Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Product quality, attributes, and brand name as determinants of price: The case of consumer electronics

  • Published:
Marketing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper proposes and illustrates an approach to measuring one aspect of brand equity, viewed as a price premium and defined as the increment that a brand name contributes to the price of a product above and beyond that justified by its quality (where quality is determined by an assessment of the relevant attributes, features, or characteristics). Two illustrative studies apply the proposed measure to consumer-electronics products found in home-theater or audio-video entertainment centers. Study 1 uses data presented byConsumer Reports to regress market price on overall quality and on dummy variables coded to represent brand names. Here, the results for home-theater products suggest a conspicuous absence of incremental brand-name effects. Study 2 generalizes this result by analyzing data for various electronic products offered by theCrutchfield Catalog. Across six product categories, when controlling for differences in an attributes-based index of product quality, a significant brand-related price premium appears to occur only for Carver. This finding again casts doubt on the importance of brand equity in the market for consumer electronics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aaker, David A. (1990). “Brand Extensions: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly,”Sloan Management Review 31 (Summer), 47–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aaker, David A. (1991).Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aaker, David A., and Kevin Lane Keller. (1990). “Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions,”Journal of Marketing 54 (January), 27–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archibald, Robert B., Clyde A. Haulman, and Carlisle E. Moody, Jr. (1983). “Quality, Price, Advertising, and Published Quality Ratings,”Journal of Consumer Research 9 (March), 347–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • BBDO Worldwide. (1988). “FOCUS: A World of Brand Parity,” New York: BBDO Worldwide, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzzell, Robert D., and Bradley T. Gale. (1987).The PIMS Principles. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Consumer Reports. (1991). “Guide to the Gear: Home Theater,”Consumer Reports 56 (March), 155–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crutchfield. (1991).Crutchfield Catalog (Winter/Spring). Charlottesville, VA 22906.

  • Curry, David J., and David J. Faulds. (1986). “Indexing Product Quality: Issues, Theory, and Results,”Journal of Consumer Research 13 (June), 134–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farquhar, Peter H. (1989). “Managing Brand Equity,”Marketing Research 1 (September), 24–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farquhar, Peter H., Paul M. Herr, and Russell H. Fazio. (1990). “A Relational Model for Category Extensions of Brands.” InAdvances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, M. E. Goldberg, G. Gorn, and R. W. Pollay (eds.), Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 856–860.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farquhar, Peter H., and Yuri Ijiri. (1991). “Momentum Accounting for Brand Equity.” In Maltz (ed. 1991), 12–13.

  • Hjorth-Anderson, Chr. (1984). “The Concept of Quality and the Efficiency of Markets for Consumer Products,”Journal of Consumer Research 11 (September), 708–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hjorth-Anderson, Chr. (1986). “More on Multidimensional Quality: A Reply,”Journal of Consumer Research 13 (June), 149–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamakura, Wagner A., Brian T. Ratchford, and Jagdish Agrawal. (1988). “Measuring Market Efficiency and Welfare Loss,”Journal of Consumer Research 15 (December) 289–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamakura, Wagner A., and Gary J. Russell. (1991). “Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Brand Quality With Scanner Data: Implications For Brand Equity,” Working Paper, Owen School, Vanderbilt University.

  • Kerlinger, Fred N. (1986).Foundations of Behavioral Research, Third Edition. Forth Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, Kelvin. (1971).Consumer Demand: A New Approach. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landler, Mark. (1991). “What's In a Name? Less and Less,”Business Week (July 8), 66–67.

  • Leuthesser, Lance. (ed. 1988).Defining, Measuring & Managing Brand Equity, Report No. 88-104. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLachlan, Douglas L., and Michael G. Mulhern. (1991). “Measuring Brand Equity With Conjoint Analysis,” paper presented at the Sawtooth Software Conference, January 28–30, Sun Valley, Idaho.

  • Maltz, Eliot. (ed. 1991).Managing Brand Equity, Report No. 91-110. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, Martin. (1991).Whatever Happened to Madison Avenue?. New York: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratchford, Brian T. (1975). “The New Economic Theory of Consumer Behavior: An Interpretive Essay,”Journal of Consumer Research 2 (September), 65–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratchford, Brian T. (1980). “The Value of Information for Selected Appliances,”Journal of Marketing Research 17 (February), 14–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, Sherwin. (1974). “Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition,”Journal of Political Economy 82 (January/February), 34–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, Andrea. (1991). “Media Colossus: Sony Is Out To Be the World's One-Stop Shop for Entertainment,”Business Week (March 25), 64–74.

  • Schlossberg, Howard. (1990a). “Brand Value Can Be Worth More Than Physical Assets: Key Factor Is How Much Income Is Derived From the Name,”Marketing News 24 (March 5), 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlossberg, Howard. (1990b). “Slashing Through Market Clutter: Brand Equity Seen As a Major New Force for the 1990s,”Marketing News 24 (March 5), 1, 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shocker, Allan. (1991). “Closing Comments: Where Do We Go From Here?”. In Maltz (ed. 1991), 41–42.

  • Smith, J. Walker. (1991). “Thinking About Brand Equity and the Analysis of Customer Transactions.” In Maltz (ed. 1991), 17–18.

  • Sproles, George B. (1986). “The Concept of Quality and the Efficiency of Markets: Issues and Comments,”Journal of Consumer Research 13 (June), 146–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tauber, Edward M. (1991). “Brand Extension: Principles and Strategies.” In Maltz (ed. 1991), 19–20.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Columbia University, USA

    Morris B. Holbrook

Authors
  1. Morris B. Holbrook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The author gratefully acknowledge the support of the Columbia Business School's Faculty Research Fund.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Holbrook, M.B. Product quality, attributes, and brand name as determinants of price: The case of consumer electronics. Marketing Letters 3, 71–83 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994082

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994082

Key words

Search

Navigation