counterfeiting in brazil_motivation and beliefs_versao enefa 2011

7/29/2019 Counterfeiting in brazil_motivation and beliefs_versao ENEFA 2011

1/21

1

Hardcore fans of soccer and their motivation and beliefs for buying counterfeit sports products: Empirical

evidence from Brazil

Fs de futebol e suas motivaes e crenas para a compra de produtos esportivos falsificados: evidncias

empricas do Brasil

PhD Andres Rodriguez Veloso

Marketing Professor

University of So Paulo

Av. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, 908, E204, Cidade Universitria, So Paulo, SP, Brazil.

[email protected]

Gabriel Lacreta Saraiva

Mackenzie Presbiterian University

Al. Graja 292 apto 11, Alphaville, Barueri, SP, Brazil.

[email protected]

PhD Marcos Cortez Campomar

Marketing Professor

University of So Paulo


[email protected]

Marcelo Barbieri Campomar

MSc Candidate

University of Sao Paulo


Marcelo.campomar@citi,com

Trabajo emprico investigacin


2/21


3/21

3

Objetivo

Falsificao uma parte importante do comrcio mundial desde os anos 80. Convencer os

clientes a no comprar falsificaes uma estratgia para superar este problema. Desta forma, o objetivo

deste trabalho compreender as motivaes e crenas dos fs de futebol para a compra de artigos

esportivos, originais e falsificaes.

Metodologia

A partir da literatura e de entrevistas em profundidade com os fs de futebol foi criado um

questionrio focado no consumo de produtos esportivos que foi aplicado com os fs de futebol durante a

venda de ingressos para as finais Campeonato Paulista de 2009. Dos 200 questionrios coletados, 192

provaram ser teis para a realizao de uma anlise fatorial.

Resultados

A anlise fatorial explicou 69,73% da varincia e gerou quatro fatores: Apreciadores de

falsificaes (razes para a compra de falsificaes) - 39,27%; Pr-Produtos Oficiais (razes para no

comprar falsificaes e compra de produtos oficiais) - 12,87%; Foco individual (foco em como

falsificaes e produtos oficiais podem impactar-lo) - 10,05%, e foco no time (foco em ajudar a equipe

atravs da compra do produto) - 7,53%. Anlise dos resultados gerou uma srie de proposio que podem

ser usado para desenvolver estratgias que podem convencer clientes de que eles no devem comprar

falsificaes.

Originalidade / valor do manuscrito

Este estudo lana luz sobre por que os fs de esportes compram falsificaes. Ele tambm traz

informaes sobre quais so as principais razes para no comprar falsificaes. Estes resultados podem

gerar estratgias de marketing eficazes para as empresas envolvidas com produtos esportivos.

Palavras-chave: marketing esportivo, artigos esportivos, anlise fatorial, fs de futebol.


4/21

4

Introduction

Counterfeiting has been a major part of worldwide trade (Prendergast, Chuen, & Phau, 2002).

The counterfeit trade is reported to have risen from 3-4% of the world trade in the 80s to 5-7% in the

90s (Vaag & Harris, 2000). This prompted major business countries to join up and write the ACTA -

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement just at the end of 2010. These countries are worried that

counterfeiting undermines legitimate trade and sustainable development of the world economy, causes

significant financial losses for right holders and for legitimate businesses, and, in some cases, provides a

source of revenue for organized crime and otherwise poses risks to the public (ACTA, 2010, p.1). Lowe

(2006) posits that counterfeit trade is also involved in financing terrorists, summing up the list of

problems related to counterfeiting.

Brazil will be hosting two of the most important sports events in the following years the 2014

World Cup and the 2016 Olympics. As Brazil moves away from its third world status and tries to

overcome economic limitations to rise up to the status of a developed county, studies have to be

developed on issues regarding counterfeiting and intellectual propriety. This becomes even more

important in the light of the enormous impact these sports event will have in Brazil.

Motives for buying counterfeit products are culturally dependent (Chaudry & Stamp, 2008;

Cheung & Prendergast, 2006), and therefore it is necessary to conduct culturally specific studies to

understand and coupe with the motivations of buyers of counterfeit products. Not only buyers, but also

producers of counterfeits have varying reasons to participate in the market according to their country of

origin and therefore culture (Chaudry & Stamp, 2008). Counterfeits only sell because there are consumer

segments prone to buy this kind of product. The objective of this research is to understand the

motivations and beliefs of soccer fans for buying sporting goods, both originals and counterfeits.

The original contribution of this paper relies on the study of hardcore fans of soccer in Brazil,

which is probably the country where people are more involved with it. The use of real people in

marketing research is sometimes scant, but this is not the case here. Besides that, the understanding of the

motivations and beliefs of hardcore soccer fans for buying sporting goods in a country that will be hosting


5/21

5

the events that generate the highest level of sales of related material also brings interesting marketing

outcomes. Finally, studies that focus on developing countries, such as those that comprise the BRICS

(Brazil, Russia, India and China) are welcome to shed some light on the generalisability of marketing

theories across different cultures.

Literature review

This section of the paper will discuss the main topics that are connected to the research objective

previously proposed.

Counterfeiting

Counterfeiting has been a major preoccupation for business enterprises and marketing

professional since the 80s (Globerman, 1988; Bloch, Bush & Campbell, 1993). This is especially true for

developing countries (Globerman, 1988). In 1988, Globerman stated that a major problem in the

counterfeit study field was the definition of piracy. The issue was still at discussion on 2000, when it was

reported that this growth has been happening in several ways, mainly scale, scope and complexity (Vaag

& Harris, 2000). The European Commission reported that in 2008 almost 178 million fakes were seized

in Europe, representing a 125% increase over 2007 (Mulholland & Terry, 2009). Losses in jobs, sales and

taxes are evaluated to have reached over S200 billion (Phau & Teah, 2009).

The identification of counterfeit products, the verification of its origin, the prosecution of sellers

and buyers is very difficult (Vaag & Harris, 2000). Despite all legal efforts, it is difficult to solve

the problems of piracy because consumers are willing to purchase fakes (Prendergarst, Chuen, & Phau,

2002). Due to this, the economic system will naturally create an incentive for emerging producers.

Counterfeit goods are divided in two categories according to consumers capacity to identify if the

product he is buying is a counterfeit (Juggessur & Cohen, 2009, p. 390): (1) deceptive counterfeiting

occurs when consumers assume that they are purchasing a genuine branded product, which then turns out

to be a fake; (2) non-deceptive counterfeiting occurs when consumers recognize that the branded


6/21

6

product is not authentic. Consumers can become aware that they are buying counterfeits by close

inspection (Grossman & Shapiro, 1988a; 1988b) or buy some signal. Stumpf, Chaudhry & Perretta (2011)

introduce 5 cues that help consumers identify counterfeits: price, purchase point, packing, labeling and

quality. They rely on Chaudhry et al. (2009a, b) and introduce a 6 cuebrand name.

The growth of counterfeiting can be attributed to a variety of factors, such as technology

developments, new emerging markets (such as Brazil, China, India and Russia) and the easiness to

manufacture low-cost imitations of luxury products (Phau & Teah, 2009). The focus of the counterfeiting

industry on luxury products is understandable because profits involved with this kind of product are

higher. It is worth noting that the focus of producers is generally on products that can generated higher

profits, therefore there is no surprise when counterfeit producers start offering different products, such as

those listed as examples by Chaudhry et al. (2010): foodstuffs, pharmaceuticals, auto and airlines parts.

The risks consumers face are getting higher with this kind of product categories counterfeits (Chaudhry et

al., 2009; 2010). Tabel 1 summarizes the many risks that counterfeits pose to those actors involved, and

also the positive effects of counterfeiting.

INSERT TABLE 1 HERE

As table 1 shows, there are several problems associated with counterfeits, but depending on the

actor analyzed there are also some positive aspects. If it was not so, there would be no counterfeit trade.

Counterfeiting and consumers

The study of the counterfeit buyer perspective was inaugurated by Bloch, Bush & Campbell

(1993), who found evidence that one third of the population would consider buying counterfeit products.

Their research also point to a consumer that is worried with the appearance and price of the counterfeit.

Tom et al (1998) found out that consumers motivated to buy counterfeit products were in search to


7/21

7

demonstrate their shrewdness or had economic concerns and therefore would accept this kind of product.

These two studies opened this field of research to the side of the consumer.

The buying and consumption of counterfeits is sometimes done with awareness, because

consumers report that price and buying location can signal that these are counterfeits (Prendergarst,

Chuen, & Phau, 2002). As Delener (2000) points out, counterfeit present several threats to business

enterprises and for consumers health. Even if the consumer is aware that he is buying a counterfeit, he

maybe not aware of potential hazards. The unaware consumer is at most risk, because he will use the

product with no restrictions. If consumers are buying counterfeits without knowing, then one useful

strategy would be to create identification signals that are too costly to copy and educate consumer on the

identification of these signals. Another strategy would be the education of buyers on the effects of buying

counterfeits (Prendergarst, Chuen, & Phau, 2002).

Stumpt, Chaundry & Perretta (2011) consider that consumers that are buying counterfeits without

knowing should be studied in order to understand their decision making process when buying products.

This could generate insights on how to educate consumers to better recognize counterfeits and how

companies could create products differences that are more difficult to copy.

Buying counterfeits is category dependent, in other words, some products categories are more

likely to be targeted by counterfeit producers. Tom et al. (1998) reported that 42% of consumers would

prefer a counterfeit t-shirt, while only 17% would prefer counterfeit software. This demonstrates that

there are some categories where consumers will be more willing to buy counterfeits. The willingness to

buy counterfeits is dependent on attitude toward counterfeits, meaning that consumers that have already

bought counterfeits or have friends and family that did so would be more prone to buy counterfeits in the

future (Matos, Ituassu, Rossi, 2007). Koklic (2011) considers that, along with attitude, moral intensity and

perceived risk are related to the intention to buy counterfeits.

Counterfeiting in Brazil


8/21

8

In general, counterfeit buyers are younger and have less income (Tom et al.,1998), therefore it is

natural that in developing countries the opportunities for counterfeit industry growth is higher. During the

eighties, the Brazilian economy faced a very significant stagnation, named the lost years. At that time,

and entering the nineties, the manufacturing capacities of Brazil were minimal, and local product

development was almost zero. Besides that, there were several governmental restrictions for imports.

Therefore, there were masses of consumer, brand aware because of American cultural influence (movies,

music and literature), that wanted to buy imported products. This was restricted to wealthy Brazilians

that could travel and bring products. This scenario duplicates in several developing countries and helps

understand the growth of counterfeits.

At first, counterfeiting organizations focused on producing luxury brands, but now the spectrum

of products and brands is much wider (Staake, Thiesse, & Fleisch, 2009). The Brazilian Justice

Department listed the top seized merchandise in 2008 (% value), which gives a clear view of the focus of

the Brazilian government: vehicles used for counterfeit transportation (8.18%), gambling machines

(6.76%), cigarettes (6.35%), shoes (6.22%), electronics (5.03%), computers and related products (4.57%)

, sunglasses (3.58%), watches (1.93%), toys (1.9%, liquor (0.7%), non recorded media (0.54%), recorded

media (0.50%) and others (47.47%) (CNCP, 2008). The origin of the others isnt explained in the

publication. Most of this merchandise comes from China (20.85%), Brazil (13.24%), USA (4.02%),

Paraguay (1.90%), Italy (1.85%), Afghanistan (1.15%) and other countries including unknown (56.99%).

Among other products seized we will surely find sporting goods, mainly soccer related products,

after all Brazilian are very fond of this sport. According to Ibope (2008) 11% of consumers had bought

sports goods counterfeits, 10% original sporting goods, 2% both, 2% couldnt tell the origin and 75% did

not buy any kind of sporting goods in the last 6 months. Most consumers (75%) buy uniforms, towels

and linen (9%), casual team related clothing (8%), balls (8%), key-chains (8%), hats (7%), shoes (5%),

kid products (2%), wallet (2%), flags (2%), cups and mugs (2%) and others (14%). Demographics show

that the young and poor educated are responsible for buying the majority of the counterfeits, on the other


9/21

9

side, the rich and well educated prefer to buy originals, but on both sides and along the spectrum we can

find both behaviors.

Brazilian consumers feel that product quality is one the main cues on spotting a counterfeit,

followed by price and the main reasons for complicity with counterfeits is the easiness to obtain and

desirable product attributes (Stumpt, Chaundry, & Perretta, 2011). The consumer feels that he can

correctly identify a counterfeit analyzing its quality and comparing prices. Oppositely, American and

Brazilian executives interviewed in the same research effort consider that consumers are not capable of

doing so. This difference in opinion on how the market operates can explain the failure of some anti-

counterfeiting activities.

Method

To accomplish the objective of this research several steps were taken. First of all five in-depth

interview with soccer fans where conducted. These interviews were conducted with the aid of an

interview protocol, consisting on instructions on how to conduct the interview, starting and ending the

interview, what questions to ask and how to record the data collected. The interviews were taped and

interviewers made notes about the insights obtained during the process. The interviewees were selected

on the frequency they go to soccer sports arenas to watch their teams play. The aim of this research was to

come into contact with those sports fans that are more involved with the sport. Each interview was

recorded and transcripted. Data was analyzed using the Content Analysis technique (Bardin, 1977) which

implied in coding and generating categories. The results, paired with the literature presented in this paper

served as base to questionnaire development.

The questionnaire was composed of two blocks of questions. The first block covered

demographic questions, such as age, income, average spending on sporting goods. The second block

focused on products, counterfeits and motivations. This block was measured with 5-ponts likert scales

ranging from totally agree to totally disagree.


10/21

10

Data collection took place during the Sao Paulo State soccer finals that was disputed by four

teams: Corinthians (25.8 million fans), Palmeiras (11.6 million fans), Sao Paulo (16.8 million fans) and

Santos (5.2 million fans). Ticket selling is still made on physical grounds, such as sports arenas, clubs and

gymnasiums. Internet sales are still not a reality in Brazil. Researchers scouted the cues for fans that had

bought sporting goods in the past sixth months. Two hundred completed questionnaires were collected.

Results

For statistical analysis we used a licensed version of the Spss 17 software. The first step was to

code the answers collected with the questionnaires to a database. Each questionnaire received a number,

so we could track down any problem in this process. After preparing the database, we went on to

eliminate any invalid questionnaires. For this we used the Boxplot Analysis to identify outliers. Each

questionnaire that had outliers or missing values was recuperated and physically analyzed to identify and

coding problem. This resulted in 192 usable questionnaires.

We first started the analysis effort by doing descriptive analysis related to demographics of the

sample. The sample consisted of 167 men (87%) and 25 women (13%). As Figure 1 shows, the level of

education of the sample was very high.

INSERT FIGURE 1 HERE

It is important to note that the results presented in Figure 1 represent the Brazilian population.

Only 10% of Brazilian population has finished college. But we can consider that the sample is a fair

representation of middle and upper class that can afford high priced tickets for the soccer finals (almost

U$100 for good seats). Minimal wage is Brazil is set to around U$330.


11/21

11

In Figure 2 we present the data for income. As you can see, there is a format similarity with

education. Almost half the sample is composed by Class A and B, with the second half of the sample

composed by Class C.


The mean age was 24.17 (6.4 standard deviation) and mean expenditures with sporting goods in

the last 6 months was approximately US$340. This sample can be divided in high spenders 77

respondents spending on average almost US$600and low spenders115 spending on average US$170.

Almost 80% of the sample reported going to stadiums for soccer matches more than once a month.


As Figure 3 shows, most respondents play soccer once or twice over the week, probably at nights

and on weekends. This behavior relates to the involvement with the sport and the necessity to buy

sporting goods for weekly practice. Having described the sample of soccer fans, the next step was to

conduct a factor analysis on the questions regarding the consumption of sporting goods.

For the factor analysis we used the extraction method named Principal Components, rotation

Varimax, with eigenvalues over 1 as extraction criteria. This resulted in four factors explaining 59,718 of

the variance. Analysis of the anti-image correlation matrix resulted in the elimination of three variables,

resulting in a three factor solution explaining 62,19% of the variance. When analyzing the scree plot, we

saw that a four factors solution would be more consistent with literature. This resulted in our final

solution, with 69,73 of variance explained. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy

(0,832) and Bartlett's Test of Sphericity (sig. 0000) support the adequacy of the following analysis, as

suggested by Hair et al (2006).


12/21

12

INSERT TABLE 2 HERE

The first factor was named Counterfeit Lovers and is composed by those variables that comprise

the motivations for buying counterfeits and beliefs about these products. Counterfeits are considered to be

cheap, easily available, offer more variety and can be bought near stadiums. A mean score with the

answers for the four variables that comprise Counterfeit Lovers factor was calculated and the answers

divided by those with mean below and equal or above 2.5. Those below 2.5 were considered to disagree

with the qualities that justify buying counterfeits (75.5% of the sample). Those equal or above 2.5 were

considered to agree with the qualities (24.5% of the sample). Of those who do not believe in the reasons

for buying counterfeits, 56.5% are low spenders and 43.4% high spender. For those who agree with the

reasons for buying counterfeits, 70.2% are low spenders and 29.7% are high spenders. In general, those

who are buying low levels of sports products have a more positive view of counterfeits. Class C, which

represents almost 50% of Brazilian population, has 62% of low spenders (60% disagree with reasons for

buying counterfeits) and 38% of high spenders (82% disagree with reasons for buying counterfeits).

Factor 2 was named Pro-Official Products and is composed by variables that are reasons for

preferring official products. The main reasons are durability, advanced technology, manufacturer

guarantee and superior quality. The same procedure undertaken for factor 1 was conducted for factor 2.

Almost all respondents (95,8%) agree with the reasons that justify buying official sports products. While

for factor 1 there are some differences about agreement on reasons for buying counterfeits, for factor 2

there is enormous agreement therefore indicating that hardcore fans are very aware of the qualities of

official products. It appears that only a small portion of respondents believe that are reasons for buying

counterfeits.

Factor 3 was named Individually Focusedbecause the variables involve the effects that products

will have on the individual. These variables deal with how individuals consider that counterfeits can harm


13/21

13

their health or that official products can improve performance. For 46.9% of respondents counterfeits can

be harmful to the health of the individual and for 68.8% official products can improve performance.

Finally, Factor 4 was named Team Focusedbecause the sole variable that comprises this factor

deals with the idea that buying official products are a way of giving financial support for their team.


Figure 4 crosses social class, spending habits and agreement with the reasons that justify buying

counterfeits. The first thing to notice is that the highest number of high spenders is located in C class. The

second thing to notice is that the distribution of those who agree and disagree with reasons to buy

counterfeits are similarly distributed, given support to those that consider that there is a 80/20 rule on how

people respond to counterfeits.

Discussion and final considerations

Counterfeits are a major problem for business companies selling different kind of products. The

sports market is one of the major markets for counterfeits in Brazil. These products are sold at almost any

match between soccer teams, retail stores and through the Internet. To address this problem, companies

have three main strategies: find and prosecute producers and seller, prosecute buyers and convince

costumers that they should not buy counterfeits. From some time now there has been a tendency to focus

on the third suggestion. It is common to see advertisements at cinemas and on dvds that try to convince

costumers on buying official products. This hasnt been done by the sports industry until now. The

sporting industry heavily relies on price and point of purchase as a way to demonstrate that the product is

official, but this strategy doesnt cope with those people that buy non-deceptive counterfeits. As our

research shows, part of the sample plays soccer at least once a week. To these amateur players, quality of

sporting material and prevention of injuries could be a factor in the buying decision. This is an interesting

topic that could be addressed further.


14/21

14

The results of this research can give some insights on how to elaborate persuasive messages that

could impact the buyer of sports products. The factor analysis conducted demonstrated that there are four

factors that help understand what these individuals think. The 2 most important factors, that conjointly

account for almost 52% of explained variance deal with variables that consider reasons for buying

counterfeits and for buying official products.

One of the main reasons for buying counterfeits is price, therefore companies should strive to

launch cheaper product lines that can compete with counterfeit low prices. This strategy would not be in

line with the industry strategy in place that aims to help the consumer to spot originals and counterfeits.

This would imply in a significant change in price policies, but it would seriously undermine one of the

advantages of counterfeits.

Another reason for buying counterfeits is that they are more readily available. A sports fan that

wants to buy a t-shirt or a flag at stadium entrance will have to recur to counterfeits. This is so because in

Brazil there are no official merchandise stores at main soccer stadiums. As soccer stadiums are been

remodeled or constructed for the 2014 World Cup, there is still hope that major sports companies will

team up with sports teams to build attractive and comfortable stores to serve their fans.

Producers of counterfeits have no problem on printing the teams logo on any kind of product and

selling it. Besides that, they have a more flexible and innovative chain of production that can replicate or

craft a new product in a very short span of time. There must be an effort to be more attentive to new

trends. If counterfeiters introduce a product that companies are not yet producing, than they should

immediately verify the selling levels of this new product and launch it as an official one as soon as

possible. In an interesting turn of events, companies could use counterfeits as cheap product testing.

Customers prefer to buy official products when they believe that they have more durability,

therefore companies should craft persuasive messages that compare counterfeits and their official pairs on

durability. There could be an effort to demonstrate that the cheap price will not compensate for the low

level of durability of counterfeits. Another approach to ensure that customers prefer official products


15/21

15

could be based on demonstrating the higher level of technology involved in designing and producing

official products. The guaranties and confidence of producers of official products could be addressed also.

The other 2 factors deal with the focus of customers, on themselves or on the team. Customers

may believe that official products can improve their performance when playing soccer or another sport.

This idea, in conjunction with the idea that counterfeits can be harmful could be exploited. Companies

can develop promotional strategies that build on these themes and propose that customers could do a lot

better buying official products. Finally, factor 4 deal with the idea that buying official products is a form

of aiding their team financially. This idea can also be used to persuade customer on buying products in

order to show their level of support for the team. This factor was composed only by one question, and

needs to be further explored in other research efforts.

References

Bardin, L. (1977). Anlise de Contedo. Lisboa, Portugal: Edies 70

Bloch, P. H., Bush, R. F. & Campbell, L. (1993). Consumer 'accomplices' in product counterfeiting: A

demand-side investigation. The Journal of Consumer Marketing;; 10, 4; 27-36.

Chaudhry, P. & Stumpf, S. (2008). International Perspectives on Counterfeit Trade. Sloan Management

Review, 49, 4, 9-10.

Chaudhry, P. and Stumpf, S.A. (2009a), The CMOs role in curtailing black-market counterfeits: how you

can act as a change agent. Advertising Age, December 21.

Chaudhry, P. and Stumpf, S.A. (2009b). Getting real about fakes. The Wall Street Journal, August 17,

R4, R8.

Chaudhry, P., Zimmerman, A., Peters, J. and Cordell, V. (2009). Evidence of managerial response to the

level of consumer complicity, pirate activity, and host country enforcement of counterfeit goods: an

exploratory study. Multinational Business Review, 17 (4), 21-44.

Cheung, W. & Prendergast, G. (2006). Buyers perceptions of pirated products in China. Marketing

Intelligence & Planning, 24, 5, 446-462.


16/21

16

Conselho Nacional de Combate a Pirataria (2008). Brasil Original. Available at:

. Acessed on 08/09/10.

Delener, N. (2000). International counterfeit marketing: Success without risk.Review of Business, 21, ,

16-21.

Globerman, S. Addessing International Product Piracy. Journal of International Business Studies, 1988,

19, 3, 497-516.

Grossman, Gene M. and Shapiro, Carl (1988a). "Foreign Counterfeiting of Status Goods. The Quarterly

Journal of Economics, CIII (412), 79-100.

Grossman, Gene M. and Shapiro, Carl (1988b). Counterfeit-product Trade. American Economic

Review,78 (1), 59-75.

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed.

Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

Juggessur, Joshie; & Cohen, Geraldine (2009). Is fashion promoting counterfeit brands? Journal of Brand

Management, 16, 383-394.

Koklic, Mateja Kos (2011). Non-Deceptive Counterfeiting Purchase Behavior: Antecedents Of Attitudes

And purchase intentions. Journal of Applied Business Research, 27 (2), 127-137.

Lowe, Peter (2006). Counterfeiting: links to organised crime and terrorist funding. Journal of Financial

Crime, 13 (2), 255-257.

Matos, Celso Augusto de Matos, Ituassu, Cristiana Trindade, Rossi, Carlos Alberto Vargas (2007).

Consumer attitudes toward counterfeits: a review and extension. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 24

(1), 3647.

Mulholland, Judith; Terry, Andrew. (2009) Opening the door to counterfeits? Journal of Brand

Management, 17, 236-239.

Prendergast, G., Chuen, L. H. & Phau, I. (2002). Understanding consumer demand for non-deceptive

pirated brands.Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 2002, 20, 7, 405-416.


17/21

17

Prendergast, G., Chuen, L. H. and Phau, L. (2003). Understanding Consumer Demand for Non-deceptive

Pirated Brands. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 20 (7), 405-416.

Sridhar, G. (2007). Countering Counterfeits. International Marketing Conference on Marketing &

Society, 8-10 April, 2007.

Staake, Thorsten; Thiesse, Frederic; & Fleisch, Elgar (2009). The emergence of counterfeit trade: a

literature review. European Journal of Marketing, 43(3/4), 320-349.

Stumpf, Stephen A., Chaudhry, Peggy E. and Perretta, Leeann (2011). Fake: can business stanch the flow

of counterfeit products? Journal of Business Strategy, 32 (2), 4-12.

Tom, G., Garibaldi, B. Zeng, Y. & Pilcher, J. (1998). Consumer Demand for Counterfeit Goods.

Psychology & Marketing, 15, 5, 405-422.

Tom, Gail; Garibaldi, Barbara; Zeng, Yvette; Pilcher, Julie (1998). Consumer Demand for Counterfeit

Goods. Psychology & Marketing, 15 (5), 405-417.

Vagg, J. & Harris, J. (2000). False Profits: Why Product Counterfeiting is Increasing. European Journal

on Criminal Policy and Research; 8, 1; 107-115.

Table 1:

The Good And The Ugly Of Counterfeits

Actors Consumers Organizations Government Counterfeiters

The

Good

-Cheap

Products

-Psychological

Satisfaction

-Pressure to reduce

costs

-Better service and

reach

-Better supply chains

--None -Low costs, better

margins

-Profits

-No taxes

-Employment

opportunity

-No need to build


18/21

18

brands

The

Ugly

-Shoddy

Products

-Physical Risk

-Monetary Risk

-Emotional Risk

-Functional

Risk

-Sales loss

-Brand loyalty

-Financial los

-Managers time

-Investments to

counter

-Tax

-FDIs

-Indication of inefficiency

-Black economy

proliferation

-Risk to public health

-If caught,

punishable

Source: Sridhar, G. (2007). Countering Counterfeits. International Marketing Conference on

Marketing & Society, 8-10 April, 2007.

Figure 1. Level of Education

Source: Data analysis

3.60%

7.80%10.90%

21.90%

35.40%

20.40%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

No education Finished basic

studies

Incomplete high

school

Completed high

school

Attending

college

Finished college


19/21

19

Figure 2. Social Class


Figure 3. Number of times that respondents play soccer weekly


Table 2. Results of the Factor analysis

Factor 1: Counterfeit Lovers

Variance explained: 39.272%

Factor

Loading

MSA

I buy sports counterfeits because they are cheaper than originals. 0.817 0.802

2%

9%

46%

24%

19%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Class E Class D Class C Class B Class A

26%29% 29%

10%

3% 2% 1% 0%0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


20/21

20

I buy sports counterfeits because they are easier to find. 0.805 0.840

I like to buy sports counterfeits because they have more product variety than

official products.

0.729 0.821

I buy sports counterfeits at venue surroundings because official sports

products are not available at these locations.

0.733 0.842

Factor 2: Pro-Official Products


Factor

Loading

MSA

I rather buy official sports products because they have more durability than

counterfeits.

0.814 0.826

I rather buy official sports products because they have more advanced

technology then counterfeits.

0.778 0.843

I rather buy official sports products because they have manufacturer

guarantee.

0.725 0.849

I prefer official sports products because they have more quality than

counterfeits.

0.677 0.832

Factor 3: Individually Focused


Factor

Loading

MSA

Official sports products allow me to improve my performance in sports. 0.802 0.843

I rather buy official sports products because counterfeits can harm my health. 0.718 0.857

Factor 4:Team Focused


Factor

Loading

MSA

I buy official sports products to aid my team financially through sales

revenues.

0.970 0.867

Source: data analysis


21/21

21

Figure 4. Spending habits and agreement with reasons to buy counterfeits


1 1

12

3

33

28

22

15 1416

1 02 1

22

6 63 2

4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

LowS

penders

HighSpenders

LowS

penders

HighSpenders

LowS

penders

HighSpenders

LowS

penders

HighSpenders

LowS

penders

HighSpenders

Class E Class D Class C Class B Class A

Disagree

Agree

counterfeiting in brazil_motivation and beliefs_versao enefa 2011

Documents