of the products sold in the factory outlet stores. It is extremely important for manufacturers to immediately improve their products’ brand images. Widening the selection of characteristics, improving stock levels and offering positive branded products in the stores are ways which this could be achieved.\r\nNowadays, factory outlet stores are no longer established for the sale of seconds or comparatively lower quality products with lower prices. Therefore, they need to build more positive brand images for the products sold in the stores instead of being perceived as discount stores. They need to invest more in the stores’ physical facilities to offer a better shopping environment and atmosphere. As a result, however, prices may increase significantly due to the costs of such upgrading, meaning that such a strategy might be risky (Parker et al. , 2002). Therefore, factory outlet stores need to evaluate their choices carefully i n 23 rder to balance any price increases and distribution channel developments. REFERENCES Ailawadi, K. L. and Keller, K. L (2004). grounds retail branding: conceptual insights and research priorities. journal of Retailing, Vol. 80 (4), pp. 331-342. Ailawadi, K. L. , Borin, N. and Farris, P. (1995). Market power and performance: A cross-industry analysis of manufacturers and retailers. ledger of Retailing, Vol. 71 (3), pp. 211â€248. Baker, J. , Parsuraman, A. , Grewal, D. and Glenn, B. (2002). The influence of two-fold store environment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions.\r\n diary of merchandising, Vol 66 (4), pp. great hundredâ€141. Bell, D. and Lattin, J. M. (1998). Shopping behavior and consumer response to retail price format: Why large basket shoppers prefer EDLP. marketing Science, Vol 17 (1), pp. 66-88. Brookman, F. (2004). Retailers Get flip nigh Displays. WWD: Women’s Wear periodic, Vol. 188 (44), p. 8. Coward, A. (2003). Cowa n & Associates suggests department stores should support a customer-created shopping experience. Display & Design Ideas, Vol. 15 (6), p. 27. Dickson, P. R. and Sawyer, A. G. (1990). The price knowledge and search of supermarket shoppers. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 4 (3), pp. 42-53. Dreze, X. , Hoch, S. J. and Purk, M. E. (1994). ledge management and space elasticity. Journal of Retailing, Vol. 70 (4), pp. 301-326. Facenda, V. , L. (2005). newly Fashion for the Season. Retail Merchandiser, Vol. 45 (8), p. 10. Fernie, J. and Fernie, S. (1997). The development of a US retail format in Europe: The case of factory outlet centres. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 25 (11), pp. 342-350. Golub, K. L. and Winston, M. (1983). Outlet Malls. estimate Journal. Vol. 51 (3), p. 452. Hallanan, B. (1994) In Store Brands, Quality http://www. gsb. stanford. du/research/faculty/news_releases/rajiv. lal/lal. htm Sells: Hellofs, L. L. and Jacobson, R. (1999) . Market Share and Customers’ Perceptions of Quality: When rotter Firms Grow Their Way to Higher Versus Lower Quality? Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63 (1), pp. 16-25. Hicks, T. (2000). People Power: Smart Staffing Will Help Build A Brand. SGB: libertine Goods Business, Vol. 33 (9), p. 14. Inman, J. J. , Venkatesh, S. and Roselline, F. (2004). The roles of channel-category associations and geodemographics in channel patronage. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68 (2), pp. 51-71. 24 Jacoby, J. and Mazursky, D. (1984).\r\nLinking brand and retailer imagesâ€Do the potential risks outweigh the potential benefits? Journal of Retailing, Vol. 60 (2), pp. 105-122. Johnson, J. L. (1994). Reinventing the Department Store. Discount Merchandiser, Vol. 34 (5), pp. 54-55. Joshi, S. (2003). Who’s buying at factory outlets? Financial Daily from THE HINDU group of publications. Retrieved on May 12, 2005 from the WWW: http://www. blonnet. com/catalyst/2003/06/05/stories/2003060500070200. htm . Keller, K. L. (2003). strategical brand management: Building, measuring, and managing brand equity (2nd ed. ). pep pill Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.\r\nKulpa, J. (1998). Service levels are key for Medic customer loyalty. Drug Store brand-news, Vol. 20 (7), p. 204. Li, J. (2003). Sincere plotting turnaround in cut-throat times. Hong Kong iMail (China). Lindquist, J. D. (1974). Meaning of image. Journal of Retailing, Vol 50 (4), pp. 29-38. Lombart, C. (2004). Factory Outlet Centres in Belgium. European Retail Digest, Vol. 41 (Spring), pp. 1-3. Martineau, P. (1958). The Personality of a Retail Store. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 36 (1), pp. 47-55. Messinger, P. R. and Narasimhan, C. (1997). A model of retail formats based on consumers’ economizing on shopping time.\r\nMarketing Science, Vol. 16 (1), pp. 1-23. Meyers, C. R. (1995). Attracting factory outlet stores can composition success for a community. Economic Development Review, Vol. 13 (2), pp. 51-55. Nasri, J. ( 1999). Traditional Retailers Prepare To Confront E-Commerce Challenge. Weekly collective Growth Report, Vol. 10 (172), pp. 10505-10507. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed. ). New York: McGraw Hill. Parker, R. S. , Pettijohn, C. , Pettijohn, L. and Kent, J. (2002). An Analysis of Customer Perceptions: Factory Outlet Stores Versus Traditional Department Stores.\r\nThe Marketing Management Journal, Vol. 13 (2), pp. 29-44. Rauch, M. (2005). look Ahead. Incentive, Vol. 179 (2), p, 14. Rudnitsky, H. (1994). Too much of a good thing. Forbes, Vol. 154 (4), pp. 46-47. Schmitt, B. H. (2003). go steady management: A revolutionary approach to connecting with your customers. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Schneiderman, I. P. (1998). Value Keeps Factory Outlets Viable. Boston Daily News Record, Vol. 28 (85), p. 10. Wyner, G. A. (2003). A Guide to Marketing Effectiveness. Marketing Management, Vol. 12 (5), pp. 6-7. Formatted: Italian (Italy) Formatted: Swedish (Sweden) 25\r\ n'