Search

This paper postulates that consumers' desire for doing-luxury – pursuing luxury with the intention of acquiring a life experience (vs. having-luxury) – pursuing luxury with the intention of acquiring a material good reduces counterfeiting schadenfreude – consumers' feelings of pleasure from the losses of luxury brands due to counterfeiting. Two experiments employed various methods of invoking doing-luxury (vs. having-luxury) – actual product exposure and brand positioning to test the predicted framework. The results demonstrate that doing-luxury (vs. having-luxury) leads to a lower counterfeiting schadenfreude; an effect explained by the lower perceived similarity. This research makes an important contribution to the counterfeiting and experiential marketing literature by demonstrating the role of brand positioning in reducing a critical counterfeit-related social emotion. The results also validate the relevance of the intentions-based distinction of experiential versus material purchases in predicting counterfeiting schadenfreude. To reduce counterfeiting schadenfreude, luxury brands must signal an ephemeral image focusing on moments of luxury rather than functions of luxury. In addition, ad appeals must invoke sensory elements, feelings, emotions, imagination, and mental stimulation rather than the hard facts about the products per se. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper aims to challenge the notion that "having-less" – limiting consumption of scarce resources to a select few – represents a social responsibility route toward guilt reduction. It rather argues that "saving-more" – the purposeful pursuit of conscious and collaborative consumption – captures consumers' true representations of responsible luxury which in turn reduces anticipated guilt. Design/methodology/approach: Six experiments using different operationalizations of saving-more (vs. having-less) and a mix of fictitious and real luxury brands were conducted on real luxury buyers. Findings: The findings demonstrate that saving-more (vs. having-less) leads to a stronger purchase intention; an effect explained by a higher responsible luxury perception and lower anticipated guilt associated with saving-more (vs. having-less). Furthermore, the ability of saving-more (vs. having-less) in building responsible luxury perception and reducing anticipated guilt is stronger (vs. weaker) when luxury is distributed based on deservingness (vs. entitlement). Research limitations/implications: This research proposes a novel distinction between two responsible luxury approaches: promoting limited consumption for business goals, that is, having-less and promoting conscious consumption for societal goals, that is, saving-more. Practical implications: Brand managers can enhance responsible luxury perception and reduce consumer guilt through corporate communication, product communication and collaborative product accessibility modes. Managers must also convince consumers that their access to luxury is based on real achievements. Originality/value: This study empirically invalidates the notion that merely invoking scarcity and rarity tactics is an expression of social responsibility. It integrates social responsibility and fairness accounts of guilt into a coherent theory of guilt over luxury consumption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper aims to theorize counterfeit luxury consumption among millennials from a generational identity perspective. Design/methodology/approach: The paper proposes and tests a model of counterfeit buying behavior using an online survey of 467 millennial respondents. The study uses multi-item measures from the extant literature and uses the structural equation modeling technique to test the proposed hypotheses. Findings: The findings reveal when millennials have a self-defining relationship with their generation, they tend to internalize the generational norm pertaining to counterfeit luxury consumption. Millennials' counterfeit related values: market mavenism, postmodernism, schadenfreude and public self-consciousness contribute to their generational identity. Moreover, market mavenism, cool consumption and public self-consciousness establish counterfeit luxury consumption as a generational norm. Practical implications: The findings of this paper suggest that the expertise and influence of market mavens can be used to deter counterfeit consumption. Moreover, luxury brands must communicate a cool image to offset the rebellious image of counterfeits. Further, from a standardization versus adaption standpoint, the generational perspective allows for the standardization of anti-counterfeiting campaigns. Originality/value: The paper makes a novel contribution to the counterfeiting literature by demonstrating that millennials pursue counterfeit luxury brands when they pledge cognitive allegiance to their generation. The paper, thus, extends the identity perspective of counterfeit luxury consumption to group contexts. The authors also test and validate the role of descriptive norms in group contexts by introducing the construct generational norm to counterfeiting literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article captures the present state of research on counterfeit luxury consumption by providing a critical review of the existing body of knowledge. The article proposes a novel conceptualization of counterfeit luxury consumption from a consumer perspective. Based on predetermined inclusion criteria, the paper provides a systematic review of the growing yet still fragmented scholarship on counterfeit luxury consumption. It provides a historical overview of the extant counterfeiting research, synthesizes the existing body of knowledge, and provides propositions for future research and practice. In our pursuit towards building a robust counterfeiting theory, this study identifies the key perspectives that seek to explain the consumption of counterfeit luxury brands through different lenses. The article reviews key theories and constructs, identifies inconsistencies in findings, and provides explanations towards a common understanding. To this pursuit, a synthesis of three counterfeiting research domains is presented; moreover, an integrated model, which captures their interrelationships, is proposed. Finally, the implications for theory and practice are spelled out. The resultant five key tenets are, therefore, proposed to guide the future of research in counterfeit luxury consumption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]