TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Nil ENGİZEK, (İstanbul Kültür Üniversitesi, İşletme Fakültesi, İstanbul, Türkiye)
AHMET KEMAL ŞEKERKAYA (İstanbul Kültür Üniversitesi, İşletme Fakültesi, İstanbul, Türkiye)
ÖNERİ
12 0
Yıl: 2015 Cilt: 11 Sayı: 43 Sayfa Aralığı: 145 - 184 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Öz:
Son yıllarda taklit ürünlerin varlığı hızla artmakta ve özellikle lüks markaların ürünleri taklitçilerin hedefi konumuna gelmektedir. Birçok tüketici de bilinçli olarak bu ürünlerin taklitlerini tercih etmektedir. Tüketicilerin tercihlerinin arkasında yatan tek etkenin fiyat olmadığının anlaşılmasından itibaren de konu araştırmacıların ilgi odağı haline gelmiştir. Bu çalışmada, bilinçli olarak bu ürünleri tercih eden tüketicilerin tercihlerinin arkasında yatan, fiyat dışındaki, muhtemel motivasyon kaynakları tespit edilmiş ve bu değişkenlerin satın alma niyeti yüksek ve düşük olan tüketicileri birbirlerinden anlamlı derecede ayırt edip etmediği incelenmiştir. Bu değişkenler; kişisel özellikler (materyalizm, değer bilinci, marka hassasiyeti ve moda bilinci), sosyal motivasyonlar (kendini izleme eğilimi, referans grup etkisi ve statü arayışı) ve ürün ile ilgili faktörler (algılanan değer ve risk) başlığı altında toplanmıştır
Anahtar Kelime:

INVESTIGATING THE DIFFERENCES OF CONSUMERS BASED ON THEIR HIGH AND LOW PURCHASE INTENTION OF COUNTERFEIT LUXURY PRODUCTS

Öz:
The presence of counterfeit products is increasing in almost every industry and particularly luxury brand products have been one of the main targets of counterfeiters. Many consumers also prefer these products knowing that they are counterfeit. This phenomenon has take attention of many scholars since it has been understood that price is not the only motivation for consumers to purchase counterfeit luxury products.This study examines the non-price consumption reasons of non-deceptive counterfeiting and how these motivation sources differ based on consumers' low/high levels of purchase intention. The motivation sources used in this study are personal characteristics (materialism, value consciousness, brand sensitivity and fashion consciousness), social motivations (self-monitoring, susceptibility to interpersonal influence and status seeking) and product related features (perceived value and risk)
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • [1] Cartı, A.:2012, "İşletmeler Açısından Marka Ve Markalama Kararlarının Önemi", 8. KOBİ'ler ve Verimlilik Kongresi, 153-166.
  • [2] Forbes Arşiv. The World's Most Valuable Brands. (www.forbes.com/powerful-brands/list/) [05/11/2013).
  • [3] Veloutsou, C. & Bian, X. (2008). A Cross-National Examination of Consumer Perceived Risk in the Context of Non-Deceptive Counterfeit Brands. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 7(1), 3-20.
  • [4] Nill, A. & Shultz, C. J. (1996). The Scourge of Global Counterfeiting. Business Horizons, 39(6), 37-42.
  • [5] Nurton, J. (2002). Why Counterfeiting Is Not So Harmless. Managing Intellectual Property, 122, 43.
  • [6] Albers-Miller, N. D. (1999). Consumer Misbehavior: Why People Buy Illicit Goods. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16(3), 273-287.
  • [7] Ang, S. H., Cheng, P. S., Lim, E. A. C. & Tambyah, S. K. (2001). Spot the Difference: Consumer Responses Towards Counterfeits. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(3), 219-235.
  • [8] Hopkins, D. M., Kontnik, L. T. & Turnage, M. T. (2003). Counterfeiting Exposed: Protecting Your Brand And Customers. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
  • [9] Furnham, A. & Valgeirsson, H. (2007). The Effect of Life Values and Materialism on Buying Counterfeit Products. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 36(5), 677-685.
  • [10] Huang, Y. (2009). The Effects Of Unethical Beliefs And Counterfeit Attitudes On Purchase Intention Of Non-Deceptive Counterfeit Luxury Brands: A Cross-Culture Comparison Between United States And Taiwan. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Marshall Goldsmith School of Management Alliant International University.
  • [11] Green, T. R. & T. Smith (2002). Executive Insights: Counterfeiting Brand Counterfeiters. Journal of international Marketing, 10(4), 89-106.
  • [12] OECD (The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2007). The Economic Impact Of Counterfeiting. Paris: OECD.
  • [13] Bhardwaj , V. (2010). The Effects of Consumer Orientations on The Consumption Of Counterfeit Luxury Brands. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, The University of Tennessee.
  • [14] Habertürk Arşiv. Türkiye'deki En Zararli 10 Sahte Ürün. (www.haberturk.com/saglik/haber/637108-turkiyedeki-en-zararli-10-sahte-urun-galeri) [05/11/2013]
  • [15] Ankara Ticaret Odası. (2005). ATO'dan Sahte Türkiye Raporu (Fake Turkey Report from ATO). (http://www.atonet.org.tr/yeni/index.php?p=269&l=1) [14/08/2011]
  • [16] Cordell, V.; Wongtada, N. & Kieschnick, L. (1996). Counterfeit Purchase Intentions: Role of Lawfulness Attitudes and Product Traits as Determinants. Journal of Business Research, 35(1), 41-53.
  • [17] Lai, K. K.Y. & Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1999). Brand Imitation: Do the Chinese Have Different Views?". Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 16(2), 179-192.
  • [18] Kay, H. (1990). Fake's progress. Management Today, July, 54-58.
  • [19] Wilcox, K.; Kim, H. M. & Sen, S. (2009). Why Do Consumers Buy Counterfeit Luxury Brands?. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(2), 247-259.
  • [20] Grossman, G. & Shapiro, C. (1988). Foreign Counterfeiting of Status Goods. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 103(1), 79-100.
  • [21] Doğan, S. Y. (2010). Materyalist Eğilimlerin Demografik Özelliklere Göre Farklılaşmasına Yönelik Bir Araştırma. C.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 57-70.
  • [22] O'Cass, A. (2001). Consumer Self-Monitoring, Materialism and Involvement in Fashion Clothing. Australian Journal of Marketing, 9(1), 46-59.
  • [23] Burroughs, W. J.; Drews, D. R. & Hallman, W. K. (1991). Predicting Personality from Personal Possessions: A Self-Presentational Analysis. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6(6), 147-163.
  • [24] Dittmar, H. & Pepper, L. (1994). To have is to be: Materialism and Person Perception in Working-Class and Middle-Class British Adolescents. Journal of Economic Psychology, 15(2), 233-251.
  • [25] Belk, R.W. (1984). Three Scales To Measure Constructs Related To Materialism: Reliability, Validity, And Relationships To Measures of Happiness. Advances in Consumer Research, 11(1), 291-297.
  • [26] Richins, M. L. & Dawson, S. (1992). A Consumer Values Orientation for Materialism and Its Measurement: Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Consumer Research,19(3), 303-316.
  • [27] Belk, R.W. (1985). Materialism: Trait Aspects of Living In A Material World. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 265-280.
  • [28] Karabatı, S. & Cemalcılar, Z. (2010). Values, Materialism, and Well-Being: A Study with Turkish University Students. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31(4), 624-633.
  • [29] Richins, M. L. (1994). Valuing Things: The Public and Private Meanings of Possessions. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(3), 504-521.
  • [30] Kim, H. & Karpova, E. (2010). Consumer Attitudes Toward Fashion Counterfeits: Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 28(2), 79-94.
  • [31] Bloch, P.; Bush, R. & Campbell, L. (1993). Consumer Accomplices in Product Counterfeiting: A Demand Side Investigation. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10(4), 27-36.
  • [32] Lichtenstein, D. R.; Ridgway, N. M. & Netemeyer, R. G. (1993). Price Perceptions and Consumer Shopping Behavior: A Field Study. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(2), 234-245.
  • [33] Hutton, B. (1995). Survey of South Korea: Fear of subsides-Bethan: Hutton Announces the Overdue Birth of the Korean Consumer. Financial Times, London edition, 4.
  • [34] Tom, G.; Garibaldi, B.; Zeng, Y. & Pilcher, J. (1998). Consumer Demands for Counterfeit Goods. Psychology and Marketing, 15(5), 405-421.
  • [35] Phau, I. & Teah, M. (2009). Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: A Study of Antecedents and Outcomes of Attitudes Towards Counterfeits of Luxury Brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 26(1), 15-27.
  • [36] Nam, J.; Hamlin, R.; Gam, H. J.; Kang, J. H.; Kim, J.; Kumphai, P.; Starr, C., & Richards, L. (2007). The Fashion-Consciousness Behaviors of Mature Female Consumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(1), 102-108.
  • [37] Summers, J. G. (1970). The Identity of Women's Clothing Fashion Opinion Leaders. Journal of Marketing Research, 7(2), 178-185.
  • [38] Gutman, J. & Mills, M. K. (1982). Fashion Life Style, Self-Concept, Shopping Orientation, and Store Patronage: An Integrative Analysis. Journal of Retailing, 58(2), 64-87.
  • [39] Yaşin, B. (2007). Tüketicilerin Alışveriş Stilleri İle Tüketim Değerleri Arasındaki İlişkinin Belirlenmesine Yönelik Bir Araştırma. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. İstanbul Üniversitesi.
  • [40] Lertwannawit, A. & Mandhachitara, R. (2012). Interpersonal Effects on Fashion Consciousness and Status Consumption Moderated by Materialism in Metropolitan Men. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), 1408-1416
  • [41] Wee, C.; Tan, S. & Cheok, K. (1995). Non-price Determinants of Intention to Purchase Counterfeit Goods. International Marketing Review, 12(6), 19-46.
  • [42] Beaudoin, P. & Lachance, M. J. (2006). Determinants of Adolescents' Brand Sensitivity to Clothing. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 34(4), 312-331.
  • [43] Lachance,M. J.; Beaudoin, P. & Robitaille, J. (2003). Adolescents' Brand Sensitivity in Apparel: Influence of Three Socialization Agents. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27(1), 47-57.
  • [44] Shim, S. & Koh, A. (1997). Profiling Adolescent Consumer Decision-Making Styles: Effects Of Socialization Agents Ond Social-Structural Variables. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 15(1), 50-59.
  • [45] d'Astous, A. & Gargouri, E. (2001). Consumer evaluations of brand imitations. European Journal of Marketing, 35(1/2), 153-167.
  • [46] Gentry, J.W.; Putrevu, S. & Shultz, C. (2006). The Effects of Counterfeiting on Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5(3), 245-256.
  • [47] Bian,, X. & Veloutsou, C. (2007). Consumers' Attitudes Regarding Non-Deceptive Counterfeit Brands in the UK and China. Brand Management, 14(3), 211-222.
  • [48] Bearden, W.; Netemeyer, R. & Teel, J. (1989). Measurement of Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (March), 473-481.
  • [49] Wang, F.; Zhang, H.; Zang, H. & Ouyang, M. (2005). Purchasing Pirated Software: An Initial Examination of Chinese Consumers. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(6), 340-351.
  • [50] Belk, R.W. (1988). Possesions and the Extended Self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (September), 139-168.
  • [51] Braun, O. L. & Wicklund, R. (1989). Psychological Antecedents of Conspicuous Consumption. Journal of Economic Psychology, 10(2), 161-187.
  • [52] 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, 7(3), 41-51.
  • [53] Heaney, J.G.; Goldsmith, R.E. & Jusoh, W.J.W. (2005). Status Consumption Among Malaysion Consumers: Exploring Its Relationships with Materialism and Attention-to-Social-Comparison-Information. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 17(4), 83-98.
  • [54] Shocker, A. D.; Bayus, B. L. & Namwoon, K. (2004). Product complements and substitutes in the real world: The relevance of 'other products. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 28-40.
  • [55] Odabaşı, Y. & Barış, G. (2007). Tüketici Davranışı. MediaCat Yayınları, İstanbul.
  • [56] Bearden, W. O. & Etzel, M. J. (1982). Reference Group Influence on Product and Brand Purchase Decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(September), 183-194.
  • [57] Penz, E. & Stöttinger, B. (2005). Forget the "Real" Thing- Take the Copy! An Explanatory Model for the Volitional Purchase of Counterfeit Products. Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 568-575.
  • [58] Snyder, M. (1974). The Self-Monitoring of Expressive Behavior", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 30(4), 526-537.
  • [59] Lennox, R. & Wolfe, R. (1984). Revision of the Self-Monitoring Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(6), 1349-1364.
  • [60] Gould, S.J. (1993). Assesing Self-Concept Discrepancy in Consumer Behavior: The Joint Effect of Private Self-Consciousness and Self- Monitoring. Advances in Consumer Research, 20(1), 419-424
  • [61] Hogg, M.K.; Cox, A.J. & Keeling, K. (2000). The Impact of Self- Monitoring on Image Congruence and Product/Brand Evaluation. European Journal of Marketing, 34 (5/6), 641-666.
  • [62] Grewal, D. & Levy, M. (2010). Marketing, Second Edition, McGraw-HillIrwin, New York
  • [63] Parasuraman, A. (1997). Reflections on Gaining Competitive Advantage Through Customer Value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), 154-161.
  • [64] Parasuraman, A. & Grewal, D. (2000). The Impact of Technology on Quality-Value-Loyalty Chain: A Research Agenda. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 168-174.
  • [65] Cronin, J. J.; Brady, M. K. & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioural intentions in service environments. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 193-218.
  • [66] Sweeney, J. C. & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer Perceived Value: The Development of a Multiple Item Scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203-220.
  • [67] Sanchez, J.; Callarisa, L.; Rodriguez, R. M. & Moliner, M. A. (2006). Perceived value of the purchase of a tourism product. Tourism Management, 27(3), 394-409.
  • [68] Brooker, G. (1984). An Assessment of An Expanded Measure of Perceived Risk. Advances In Consumer Research, 11(1), 439-441.
  • [69] Gabbott, M. (1991). The role of product cues in assessing risk in second-hand markets. European Journal of Marketing, 25(9), 38-50.
  • [70] Mitchell, V. W. (1999). Consumer Perceived Risk: Conceptualizations and Models. European Journal of Marketing, 33 (1/2), 163-195.
  • [71] Mitchell, V. W. & Boustani, P. (1993). Market Development Using New Products and New Customers: A Role for Perceived Risk. European Journal of Marketing, 27(2), 17-32.
  • [72] Schiffman, L. & Kanuk, G., L. L. (2010). Consumer Behavior. 6. Baskı, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
  • [73] Sweeney, J.C.; Soutar, G.N. & Johnson, L.W. (1999). The Role of Perceived Risk in the Quality-Value Relationship: A Study in a Retail Environment. Journal of Retailing, 75(1), 77- 105.
  • [74] Lichtenstein, D.R.; Netemeyer, G.R. & Burton, S. (1990). Distinguishing Coupon Proneness From Value Consciousness: An Acquisition-Transaction Utility Theory Perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 54-67.
  • [75] Nelson, M. R. & McLeod, L. E. (2005). Adolescent Brand Consciousness and Product Placements: Awareness, Liking and Perceived Effects on Self and Others. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 29(6), 515-528.
  • [76] Sproles G.B. & Kendall, E.L. (1986). A Methodology for Profiling Consumers' Decision-Making Styles. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 20(2), 267-279.
  • [77] Kilsheimer, J.: 1993. Status Consumption: The Development and Implications of a Scale Measuring the Motivation to Consume for Status, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Florida State University Marketing Faculty.
  • [78] Hsu, J. L. & Shiue, C. W. (2008). Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Non-Pirated Software. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(4), 715-732.
  • [79] Stone, R. N. & Gronhaug, K. (1993). Perceived Risk: Further Considerations for the Marketing Discipline. European Journal of Marketing, 27(3), 39-50.
  • [80] Kurtuluş, K. (2010). Araştırma Yöntemleri. Türkmen Kitapevi.
  • [81] Kim, J. E.; Cho, H. J. & Johnson, K. K. (2009). Influence of Moral Affect, Judgment, and Intensity on Decision Making Concerning Counterfeit, Gray-Market, and Imitation Products. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 27(3), 211-226.
  • [82] Hair, J. F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis. Seventh Edition, Prentice Hall.
  • [83] Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. The Guilford Press, New York.
  • [84] Schermelleh-Engel, K.; Moosbrugger, H. & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive Goodness-Of-Fit Measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
  • [85] Bagozzi R. & Yi, Y. (1988). On The Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
  • [86] Fornell C. & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables And Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1), 39-50.
  • [87] Nakip, M. (2006). Pazarlama Araştırmaları: Teknikler ve (SPSS Destekli) Uygulamalar. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • [88] Kalaycı, Ş. (2008). SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri. Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
  • [89] Kurtuluş, K. (2008). Pazarlama Araştırmaları, Genişletilmiş ve Gözden Geçirilmiş 9. Basım, Filiz Kitabevi. İstanbul.
APA ENGİZEK N, ŞEKERKAYA A (2015). TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. , 145 - 184.
Chicago ENGİZEK NİL,ŞEKERKAYA AHMET KEMAL TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. (2015): 145 - 184.
MLA ENGİZEK NİL,ŞEKERKAYA AHMET KEMAL TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. , 2015, ss.145 - 184.
AMA ENGİZEK N,ŞEKERKAYA A TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. . 2015; 145 - 184.
Vancouver ENGİZEK N,ŞEKERKAYA A TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. . 2015; 145 - 184.
IEEE ENGİZEK N,ŞEKERKAYA A "TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA." , ss.145 - 184, 2015.
ISNAD ENGİZEK, NİL - ŞEKERKAYA, AHMET KEMAL. "TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA". (2015), 145-184.
APA ENGİZEK N, ŞEKERKAYA A (2015). TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. ÖNERİ, 11(43), 145 - 184.
Chicago ENGİZEK NİL,ŞEKERKAYA AHMET KEMAL TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. ÖNERİ 11, no.43 (2015): 145 - 184.
MLA ENGİZEK NİL,ŞEKERKAYA AHMET KEMAL TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. ÖNERİ, vol.11, no.43, 2015, ss.145 - 184.
AMA ENGİZEK N,ŞEKERKAYA A TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. ÖNERİ. 2015; 11(43): 145 - 184.
Vancouver ENGİZEK N,ŞEKERKAYA A TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA. ÖNERİ. 2015; 11(43): 145 - 184.
IEEE ENGİZEK N,ŞEKERKAYA A "TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA." ÖNERİ, 11, ss.145 - 184, 2015.
ISNAD ENGİZEK, NİL - ŞEKERKAYA, AHMET KEMAL. "TÜKETİCİLERİN LÜKS MARKALARIN TAKLİTLERİNİ SATIN ALMA SEVİYELERİ AÇISINDAN FARKLILIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA". ÖNERİ 11/43 (2015), 145-184.
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
17-04-2024 4:35

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları