Description Detail

Vol.21, No.2(2014-)(91) 
Study of Evaluation Factors on Internet Brands of Cheap and Fashion
影響網路平價時尚品牌評價因素之研究
W. J. Huang, H. W. Yu, S. F. Luo, L. L. Zhuang*
黃文靖, 余綉雯, 羅淑芳, 莊龍隆
Fashion products which are not standardized products are not suitable to be sold through internet. The purchasing expenses of young ladies who are the main consumers for internet fashion products are lower than others. However, there are still many successful internet brands of cheap and fashion. Therefore, consumers’ traits such as price sensitivity, preference of liking and understanding chains are worth discussing. We collected the contexts of consumers’ understanding chains to design questionnaires. The internet questionnaires were used to collect quantitative data to analyze factors of mean-end chains, preference of liking and price sensitivity on brands evaluation of young ladies regarding internet fashions. The majority of questionnaires respondents aged 18-26, college students, average numbers of internet browsing are more than 4 times per month. They spend average NT$1001~3000 in apparel and NT$201~500 in bag monthly. We used Mean-end Chains to investigate consumers’ traits. The results show that the majority of consumers get inner satisfaction in buying bags. Motivations of purchasing are cheapness, and benefits are the storage functions and fashion styling. Consumers have more brand understanding, and will have the higher brand evaluations. Price sensitivity(negative) and fashion liking(positive) are moderators to understanding ladder.
時尚產品並非適合網路行銷的標準品,目標顧客是網路購物金額較少的年輕女性,但仍有不少成功的網路平價時尚品牌公司,因此這些消費者特性如理解層級、價格敏感度及時尚喜好度等就值得深入討論,本研究先收集消費者理解層級內容,依此設計問卷,再利用網路問卷進行量化資料收集,分析年輕女性理解層級、時尚喜愛程度及價格敏感度對網路時尚品牌評價的影響。 網路購買平價時尚品牌消費者(1008個受訪者)以18-26歲、專科/大學、每月平均上網瀏覽次數多在4次以上,每月平均服飾花費以1,001-3,000元,花費在特定袋包上有201-500元最多。本研究透過方法目的鏈去了解購買網路時尚品牌包包消費者最大價值為心靈滿足,平價是購買動機,包包流行時尚的整體造型及良好的物品收納功能是利益。消費者對品牌理解程度愈高,品牌評價就愈高,價格敏感度(負相關)及時尚喜好度(正相關)均對理解層級具有調節效果。
consumer trait, network brand of cheap and fashion, brand evaluation
消費者特性、網路時尚品牌、品牌評價
Year Volume
2020 27.1 | 27.2
27.3 |
2019 26.1 |
2018 25.1 |
2017 24.1 | 24.2
24.3 | 24.4
24.5 | 24.6
24.7 | 24.8
24.9 |
2016 23.1 | 23.2
23.3 | 23.4
23.5 | 23.6
23.7 | 23.8
2015 22.1 | 22.2
22.3 | 22.4
22.5 |
2014 21.1 | 21.2
21.3 |
2013 20.1 | 20.2
20.3 | 20.4
2012 19.1 | 19.2
19.3 | 19.4
2011 18.1 | 18.2
2010 17.4