Does Luxury Brand Perception Matter In Purchase Intention? A Comparison Between A Japanese Brand And A German Brand Diana Sari* and Brata Kusuma** The research regarding luxury products in developed economies can be found in many literatures, on the other hand similar research in developing economies are still limited. Since this topic is still underexplored, particularly in developing economies, the purpose of this study is to investigate Indonesian consumers’ perception of two different luxury brands that comes from different countries, namely BMW (Germany) and Lexus (Japan). Data was collected from diverse Indonesian BMW and Lexus owners. The consumers’ general brand perception and perceived values of luxury car are examined in this study. Data analysis used structural equation modeling (SEM). Results indicated that Indonesian consumers considered Japanese luxury car’s (Lexus) conspicuous value higher than German luxury car (BMW). Nevertheless, BMW was considered to have higher value in all of the rest of the aspects studied such as quality value, social value, and hedonic value. Even though so, the result of the study inds that Lexus owners have a higher purchase intention than BMW owners. The research concludes that luxury brand perception is highly affecting consumers’ purchase intention in this luxury automotive industry. Keywords: Luxury Product, Demographic Factors, Country of Origin, Luxury Brand Perception, and Purchase Intention. Penelitian mengenai produk mewah (luxury products) di negara maju dapat ditemukan di banyak literatur, namun penelitian serupa di negara berkembang masih terbatas. Karena topik ini masih relatif kurang dieksplorasi di negara berkembang, maka tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui persepsi konsumen Indonesia mengenai dua merek luxury brands yang berasal dari berbagai negara, yaitu BMW (Jerman) dan Lexus (Jepang). Data dikumpulkan dari berbagai pemilik BMW dan Lexus di Indonesia , kemudian penelitian ini meneliti persepsi umum konsumen mengenai merek dan nilai-nilai yang dirasakan (perceived value) dari merek mobil mewah. Analisis data penelitian dengan menggunakan Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) mengungkapkan bahwa bahwa konsumen Indonesia menganggap mobil mewah Jepang (Lexus) memiliki conspicuous value yang lebih tinggi dari mobil mewah asal Jerman (BMW). Namun demikian, BMW dianggap memiliki nilai yang lebih tinggi dalam semua aspek lainnya yang diteliti dalam penelitian ini seperti nilai kualitas (quality value), nilai sosial (social value), dan nilai hedonis (hedonic value). Meskipun demikian, hasil studi tersebut menemukan bahwa pemilik Lexus memiliki niat beli lebih tinggi dari pemilik BMW. Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa persepsi merek mewah sangat mempengaruhi niat beli konsumen dalam industri otomotif mewah. Kata Kunci: Barang Mewah, Faktor Demograi, Negara Asal, Luxury Brand Perception, dan Purchase Intention Introduction Southeast Asia is one of the key regions that any brands in the world should not ignore. Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia are niche markets 50 ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 * Faculty of Economics and Business Universitas Padjadjaran, corresponding author, Email: ** Faculty of Economics and Business Universitas Padjadjaran with rising standard of living. Certainly, Indonesia is part of this phenomenon since the country emerged as World’s Economic Tiger and included in HSBC’s list of top 50 Economies in 2050. With a population of 237 million in 2010 which is expected to reach over 250 million by 2020, private consumption, the backbone of the economy, remained resilient, as it grew 4.9% from a year earlier (http://www.cpp-luxury. com). The euphoria and sparks of emerging economy somehow take parts in the social stratiication that is gradually vanishing in the present days. Regardless so, people still tend to distinguish the classes in society by trying to be the leader in society, as they always pursue by showing off their extravagant life with any “weapons” available, which includes luxury brands since luxury is the symbol of good taste and wealth. There is no doubt why everyone wants to have it, because it is special. But on the other hand, Chadha and Husband (2006) said that the democratization of luxury brands made the door of exclusivity open to ordinary people. In result, the luxury is everywhere today (Kapferer & Bastien, 2009). While Fiske and Silverstein (2002) identify some of the driving forces behind today’s more affordable luxury. These include a decline in household size and a concomitant increase in family income, the inluence of lifestyle magazines, increased travel opportunities, and also technological development which basically happening in Indonesia. Some authors assert that it is no longer the case that only the super rich can afford certain luxury products, as the number of aspiring consumers has boomed (Dewey, 2009). Luxury brands are a modern set of symbols that Asians wear to redeine their identity and social position (Chada & Husband, 2006). Indonesia is no exception, it became a hot spot for this market. Despite the global economic crisis, the luxury market is not severely affected, still, people feel happy with their belongings. Representing nearly half of the world’s population, Asian markets are not only dynamic but also powerful (Phau & Chan, 2003). Due to the strong purchasing power of Indonesian consumers, this country seemed like a gold mine for luxury brands. Indonesia’s shift to the top spot in the global survey of Consumer Conidence and Spending Intentions topping the United States of America, India and China was a further sign that the country, with its big domestic economy and an expanding middle class, is weathering the global slowdown better than the emerging markets (Nielsen, 2012). Currently BMW is the best selling European luxury car brand in Indonesia, booked a 41% increase in 2012 sales through the irst eight months of the year, compared with same period last year. While Toyota, the major mass-market cars in Indonesia, with its luxury brand, Lexus is following closely behind the competitor.The aforementioned data suggest that Lexus and BMW, two well known cars that came from different places of origin, one from Japan and the other from Germany was leading and accepted differently in different markets. In a global context, it is critically important for luxury researchers and marketers to understand why consumers buy luxury, what they believe, think, conceive, feel luxury is and how their perception of luxury value impacts their buying behavior that in the end motivates consumers to select one brand rather than another, it is strongly related to consumers’ purchase intention. That’s why in this study the authors will research the concept of “luxury” in the perception of luxury car brands and whether it’s country of origin, and the consumers background have their impact, contributes to consumers perception about a brand with a closer look at Lexus and BMW in Indonesia as the best sellers and well-known luxury brands in its industry. This study will not be concentrated on targeting the so-called ‘high-class’ market but as well as the growing middle-class that could potentially be consumers of the luxury products in the upcoming future. Literature Review The Concept of Luxury The term luxury is routinely used in everyday life to refer to products. The luxury world is ambiguous. The deinition of luxury may vary for different people as the perception of luxury is also inluenced by many factors including demographics, lifestyle, habit, social ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 51 environment, and of course, the surveyors of luxuries, and the marketers. That means drastic inluences are relected in the perception of luxury (Dubois & Laurent 1994; Tidwell & Dubois, 1996). According to Kapferer and Bastien (2009), the concept of luxury is very old as the age of humanity. Kapferer (2009) used etymology to clarify the concept. Luxury comes from “lux” that means light in Latin. Luxury glitters. Like light, luxury is enlightening. Luxury deines beauty. There are two things relating to luxury: the monetary capacity to pay the price of quality and a propensity to appreciate the object’s artistic, creative and sensuous dimensions, something beyond mere practicality. Luxury items provide extra pleasure and latter at the senses. According to Kapferer and Bastien (2009), the luxury goods are not perfect, but an affecting goods. It is the price, not the product that is sold to the customer. Chevalier and Mazzalovo (2008) stated that luxury can be categorized by several different sectors of activities such as: (a). Luxury fashion, (b). champagne and spirits, (c). Luxury automotive, (d). Luxury tourism, (e). Luxury hobbies Luxury Value Perception Vigneron and Johnson (2004) deines luxury as something beyond any functional utility where the simple use or display of a particular luxury product brings esteem to the consumer due to its signal value. Concerning the motives for consuming luxury brands, it has to be stated that the notion of buying to impress others, still more or less serves as a strategic principle for the marketing management of luxury brands (Dittmar 1994; Corneo & Jeanne 1997; Vigneron & Johnson 1999, 2004; O‘Cass & Frost 2002). According to theory of impression management, consumers are highly affected by internal drive to create a favorable social image from the outcome of their purchase behavior (Mandrik 1996; Sallot 2002). While the consumption of prestige or status products involves purchasing a higher-priced product to embellish one‘s ego (Eastman, Fredenberger, Campbell, & Calvert (1997), the term luxury and the consumption of luxury goods involves purchasing a product that represents value to both, to the individual 52 ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 and their reference group. Thus, to explain consumers‘ behavior in relation to luxury brands, apart from interpersonal aspects like snobbery and conspicuousness, personal aspects such as hedonist and perfectionist motives (Dubois & Laurent 1994) as well as situational conditions (e.g., economic, societal, and political factors) have to be taken into consideration (Vigneron& Johnson 1999, 2004). For the purposes of this research, the author follows the luxury brand deinition from Vigneron and Johnson (2004), who deined luxury brand as something beyond any functional utility where the simple use or display of particular luxury product brings esteem to the consumer. Following the work of Eastman, Goldsmith, Flynn (1999), Phau and Prendergast (2000), as well as Dubois, Laurent, and Czellar (2001) on the evaluation of luxury brands, Vigneron and Johnson (2004) developed a framework of brand luxury index proposing that the luxuryseeking consumer‘s decision-making process can be explained by ive main dimensions that form a semantic network. Including personal perceptions (perceived extended self, perceived hedonism), as well as the more usual non-personal perceptions (perceived conspicuousness, perceived uniqueness, perceived quality), Vigneron and Johnson (2004) also reviewed the dimensional structure and the interrelations among the primary meanings of the luxury concept that underlie the decision making process that occurs when assessing luxury brands as follows: • Conspicuous Value – The consumption of luxury brands that serves as a signal and symbol of status also wealth. • Uniqueness Value – The consumption of luxury brands that symbolize exclusivity and rareness of a limited product that enhances consumers’ desire. • Social Value – The consumption of luxury brands that based on the role-playing aspects that affects the decision to buy. • Hedonic Value – The consumption of luxury brands that look at the product’s subjective intangible beneits that fulill emotional value and provide intrinsic enjoyment. • Quality Value – The consumption of luxury brands that is partly derived from technical superiority. Luxury Vehicle Luxury vehicle is a marketing term for a vehicle that provides luxury — pleasant or desirable features beyond strict necessity — at increased expense. In contemporary usage, the term may be applied to any vehicle type — including sedan, coupe, hatchback, station wagon, and convertible body styles, as well as to minivans, crossovers, or sport utility vehicles and to any size vehicle, from small to large — in any price range (Anurit, Newman, Chansarkar, 1998). In this research we can sum up that luxury cars are those vehicles, which provide luxury with pleasant or advantageous features beyond strict necessity at an increased expense. The authors also generalizes the deinition of luxury vehicle, luxury car, and luxury automobile as one into one deinition that already stated above. Demographic Factors Dubois and Laurent (1994) and Tidwell and Dubois (1996) stated that the perception of luxury is inluenced by demographics, lifestyle, social environments as well as by endorsers of luxuries and marketers. Demographics describe a population in terms of its size, distribution and structure. Demographics inluence consumption behaviors both directly and by affecting other attributes of individuals, such as their personal values and decision styles (Hawkins and Mothersbaugh, 2010) Tangible attributes may be the result of actual demographics differences among consumers, such as physiological distinctions stemming from gender and ethnicity. Intangible attributes may be based in cultural, social, economic and psychological distinctions (Prensky and Wells 1996). Demographics also usually reveal ongoing trends, such as shift in age, sex, and income distributions that signal business opportunities (Schiffman and Kanuk, 2006). Only with a clear understanding of major consumer characteristics marketers can appreciate the implication of the environmental and individual determinants of consumer behavior (Loudon and Bitta 1993). For the purposes of this paper, the author follows the deinition from Schiffman and Kanuk (2000) who explained that demography re- fers to “the vital and measurable statistics of a population”, Using this deinition, demographics dan be divided into several segments that include gender, age and household income that will be used as Demographic variables in this research. The Country of Origin (COO) The country of origin (COO) of a product is an important marketing element known to inluence consumer perceptions as well as behavior. COO of a product is an extrinsic cue similar to brand name, COO is known to inluence consumers’ perceptions and to lead consumers to cognitive elaboration (Pappu et al., 2006). COO is known to guide to associations in the minds of consumers (Aaker, 1991; Keller, 1993). In the process of buying, consumers are not only concerned about the quality and price of a product but also other factors such as the brand’s COO. Some writers have more or less the same understanding of the deinition of COO, such as Badri, Davis and Davis (1995) who deine COO as “made in”. Many believed that the COO effect has also become an indicator of quality and it would affect consumers when they evaluate products (Lin & Sternquist, 1994), particularly when the product is dificult to assess using other objective measures (Huber & McCann, 1982). Ahmed, Johnson, Yeng, Fatt , Teng and Boon (2004) deined COO as a “country of manufacture or assembly that is identiied by labels such as “made in”, or “manufactured in.” In other words, it was the country, which appeared on the ”made-in” label. Czinkota and Ronkainen (2001:628) mentioned that the country-of-origin is understood in the consumer perception as the location where a product is produced. Regardless the diversity of the deinition, whether it’s the production location or the brand origin itself, it is proposed that the effect of COO will decrease as consumer have more information about the product. This is caused by the formation of consumer rationality of the quality of a product. As of today, many consumers still utilize COO stereotypes to appraise products for example, “Japanese electronics are reliable”, “German cars are excellent”, “ItalASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 53 ian pizza are superb”. Many consumers believe that a “Made in . . .” label means a product is “superior” or “inferior” depending on their perception of the country (Yasin et al., 2007). Wall, Liefeld, and Heslop (1991) noted that, for luxury items, the COO tended to have a stronger effect than price in product quality assessment. Bilkey and Nes (1982) showed that consumers’ attitude toward foreign products or foreign brands could be inluenced by consumers’ image or knowledge about that country. Lin (1994) mentioned that the products from more developed countries usually gain more positive evaluations than products from less developed countries, the more developed countries are not only given credit for the excellence of the design and quality of their products, but also because they project an image of a privileged lifestyle on the products which attracts consumers. So indeed, a country image becomes a bias that really could inluence the purchase decision. According to Roth and Romeo (1992), the image of a country arises from a series of dimensions that positively qualify a nation in terms of its production proile. According to Schweiger, Otter and Strebinger (1997) COO includes four factors used as research variables, namely: • Affective evaluation of the COO of the product – which is the feelings and views of the COO of the product. • Cognitive evaluation of the state of origin – which is a reasonable estimate of the quality of the COO of the product. • Image “Made in” Country of Origin – where is the origin of competence in producing products. • Evaluations of individual products COO – the evaluation of high-tech products in the country. Purchase Intention The most vital aspect of consumer behavior is their purchase intention, which is deined in literature as the situation in which a customer is willing to make a transaction with the retailer. Purchase intentions data can help managers in marketing decisions related to product demand (new and existing products), market segmentation and promotional strategies (Tsiotsou, 54 ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 2006). Purchase intention can measure the possibility of a consumer to buy a product, and the higher the purchase intention is; the higher a consumer’s willingness is to buy a product (Dodds, Monroe, Grewal, 1991; Schiffman & Kanuk, 2000). Purchase intention is the probability that customers in a certain purchasing situation choose a certain brand of a product category (Crosno, Freling, Skinner, 2009). The interest of marketing scholars on purchase intentions stem from its relation to purchase behavior. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) contend, “The best single predictor of an individual’s behavior will be a measure of his intention to perform that behavior”. Purchase intentions describe and determine the consumer response to purchase the offering. The higher the intention leads to elevated purchase of that offering. Consumers purchase intention can be determined through their responses, feedback and their involvement. Highly involved consumers shows high rate of purchase ( Schiffman & Kanuk, 2000). Purchase intention referred to the subjective judgment by the consumers that is relected after the general evaluation to buy a products or services (Dodds et. al., 1991;Blackwell, Miniard, & Engel: 2005). Based on the literature mentioned previously, purchase intention covers several essential meanings: (1) consumers’ willingness to consider buying; (2) buying intention in the future; (3) decision of repurchase. To sum it up, purchase intention is composed of consumer’s feelings, thoughts, experience and external factors that they considered before making any purchase. Purchase intention of the consumers depicts and expresses their behavior and the way they making decisions about their buying process (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). According to Busler (2002), purchase intention could be measured by three dimensions: • Likely refers to the consumers’ plan in purchasing a product. • Probable refers to the probability in purchasing a product. • Deinitely refers to the certainty in purchasing. The Impact of Demographic Factors to Luxury Brand Perception Demographic characteristics have its own variables such as age, gender, family size, income, occupation, religion, race and nationality. Demographic segmentation is one of the most commonly used forms of segmentation as it is clearly identiiable. The variables used for Demographic segmentation help divide a large population into speciic customer groups. Each and every individual has an age, gender, income etc. In luxury industry, this becomes one of the best ways to diversify individuals. This also helps in analyzing lots of data in shorter time for market research that could be vital for promotions strategy. Perception of luxury is sure to be inluenced by demographics characteristic of the market. No business can be all things to all people. Instead, the company must reach speciic customers and satisfy their particular needs while also identify those customers and understand as precisely as possible what they want. Their needs and wants is also most of the time different simply because each and every group usually have a mindset or perspective toward something that develops as they mature, and in the end this creates an attitude. Dubois and Laurent (1993) investigated the relationship between demographic characteristics and luxury brand perception, awareness and purchase in ive European countries. They found that income, education and occupation were most consistently associated with luxury brand perception, awareness and purchase across the ive countries. Age, gender, marital status, and location of residence (urban, rural etc.) showed no relationship or only a weak relationship with the dependent variables. In this current research, the authors were intrigued whether age and gender would have the same result (i.e. having weak or no relationship with the dependent variables) as found in luxury industry in Europe. To balance the approval of suspicion, income that shows a strong or rather consistent relationship with luxury brand perception in Europe is also added to as one of the sub-variables. Therefore the irst Hypothesis is; H1: Demographic factors affect positively to the Indonesian consumers’ perception of luxury brand. The Impact of COO to Luxury Brand Perception Consumers use both intrinsic and extrinsic informational product cues as the basis for their evaluating products (Ulgado & Lee, 1998). Intrinsic cues involve the physical composition of a product, whereas extrinsic cues are productrelated, however it is not part of the physical product itself. COO is regarded as extrinsic cues and can be manipulated without physically changing the products (Verlegh & Steenkamp, 1999). The importance of image as a signal in consumers’ quality or performance perception has been well recognized by researchers. Realizing that consumers may use one of the extrinsic cues such as COO as a signal to infer beliefs regarding product attributes (e.g. product quality), researchers mainly studied the use of COO as a cognitive cue (Steenkamp, 1990). Hong and Wyer (1989) demonstrated that the effect of COO could not be explained entirely by the quality signaling process. They found that COO also has symbolic and emotional meaning to consumers, and it plays an important role like other attributes such as quality and reliability in shaping consumers’ attitudes toward products. Affective connotation of COO may be formed not only by direct experience in foreign countries or encounters with foreigners, but also through indirect experience with countries through culture, education or some well-known events. For most consumers, COO may also serve as an affective image attribute, which associates a product with status, authenticity and exoticness (Verlegh & Steenkamp, 1999). When making buying decisions, consumers may link COO to personal memories, to national identities and to feelings of “pride” associated with the possession of products from certain countries (Hirschman, 1985). In this research, the authors assume that COO plays an important part that affect consumers’ attitude, by linking the image of the country and a product produced by that country with luxury brand perception. Based on the previous empirical research the second hypothesis is; H2: COO positively affects Indonesian consumers’ perception of luxury brand. ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 55 The Impact of Luxury Brand Perception to Purchase Intention Luxury brands can have a great deal of inluence over how their brand is viewed. However, to successfully maintain that carefully manicured identity, it requires effort on the part of the brand owner. Luxury companies want to ensure that their brand is perceived to be indicative of status, inesse, and taste. This task is dificult to achieve alone, but by working with an experienced branding agency a irm can push its luxury products into the hands of tastemakers and style icons. Luxury brand perception that is constructed by variables such as conspicuousness value, uniqueness value, social value, hedonic value and quality value have to be carefully maintained and periodically observed to prevent losses due to change of trend. By knowing the dominant factors that construct certain market’s perspective towards luxury product, a company could create effective and eficient efforts in order to gain purchase intention and fulill their customers’ needs and wants based on those characteristics. However, study by Hung, Chen ,Peng, Hackley, Chou, Hackley, & Tiwsakul (2011) found that perception of luxury product have weaker support for the purchase intention. The key is that brands often have clearly deined images, or personalities. That is the higher they value the luxury brand itself, the higher is their interest that could lead to higher intention and consideration to purchase the luxury product. Considering this matter, the author suspect that luxury brand perception has a rather high impact to the consumers’ purchase intention. Therefore the third hypothesis is: H3: The Indonesian consumers’ brand perception of luxury automobile positively affect consumers’ purchase intention. Research Framework In the twenty irst century, luxury consumption has become so popular (Kapferer and Bastien, 2009) and the period of globalization offers many sources of luxury. This is driven by the development of industries, economy, 56 ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 new trades, increase in spending, as well as communication. As a result, people all over the world are familiar with brands; Lexus and BMW are both strong players that often compete to rule at the top position in the rank of luxury cars sales. People all around the world, particularly in Indonesia are also familiar with the country facts as well as the characteristic of products that came from certain country, such as Japan and Germany. This study aims to collect the attitude of Indonesian people so in the end we could compare the perspective towards these two luxury automotive brands. There is a set of luxury brand perspective by Vigneron and Johnson (2004) that consist of Conspicuous Value, Uniqueness Value, Social Value, Hedonic Value and Quality Value that are suspected to be affected by two antecedents, which is Demographic (age, gender, household income), and also COO (affective, cognitive, ,made in and general evaluation). Source of Data and Data Collection Technique In this study, sample size measurement is taken in order to get the desired number of respondents. Then in turn, a sampling method was applied to get the number of respondents required for this study. According to Kline (2005) SEM is a large sample technique (usually N > 200) and the sample size required is somewhat dependent on model complexity, the estimation method used, and the distributional characteristics of observed variables. Thus, the sample size used in this research consist of 100 Lexus owners and 100 BMW owners, both group make up the total sample of 200 respondents. To get the required sample, this study applied purposive sampling method. This sampling method which requires respondent to meet a given set of criteria (i.e. Respondents must be Lexus or BMW owners) to gain basic information accurately and eficiently. Malhotra (2010:379) deines purposive sampling as a form of convenience sampling in which the population elements are purposely selected based on the judgments of the researcher. The measurement method used in this study was Likert scale. For positive statements, the Source: Modiied from various sources Figure 1. Research Framework scale value used is 5-4-3-2-1, and for negative statements rating scale used is 1-2-3-4-5, this measurement was performed on an ordinal scale closed questions. Data Collection Technique A total of 25 questions measured on a 5-point Likert scale were used in this research. The questionnaire designed for this study was originally drafted in English, then it was translated into Indonesian (respondents’ native language) to ease respondents in understanding the questions provided in the questionnaire. and 72 (36%) were females. Most of respondents’ age ranged from 18-50 years old, only 15.5% were over 48 years old. Respondent with age range of 18 - 27 years old and 28 -37 were dominating respondent pool, with percentage of 31% and 28% respectively. In terms of family monthly income, it could be said that the most participants not come from poor family. Most of their family had total income per month ranging from ive million rupiahs to over twenty million rupiahs. As a matter of fact, the range of monthly income over twenty million rupiahs were dominating the result (32.5% of total respondents). Table 1 present demographic classiication of the respondents. Validity and Realibility Test Results and Discussion Validity construction was measured using SPSS 16 statistical software by calculating coeficient of correlation. The higher the coeficient of correlation (value closer to 1.00), the more the items are regarded consistent and valid. On the other hand, items which have correlation score below standard can be deleted. If the items fulilled the aforementioned criteria, it can be said that both variables are reliable. It also means that the same indicators as used in this research can be used again in future research (Maholtra, 2010). Participants from all over Indonesia illed out the questionnaires that was distributed online via www.kwiksurvey.com producing 200 usable data for the two different luxury car brands, (100 respondents for each brand). From 200 total respondents, 128 (64%) were males The analysis aim to understand the inluence of the independent variables (demographic factors and COO), and intervening variable (luxury brand perception = LBP) toward dependent variable (consumers’ purchase intention = CPI) and also to ind out the strength of the sub-variables that construct one variable. In order to determine the correlation and to observe the correctness of the research model, LISREL 8.70 was used. The model it was assessed with the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), the Goodness of Fit Index (GFI; Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson &L. : 2006), the Normed Fit Index (NFI), and the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA). ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 57 Table 1. Demographic Classiication of the Respondents Demographic variable Gender Male Female TOTAL Age 18-27 28-37 38-47 >48 Monthly income IDR 5M-10M IDR 10M-15M IDR 15M-20M >IDR20M TOTAL Frequency of BMW Respondents Frequency of Lexus Respondents 62 38 100 66 34 100 38 20 23 19 24 36 28 12 37 27 15 21 100 22 16 18 44 100 Table 2. Goodnes of Fit Indices for Model Analysis Indices in SEM analysis RMR SRMR GFI NFI NNFI IFI CFI RMSEA BMW 0.050 0.050 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.075 Lexus 0.061 0.061 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.94 0.94 0.077 Data itting Good it Good it Good it Good it Good it Good it Good it Good it Source: Primary data (2013); Kline, (2005) Table 3 Hypotheses testing and Structural Models Lexus Demographic → Perception COO → Perception Perception → Purchase Intention Standardized Estimate 0.303 0.103 0.891 T Value 2.748 0.507 4.753 Prob. 0.003* 0.306 0.000* BMW Demographic → Perception COO → Perception Perception → Purchase Intention Standardized Estimate 0.061 0.043 0.780 T Value 0.108 0.437 4.265 Prob. 0.543 0.668 0.000* *Signiicant at p<0.05 The chi-square statistic of the Lexus group was 182.22 with 86 degrees of freedom, while for BMW data the chi-square statistic was 183.26 with 86 degree of freedom. These data indicate a good it with the model (a ratio of less than 3). As shown in Table 2, all the indices– RMR, SRMR, GFI, NFI, NNFI, IFI, CFI and RMSEA– were at acceptable levels. Overall, the results indicated that the model provided a valid framework for the measurement of the antecedents of luxury brand perception and their relationship with purchase intention. Table 3 shows that all indices were in a good it with do much difference in model it between Lexus and BMW, therefore the result can be used to perform hypothesis testing. 58 ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 Figure 2 and Figure 3 present the structural model for each group (BMW and Lexus). Based on igure 2 and 3, it can be seen that Demographic factors (DF) have medium impact to Luxury Brand Perception (LBP) with Standardized Factor Loading (SLF) of 0.33 for Lexus (p=0.003), therefore H1a is supported. Nevertheless, the same case was not evident in BMW group. In the BMW group, path from DF to LBP have low SLF (0.07), thus impact of DF to LBP was very weak, hence H1b was not supported. This result support empirical study carried out by Dubois and Laurent (1993) that investigated the relationship between DF characteristics and LBP. They found that demographic factors such as age and gender did not have signiicant in- Figure 2. Structural Model (Lexus) Figure 3. Structural Model (BMW) luence in shaping people’s perception towards luxury brand, yet income had a better impact on it. Overall, demographic factors had small contributions for people in constructing the LBP. The authors suspect that psychographic factors might be able to exert impact on luxury brand perception rather than the demographic factors. Another possibility is that there are other factors beyond the variables studied that contributed more in constructing the overall value of luxury brand perception such as the pricing, product, promotion strategy or so on. COO for Lexus did not have strong inluence to LBP (SLF = 0.11, p-value >0.05), in- stead it only displayed a very weak and not statistically signiicant inluence. Similarly BMW’s COO also have very weak inluence toward LBP (SLF = 0.05). Therefore, both H2a and H2b were not supported. The current study have different result with study carried out by Verlegh and Steenkamp (1999) and Hirschman (1985), which found that when making buying decisions, consumers may link COO and feelings of “pride” associated with the possession of products from certain countries. Based on data analysis, LBP perceived by Lexus owners lead to positive impact on purchase intention (PI) (SLF coeficient 0.89, ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 59 p=0.000). Thus, this research proves that Lexus LBP had positive inluence to PI as it is considered high in the degree of impact. Like wise, similar result was found in BMW group (SLF coeficient 0.79). The result indicate that BMW owners also showed positivity to the PI. Therefore, H3a and H3b were supported. Conclusion This research has been tailored to determine the impacts of antecedent variables such as Demographic factors and Country of Origin as well as to observe the most dominant variable that affect Luxury Brand Perception, which in turn inluence consumers’ Purchase Intention of BMW and Lexus in Indonesia. The results of this research have theoretical and empirical implications in the area of international marketing. There are several conclusions that can be drawn from this study: • Luxury Brand Perception have a statistically signiicant and positive impact on customer Purchase Intention for Lexus and BMW owners. Nevertheless, Demographic Factors and Country of Origin have a small impact on Luxury Brand Perception. • BMW owners associate with the COO of their car more than the Lexus owners, they are much aware with the fact that the COO of their luxury car is trustworthy and widely known by a lot of people so they take more pride in embracing the COO rather than Lexus owners. This means that BMW owners would consider COO more when making purchase decision because they could perceive more these values such as displaying social, wealthy status and so on. • BMW owners featured a hedonic value upfront rather than Lexus owners. BMW owners are very much driven by what the luxury car offers in terms of the intangible beneits such as self-satisfaction, high self-esteem rather than the functionality like what’s the most Lexus owners consider more. The rank for BMW owners is Hedonic value, Conspicuousness value, Social value, Quality value and Uniqueness value. While for Lexus own- 60 ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 ers, the rank is as follows: Quality value, Hedonic value, Uniqueness value, Conspicuousness value, and Social value. Both are perceived differently. • BMW owners have a better evaluation on COO rather than Lexus, yet both are located in the moderate interval. On LBP, BMW’s mean score is better than Lexus and on PI the mean score for BMW also higher than Lexus. Suggestions and Limitations This study suggest that results might be useful for particular purposes/users in the future that is related to luxury cars, speciically BMW and Lexus. The suggestions are explained as follows: • This study used the minimum number of samples required to perform analysis using SEM, therefore the next research should try to have more respondents/data samples to make the research more accurate. • The next research should try to look for the relationship/observe another antecedents of luxury brand perception, among other things, psychographic factors, marketing strategies, marketing distribution channel, etc. In addition, next research need to see whether they have bigger impacts on luxury brand perception because that would be interesting to collect more detailed data from another variables to allow a better understanding of the subject. • This research utilized online questionnaires surveys service, which is less reliable than the ofline questionnaires because the researchers could not directly observe respondents’ reaction or the process they took in illing out the questionnaires, therefore the next research should do the ofline survey to see if there is any differences made. • This research utilized data that is mostly came from Java island, therefore samples can not be generalized to all Indonesian people, therefore it is suggested for the next research, researcher could add geographic factors or so to the research to minimize the typical answers. References Aaker, D.A. (1991). Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name. New York: The Free Press. Ahmed, Z.U., Johnson, J.P., Yeng, X., Fatt, C.H., Teng, H.S. and Boon, L.C. (2004). Does Country of Origin Matter for Low-Involvement Products?. International Marketing Review, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 102-20. Anurit, J., Newman, K., & Chansarkar, B. (1998), Consumer Behaviour Of Luxury Automobiles: A Comparative Study Between Thai And UK Customers’ Perceptions. Retrieved 2013, Middlesex University Business School. Badri, M. A., Davis, Donald and Davis, Donna (1995). A study of measuring the critical factors of quality management. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 12(2). Bilkey, W.J., &Nes, E. (1982), Country of origin effects on product evaluations. Journal of International Business Studies, 13(1): 89-99. Blackwell, Roger D., Miniard, Paul W., & Engel, James F. (2005). Consumer Behavior (10th Ed.). Thomson Learning Busler, Michael (2002) Product Differentiation, Celebrity Endorsement and The Consumer ‘s Perception about Quality, unpublished doctoral thesis Chada, R., & Husband, P. (2006). The Cult of the Luxury Brand : Inside Asia’s Love Affair with Luxury. Londra : Nicholes Brealey. Chevalier, Michel., and Mazzalovo, Gérald. (2008). Luxury Brand Management: A World of Privilege . John Wiley & Sons. Corneo, Giacomo and Jeanne, Olivier. (1997). Conspicuous Consumption, Snobbism and Conformism. Journal of Public Economics, 66 (October). Crosno, J., Freling, T. H., & Skinner, S. J. (2009), Does Brand Social Power Mean Market Might? Exploring the Inluence of Brand Social Power on Brand Evaluation. Journal of Psychology & Marketing,V. 26, N. 2, pp 91-121. Czinkota, M. R. and Ronkainen, I. A. (2001). International Marketing. Fort Worth/Philadelphia: Harcourt College Publishers. Dewey D. (2009). The impact of the current economic crisis . Available at http://beta.luxurysociety. com/articles/2009/06/the-impact-of-the-currenteconomic-crisis, Dittmar, Helga. (1994). Material Possessions as Stereotypes: Material Images of Different SocioEconomic Groups. Journal of Economic Psychology, 15 (December). Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effect of Price, Brand and Store Information on Buyers’ Product Evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research. Dubois, Bernard., & Gilles, Laurent. (1994). Attitudes Towards the Concept of Luxury: An Exploratory Analysis, in Siew Leng Leong and Joe Cole (Eds), Asia-Paciic, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 1, Provo, UT, Association for Consumer Research. Eastman, J., B. Fredenberger, D. Campbell, and S. Calvert. (1997), The relationship between status consumption and materialism: cross-cultural comparison of Chinese, Mexican, and American students.‖ Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 5 (1): 52-65. Eastman, J. K., Goldsmith, R. E., & Flynn, L. R. (1999). Status Consumption in Consumer Behavior: Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading. MA: Addidon-Wesley. Fiske, N., and Silverstein, M. (2002). Trading Up: The New Luxury and Why We Need It. Boston Consulting Group. Hawkins D.I., Mothersbaugh D.L.(2010).Consumer behavior: building marketing strategy. (11th ed.) McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & L., T. R. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis (6 ed.). New Jersey: Pearson International Edition. ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 61 Häubl, Gerald. (1996), A cross-national investigation of the effects of country of origin and brand name on the evaluation of a new car. International Marketing Review, Vol. 13 No. 5,: 76-97 Higgins, Tim. (2012).Lexus August Sales Rise 34%, Push Past Mercedes, BMW.http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-04/lexus-august-sales-rise-34-push-past-mercedes-bmw.html, accessed April 2013 Hirschman, Elizabeth C. (1985). Primitive Aspects of Consumption in Modern American Society,. Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (September). Hong, Sung-tai and Robert S. Wyer. (1989). Effects of Country-of-Origin and Product-Attribute Information on Product Evaluation: An Information Processing Perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (September). Hooper, D., Mullen, M. R., Coughlan, J., (2008). Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods Volume 6 Issue 1 2008:5360. Huber, Joel and McCann, John. (1982). The Impact Of Inferential Beliefs on Product Evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research,19 (August). Hung, K., Chen , A. H., Peng , N., Hackley, C., Chou, C., Hackley, C., & Tiwsakul, A. R. (2011). Antecedents of luxury brand purchase intention. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 20(6), 456-467 Kapferer, J.N., and V., Bastien. (2009). The Luxury Strategy: Break the Rules of Marketing to Build Luxury Brand. London : Kogan Page. Keller, K.L. (1993). Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Consumer Based Brand Equity, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, January. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principle and Practice of Structural Equation Modelling (2nd Ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. Lin, L. & Sternquist, B. (1994). Taiwanese Consumers’ Perceptions of Product Information Cues. European Journal of Marketing. Loudon, D. L., and A. J. D. Bitta. (1993). Consumer Behavior. Concept and Applications (4th Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Maholtra, N. K. 2010. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation 6th Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Mandrik, Carter C. (1996). Consumer Heuristics: The Tradeoff between processing Effort and Value in Brand Choice, in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 23. O’Cass, A. and Frost, H. (2002). Status Brands : Examining the Effects of Non-Product-Related Brand Associations on Status and Conspicuous Consumption. Journal of Product and Brand Management,11. Pappu, R., P.G. Quester and R.W. Cooksey. (2006). Consumer-Based Brand Equity and Country-of Origin Relationships Some Empirical Evidence. Eur.J. Market., 40(5/6): 696-717 Petcu, Oliver. (2012). Huge Potential of Indonesia’s luxury market. http://www.thetoptier.net/index. php/home/luxury-business-news-and-updates/460-the-huge-potential-of-indonesias-luxury-market, accessed April 2013. Phau, I., & Chan, K. W. (2003). Targeting East Asia Markets: A Comparative Study on National Identity. Journal of Targeting, Management and Analysis for Marketing 12 (2). Phau, I. and Prendergast, G. (2000). Consuming luxury brands: The relevance of the rarity principle, Journal of Brand Management, 8. Prensky D & Wells W. D. (1996). Consumer Behaviour. By John Wiley & Sons Inc Rahman., Haque., Khan. (2012). A Conceptual Study on Consumers’ Purchase Intention of Broadband Services: Service Quality and Experience Economy Perspective, International Journal of Business and Management; Vol. 7, No. 18. Roth, M. S. and Romeo, S.B. (1992). Matching Product Category and Country Image Perceptions: A Framework for Managing Country-of-Origin Effects, Journal of International Business Studies, 23(3), 477-497. 62 ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 Sallot, L., (2002). What the Public Thinks about Public Relations: an Impression Management Experiment, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol. 79, No. 1. Schiffman L., & Kanuk, L. (2006). Consumer Behavior (9th Ed.). NJ: Prentice Hall. Schweiger, G., Otter, T., Strebinger, A. (1997). The Inluence of Country of Origin and Brand on Product Evaluation and the Implications thereof for Location Decisions, CEMS Business Review, vol.2, pp. 5-26 Shiffman., Kanuk. (2009). Consumer Behavior (Tenth Edition). . New York:Pearson International. Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. (1990). Conceptual Model of The Quality Perception Process. Journal of Business Research 21, 309–333. Tidwell, P. and Dubois, B. (1996). A cross-cultural comparison of attitudes toward the luxury concept in Australia and France. Asia Paciic Advances in Consumer Research, 2. Tsiotsou, R. (2006). The Role of Perceived Product Quality and Overall Satisfaction on Purchase Intention. International journal of consumer studies. Ulgado, Francis M. and Moonkyu Lee. (1998). “The Korean versus American Marketplace: Consumer Reactions to Foreign Products,” Psychology and Marketing, 15, 6 (September), pp. 595-614. Verlegh, Peeter W.J. and Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. (1999). A Review and Meta-Analysis of Country-ofOrigin Research. Journal of Economic Psychology, forthcoming. Vigneron, Franck., and Johnson, Lester, W. (1999). A Review and a Conceptual Framework of Prestige-Seeking Consumer Behaviour. Academy of Marketing Science Review 1999 (1). Vigneron, Franck., and Johnson, Lester, W. (2004). Measuring Perception of Brand Luxury. Journal of Brand Managemenr 11 (6). Wall, M., Liefeld, J. and Heslop, L. (1991). Impact of Country-of-Origin Cues on Consumer Judgments in Multi-cue Situations: a Covariance Analysis. Journal of Academy of Markeeting Science, Vol. 19 Yasin., Noor., Mohamad. (2007). Does image of country-of-origin matter to brand equity? Journal of Product & Brand Management 16/1 (2007): 38–48. ASEAN MARKETING JOURNAL June 2014 - Vol.VI - No. 1 63