Page | 1 MKTG2004 Consumer Behaviour Project A Booklet | Semester 1 2017 DATE OF DISCUSSION: WEEK 5 & 6 TUTORIAL DATE OF SUBMISSION: WEEK 7 TUTORIAL CLASS ACTIVITY Please read the following four news articles on luxury brand counterfeiting. Within your group of no more than 5 members, you have 15 minutes to reflect and discuss on the assigned questions. Your tutor will facilitate the responses with the class. You should participate actively within your group as well as during the tutor facilitated class discussion. Please jot down all your notes as you are required to submit the answer booklet individually both on Blackboard and in class by the specified deadline. You are expected to have external references (textbook, newspaper, websites etc.). You MUST provide references for all external materials. Please use the Chicago 16th B referencing style. You should present a type written assignment that MUST meet the following formatting criteria: Font: Times New Roman, Font size: 12, Line spacing: 1.5. Tutorial week 5: Q1. Discuss the type of value consumers seek from counterfeit luxury products? Q2. Identify and explain the consumer perceived risks associated with counterfeit luxury consumption. Q3. “The real issue is when people think they're getting the real thing and they're not” says Prof Wall. Is this statement applicable for the non-deceptive counterfeit luxury products? Is the consumer perceived value higher for non-deceptive counterfeit luxury products? Explain. Tutorial week 6: Q4. “The problem is that the fake products today, they make better quality, better prices than the real products, the real names.” Do you agree with Jack Ma? Justify your argument using the phases of consumer perception process. Q5. Choose a luxury fashion brand. Do an online search and find how the brand is being counterfeited. Visual comparison of the original and counterfeit product would be helpful. Apply a relevant concept to explain why some consumers fail to detect the counterfeit product. Q6. Suggest how the brand (refer to Q5) can apply instrumental conditioning to discourage consumers from buying the counterfeit. Please refer to the marking guide for mark allocation. Page | 2 blogs.wsj.com Luxury Brands Get Tough With Counterfeiters WSJ Staff | Aug 16, 2016 12:13 pm HKT Fashion from the Alexander Wang Fall 2016 collection is modeled during New York Fashion Week, Saturday, Feb. 13, 2016. The brand is filing more lawsuits in its battle against fake goods. Photo: Associated Press Luxury brands are getting more aggressive about taking suspected counterfeiters to court. After years of debate in the luxury industry about how to publicly tackle counterfeit goods, a growing number of high-end names from Gucci to Moncler and Alexander Wang are suing sellers of fakes, both in China and the West. The legal action comes as brands grapple with an explosion of fake goods on e-commerce and social-media platforms. Fashion brand Alexander Wang, which sued the owners of 459 websites believed to be selling counterfeit handbags, footwear and clothing last year, won a $90 million judgement this month in a New York district court. The court froze the websites and transferred their domain names — many of which are believed to originate in China — to the designer. Alexander Wang, in a statement, said it was “pleased” by the court’s verdict and would protect its brand by “maintaining constant vigilance on a global scale.” The lawsuits are a “strategic change” for companies who haven’t always been vocal or public about their battle against fake goods, said Paolo Beconcino, a Beijing-based consultant for Squire Patton Boggs law firm, who represents half a dozen Western brands in lawsuits against counterfeiters. In the past, many brands focused mainly on raids and seizures of counterfeit goods to shut down shady manufacturers and sellers, but some have questioned how effective this tactic is at deterring production of fakes. Page | 3 Luxury names are increasingly considering lawsuits because of the rising production of counterfeits, their growth online and links to organized crime networks, according to Delphine Sarfati-Sobreira, director general of Unifab, a Paris-based anticounterfeit group. It can be hard to find out who is selling the counterfeit goods, and therefore who to sue, so the brands sometimes hire investigators and lawyers. No numbers are available on how many brands are filing lawsuits against counterfeiters. Yet in China — the source of almost two-thirds of the estimated $1.2 billion worth of counterfeits seized by U.S. authorities in the 2014 fiscal year — the government has set up special courts in major cities to deal with a rising number of intellectual-property cases. Between 2005 and 2014, the number of civil intellectual-property cases filed in Chinese courts increased nine-fold to 133,000, while criminal cases rose 10-fold to 11,000, according to an analysis of government data by Martin Dimitrov, an associate professor at Tulane University in New Orleans. As a swelling middle class in developing countries propels demand for brand-name goods, the concern is that counterfeit products will hurt global brands’ reputation. Higher-quality counterfeits can also eat into sales of authentic goods. “It’s pretty easy to live with at least some fakes if they don’t take much market share,” said Harley Lewin, a partner at McCarter & English who represents Alexander Wang and other global brands in cases against counterfeiters. “But when the legitimate retail market gets increasingly tight and tough, the impetus to crack down (on fakes) becomes just that much more urgent.” In China, luxury down-jacket maker Moncler won a court case in November against a company selling jackets with the Italian company’s logo. Gucci and other luxury brands owned by Paris- based Kering are also waging a legal battle against New York Stock Exchange-listed Alibaba and its sellers over the widespread sale of fake goods on the Chinese e-commerce giant’s platforms. A U.S. judge this month dismissed part of the lawsuit, saying that Gucci and other plaintiffs had “failed to allege the existence of a conspiracy” between Alibaba and its merchants. The judge’s decision doesn’t affect other parts of Kering’s lawsuit, which alleges that Alibaba encourages the sale of fake goods on its sites. Gucci declined to comment. Alibaba has said the complaint has no basis. Moncler couldn’t immediately be reached for comment. While fashion brand Alexander Wang “prefers to avoid confrontation and resolve matters amicably” in suspected counterfeiting cases, the company has been frustrated by the surge of fake products online, especially in China, according to Mr. Lewin, who represents the brand. “After years of playing the whac-a-mole game, (Alexander Wang) decided to move in a more aggressive fashion as the counterfeiting of his goods had increased along with his own growth,” Mr. Lewin said. Page | 4 bbc.com What's wrong with buying fake luxury goods? By Bethan Bell BBC News Every time a new haul of fake designer goods is seized we're told that the people who buy them are ruining the reputation of brands, stealing revenue from companies, contributing to an unethical labour market and subsidising organised crime. But is this really the case? A BBC investigation has found over the past two years, thousands of fake goods were seized from black markets across England. But is there any harm in nabbing a pair of "Louboutins" from a market, or a "Chanel" handbag from a chap selling them on a foreign beach? To the average punter it might sound a bit far- fetched that their cash goes straight to a drugs cartel or gun-runners. We're not talking about alcohol, tobacco or medications - buying such items clearly poses a health risk. The same can be said for toys which aren't up to safety standards, and sunglasses which don't have the recommended UV protection. Nor are we talking about people who genuinely believe the goods they buy are the real thing. We're talking about those who are happy to get knock-off designer items for knock-down prices. The people who are well aware there may be issues about quality and copyright - but don't actually mind. After all, are the people who buy fakes for a tenner really depriving the companies that sell goods for hundreds or even thousands of pounds? A woman who makes an impulse buy in a market almost certainly wouldn't otherwise invest in the real deal, while the wealthy buyers of the genuine brand pride themselves on knowing the difference and having the official article. As Steven Brown, from Batley, told the BBC in response to its revelations about the extent of the black market in England: "I've bought fake handbags for my wife. We both knew that a Gucci bag for £20 would be fake and not last as long as a real one. "Is it really stealing revenue from a company if I would never buy a genuine Gucci bag?" Page | 5 The fake market exists alongside the genuine one. It can be argued it actually helps the brands, by quickening the fashion cycle and raising brand awareness. That's what David Wall, professor of criminology at Leeds University, believes. He says the issue of counterfeited goods "provokes a lot of outrage, but what about?" He argues there is little evidence provided that profits fund organised criminal gangs - although admits there is a problem with sellers of fake goods not paying taxes. However, should that be an issue for the consumer? Do we have a moral responsibility to ensure the people we buy things from pay their taxes? Is that any of our business? Arguably, the same goes for goods that violate the intellectual property rights of the designer. Most punters wouldn't see it as their moral obligation to look after the brands of the big fashion houses. "I'm not condoning counterfeiting," Prof Wall insists. "It's just that it shouldn't be a police issue. It's a civil issue. "And the same goes for people stealing a design, or a logo. Fashion is a complex market, and counterfeit fashion just as complex. "After all, we buy fake items for different reasons. Many of us indulge in ironic consumption - such as a Breitling watch for a dollar. It's clear it's not real, it's just quite amusing. "The real issue is when people think they're getting the real thing and they're not. Those people need to be protected. But the vast majority of consumers know exactly what they're getting". What about the argument that counterfeiting leads to the exploitation of workers in so-called sweat shops? There's no reason to think it's more of a problem than with many "fast fashion" brands, such as Primark. How sure are we that anything we buy is ethically sourced? Fake luxury goods still need to be made to a certain standard, or they wouldn't sell. There's still skill in the manufacture of making something that can be confused with the original, skilled workers are still needed. The National Fraud Intelligence Bureau advises consumers to avoid buying fake goods because "you're helping the trader to break the law". The bureau, which is affiliated to the City of London Police, also claims: "Many fraudsters use the proceeds from selling counterfeit goods to fund drug dealing or other types of organised crime" Counterfeiting "contributes to job losses because genuine manufacturers are unable to match prices charged by rogue traders" "Genuine manufacturers are deprived of any profit" The organisation urges people to report any instances of fraud. Research suggests about three million consumers every year buy counterfeit goods carrying one of the top designer labels, such as Yves Saint Laurent, Burberry or Gucci. Nearly a third of the sales are over the internet. Louis Vuitton is one of the luxury brands with a specific team dedicated to the management and protection of the company's intellectual property rights. A spokesperson said: "Louis Vuitton believes that it is essential to preserve the house's ancestral know-how and the work of its craftsmen by fighting the illegal networks that infringe on human rights, the environment and global economy. Page | 6 "In 2010, Louis Vuitton initiated 10,673 raids and 30,171 anti-counterfeiting procedures worldwide, resulting in the seizure of thousands of counterfeit products and the breaking up of criminal networks." But despite the action taken by the fashion house, it's still pretty easy to get your hands on a replica. One online shop is perfectly open about the fact it's selling a fake, cheerfully boasting that "the materials used are identical to the real ones. Trademark marks are indistinguishable to the originals". What is distinguishable is the price. A genuine Monogram Zippy Wallet retails for £455, a fake one for about £40. So who buys fake luxury goods, and - other than the "ironic consumers" - why? According to Dr Haider Ali from the Open University, it's "people who have relatively little regard for the law" and "people who have negative attitudes towards big business". "This may be because they feel that genuine brands charge unfair prices. Those people who see themselves as being shrewd shoppers willing and able to beat the system may also be more likely to buy counterfeits. "Counterfeits may also appeal to those people who want to demonstrate their status, but don't have the funds to do so with genuine products". Dawn Lawson from Herefordshire bought a fake Prada backpack for a fraction of the cost of a real one. She has no qualms about it, she says. "I have little pity for the multinational companies that lose a minimal amount of profit. You're surely not expecting me to believe Prada or Louis Vuitton are going to go out of business because of replicas? "Of course they're not. Besides, I love my bag - fake or not." According to Prof Wall, who's advised the Home Office about organised crime, there's no need to have a moral argument about it. "Policing counterfeit luxury goods is not in the public interest. People bow to the norms set by the fashion industry. High demand is an indication of successful brand. That's the way it is. It's up to the brand to invest in security for intellectual property. "So long as people know what they're getting, there's really no need to get worked up about it." Page | 7 qz.com Alibaba's Jack Ma: The problem with counterfeits is they're "better quality" than luxury goods Marc Bain At Alibaba’s first-ever investor day since going public in 2014, Jack Ma, the Chinese e- commerce giant’s founder and CEO, addressed his company’s counterfeit problem—or sort of did. He shifted blame away from Alibaba as the platform for selling those goods by arguing the real issue is that fakes are now as good or better than the genuine article, Bloomberg reports. “The problem is that the fake products today, they make better quality, better prices than the real products, the real names,” he said at the event in Hangzhou, China. Ma said the “exact factories” producing for foreign brands, using the “exact raw materials,” now replicate luxury goods to the same standards, just leaving the brand name off. “It’s not the fake products that destroy them, it’s the new business models,” he said. Alibaba’s consumer-to-consumer platform, Taobao, is notorious for fakes. It’s a subject that consistently provokes anger from international labels, which say Alibaba doesn’t do enough to protect their brands and intellectual property. Recently, when a prominent anti-counterfeiting group allowed Alibaba in as a member, some luxury labels quit in protest. Not everyone agrees with Ma’s diagnosis of the problem. Cao Lei, director of the China E-Commerce Research Center, told Bloomberg that it was “inappropriate” for Ma to blame the high quality of counterfeit goods, and that while it might be true in some cases, it was wrong to “generalize the phenomenon.” It is true that China is no longer known only for cheap, fast production. It has developed as a sophisticated fashion-manufacturing hub, producing even for high-end labels such as Prada, Burberry, and Armani. The Chinese factories churning out this coveted merchandise now have all the knowledge needed to create their own products, and Ma says many now use the internet, including Alibaba’s sales platforms, to sell directly to consumers. Biyao.com, for example, which launched last year, says it allows customers to order directly from the factories manufacturing for a number of well-known international brands, including Burberry, Prada, Cartier, Nike, and Under Armour. The factories use their own designs, according to founder Bi Sheng. But the selling point is that the products are as good as their name-brand equivalents, while costing significantly less. Be that as it may, it’s not hard to see why luxury labels are furious with Alibaba: There’s plenty of evidence that Alibaba’s knockoff problem continues unabated. Last month, Haze Fan, a Beijing-based producer with CNBC, described buying a pair of Dior sunglasses from a Taobao seller that provided close-up images of the product and even offered a “guarantee card.” When the sunglasses arrived, Fan could tell the product was suspicious, as was the card, which was riddled with spelling mistakes. Fan contacted Alibaba, which confirmed the product was fake, refunded her money, and vowed to investigate the vendor. “Almost two months later, however, the same vendor remains in business on Taobao,” she wrote. In his speech, Ma called Alibaba the “world’s leading fighter of counterfeiting,” and he has said it’s in the company’s interest to police itself, since the sale of one fake on the site could lead to the loss of five customers. Whether or not that’s true, Alibaba has to address the problem if it wants to maintain credibility with China’s increasingly sophisticated consumers and reach its goal of $1 trillion in revenue by 2020. Meanwhile, luxury brands arguably can’t solve their knockoff problem unless they work with Alibaba, but they’re not likely to do that if Ma doesn’t acknowledge the problem in the first place. Page | 8 luxurydaily.com Online anti-counterfeiting strategies preserve brand equity: NetNames By Jen King Counterfeiting has had an extensive impact on luxury goods and is set to keep pace with technology, creating challenges and opportunities to stop the production of these items through authentication practices. Through counterfeiting, governments lose out on tax money and luxury brands, often the main target of counterfeiters, must cope with the possible dilution of standing and erosion of trust held by the consumer due to fears of purchasing an unauthenticated product. NetNames, a firm specializing in online brand protection and anti-counterfeiting services, works with luxury brands to protect their online presence and intellectual property from counterfeiting threats. “The quality of manufacturing methods and materials, along with special and proprietary branding, processing and packaging are what make luxury products unique enough to command high prices in addition to the unique role they play in the market,” said Andrew Brodsky, commercial director at NetNames, New York. “Building in authentication procedures such as recognizable-but-difficult-to-replicate logos, colors and payment methods, is the first line of defense for any luxury brand that has an online offering,” he said. “Not having these methods in place is an open invitation to fraudsters to put up convincing but fake Web sites that accept payment for counterfeit goods…or possibly for no product at all.” In this Q&A, Mr. Brodsky discusses how NetNames works with its clients, how new technologies will affect counterfeiting and why it is vital for brand’s to protect their goods from counterfeits in the online space. Here is the dialogue: How did NetNames become part of the anti-counterfeiting movement? We've been offering online brand protection solutions for over 15 years and are considered pioneers in the industry because of our proprietary technologies and human analysis. In the beginning, our practice focused solely on helping companies establish and enhance a global presence online. We began to notice an increasing need for online brand protection and anti-counterfeiting solutions due to the continual increase of threats that arose. In the digital world, the most valuable asset a brand has is its intellectual property and we have made it our business to stay one step ahead of infringing forces. During the past decade, we have acquired a network of leading global brands, and we have the resources, worldwide expertise and state-of-the-art technology to proactively safeguard the IP and brand assets of these global corporations. Page | 9 How does digital technology play an important role in preventing counterfeiting? One in six products sold online is identified as counterfeit, and in the European Union, 30 percent of all counterfeit seizures are linked to Internet distribution channels. But just as digital technology is responsible for allowing the distribution of the vast majority of counterfeit goods, it can also be a tremendous asset in locating, identifying and taking down infringing sites, listings and applications—ultimately leading to a reduction in the amount of fakes threatening the integrity of any brand that proactively defends its intellectual property. By using cutting edge methods to detect, analyze and enforce against key infringers, brands can deploy a veritable arsenal of techniques to use against counterfeiters. The breadth of this type of response is only possible through digital technology. What are some ways brands can use the insights generated by NetNames to fend off counterfeiting? First, they need to identify high level infringements—the assessment of how counterfeiting and other online fraud is affecting their brand is the first step in employing a good online security strategy. Then they can enlist their customers through their own Web sites and through social media. The most successful brands get active on social media and mobile apps, and list qualities of their product that couldn’t be replicated, and/or telltale signs of fakes they’ve seen out there. Finally, in an effort to deplete the infringements that exist, brands should enlist the help of online brand protection specialists such as NetNames—a firm that is in the business of scanning all corners of the Web for counterfeit and grey market products and Web sites and relentlessly take them down. Why are authentication procedures so important for luxury brands? Obviously the quality of manufacturing methods and materials, along with special and proprietary branding, processing and packaging are what make luxury products unique enough to command high prices in addition to the unique role they play in the market. Building in authentication procedures such as recognizable-but-difficult-to-replicate logos, colors and payment methods, is the first line of defense for any luxury brand that has an online offering. Not having these methods in place is an open invitation to fraudsters to put up convincing but fake Web sites that accept payment for counterfeit goods…or possibly for no product at all. Versace’s Versus, for example, created a counterfeit-inspired clothing line while other brands such as Cartier have pressed charges. Is there a proper way for brands to respond and react? Will these reactions help or hinder the problem? Cartier’s September 2014 campaign to block counterfeit Web sites—which led to the groundbreaking ruling that two Web sites were ordered to shut down because of claims of pirated goods sends a message to fraudsters, and to the world, that this behavior is not only not okay, it’s illegal and punishable by heavy fines (that can go into the hundreds of thousands of Page | 10 dollars) and jail time, not to mention having to remove a Web site that probably a major source of income. While there was public outcry about free trade and freedom of expression, this is a much more appropriate brand response, to our way of looking at it. Due to counterfeiting governments are losing a lot of money in taxes -- what impact will this have on the products and brands being copied? Any time revenues are diverted to a third party—in this case counterfeiters—both brands and governments will lose out. Low operating costs, uninhibited access to a global customer base and high levels of anonymity make online channels the perfect ‘shop window’ for the sale of counterfeit goods – not just knockoff luxury items, but also fashionable accessories, toys, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and even car and airline parts. The global nature of the online marketplace also makes it much harder to enforce sales tax collection. It is therefore incumbent on brand owners to protect themselves online and take active measures to stop counterfeiters from using their hard-earned brand identities toward these illegal gains. Proactive and effective online anti-counterfeiting strategies must be put in place to preserve customer confidence and brand equity, and to safeguard sales and revenues. How can brands work to better authenticate their products on third party retailer’s Web sites? They can start by limiting and vetting the marketplaces through which their branded luxury goods are sold. As noted below, some Web sites have flagrantly and notoriously offered fake goods, while others have adopted stringent anti-counterfeiting policies that protect brands’ intellectual property to a much greater extent. Some of the methods used to determine whether goods sold are legitimate or knockoffs include detection of aberrations in brand imagery, logos, colors, packaging, rogue domain names and duplicated text. Using proprietary software, brands can protect their intellectual property by keeping tabs on this activity and flagging potential infringers. Where are the most counterfeited items produced and where are they more likely to be purchased? Most counterfeited items originate in mainland China, which alone accounted for more than half a billion dollars just in fake purses seized in 2013. China and Hong Kong were pinned with 93 percent of the estimated manufacturer's suggested retail price (MSRP) of all confiscated goods in 2013, for $1.6 billion in total. They’re most likely to be bought from online market places such as eBay, Alibaba and Taobao. Although the U.S. Trade Representative dropped Alibaba from its “notorious marketplace” list in 2012, complaints that the online platform is an enabler for sellers of fraudulent goods continue to mount. Page | 11 In September 2014, CNN Money headlined a story, “Alibaba has a major counterfeit problem,” indicating that in the two years that had passed since they were dropped from the watch list, the perception hadn’t shifted. As recently as May 15, as reported in these pages and other publications, Kering, the holding company for brands such as Gucci and Yves Saint Laurent, filed the lawsuit against Alibaba, in a U.S. district court in New York. Infringers also exploit mobile app stores as an ideal shop front; users are less likely to question the legitimacy of an app than a phony Web site they accessed on their home computer. By January 2014, mobile devices accounted for 55 percent of internet usage in the United States, and apps made up 47 percent of internet traffic. Consumers are always looking for a good deal, how can a brand work to persuade a consumer from buying a counterfeit? Brand owners have to keep reminding their customers about the things that make their brand unique. By educating consumers about what goes into producing quality products—whether it’s in craftsmanship, materials, design or merchandising and presentation—brands will be rendering a service to consumers and to the marketplace. As we mentioned earlier, connecting with customers through social media and legitimate Web sites and retailers is one way to do this. There are other creative methods that brands will need to implement to persuade consumers not to go for the cheap alternative. With cosmetics or pharmaceuticals, these fakes can actually pose a serious health threat to the consumer. So appealing on the level of health and safety may in some cases trump the almighty dollar…but it won't be easy. In what ways do you think counterfeiters will become smarter in the next five to 10 years? As technology advances, fraudsters will keep pace. In the next five to 10 years we see mobile and social becoming an even more serious security issue. Already it’s a far easier platform from which digital pirates and fraudsters can dupe consumers, since the inherent protections are weaker and the way the smaller screens are used—on the go and in a hurry—lends itself to people buying into fraudulent deals more easily. Mobile payment methods are in their infancy, too, leaving another loophole for counterfeiters to slip through. Also in its early stages, we’ll probably see a lot more brand infringements made possible by new and evolving production methods like 3D printing. Page | 12 References: Bain, Marc. “Alibaba’s Jack Ma: The problem with counterfeits is they’re “better quality” than authentic luxury goods.” Quartz. http://qz.com/706493/alibabas-jack-ma-the- problem-with-counterfeits-is-theyre-better-quality-than-authentic-luxury-goods/ (accessed December 9, 2016). Bell, Bethan. “What's wrong with buying fake luxury goods?” BBC News. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-36782724 (accessed December 9, 2016). Chu, Kathy. “Luxury Brands Get Tough With Counterfeiters.” The Wall Street Journal. http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2016/08/16/luxury-brands-get-tough-with- counterfeiters/ (accessed December 9, 2016). King, Jen. “Online anti-counterfeiting strategies preserve brand equity: NetNames.” Luxury Daily. https://www.luxurydaily.com/online-anti-counterfeiting-strategies-preserve- brand-equity-netnames/ (accessed December 9, 2016). Relevant academic journal articles: Bian, Xuemei, and Cleopatra Veloutsou. "Consumers' attitudes regarding non-deceptive counterfeit brands in the UK and China." Journal of Brand Management 14, no. 3 (2007): 211-222. Chiu, Weisheng, and Ho Keat Leng. "Consumers’ intention to purchase counterfeit sporting goods in Singapore and Taiwan." Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 28, no. 1 (2016): 23-36. Doss, Farrell, and Tammy Robinson. "Luxury perceptions: luxury brand vs counterfeit for young US female consumers." Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 17, no. 4 (2013): 424-439. Nia, Arghavan, and Judith Lynne Zaichkowsky. "Do counterfeits devalue the ownership of luxury brands?" Journal of Product & Brand Management 9, no. 7 (2000): 485-497. Perez, María Eugenia, Raquel Castaño, and Claudia Quintanilla. "Constructing identity through the consumption of counterfeit luxury goods." Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 13, no. 3 (2010): 219-235. Phau, Ian, and Min Teah. "Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: a study of antecedents and outcomes of attitudes towards counterfeits of luxury brands." Journal of Consumer Marketing 26, no. 1 (2009): 15-27. Phau, Ian, Min Teah, and Agnes Lee. "Targeting buyers of counterfeits of luxury brands: A study on attitudes of Singaporean consumers." Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing 17, no. 1 (2009): 3-15. Tang, Felix, Vane-Ing Tian, and Judy Zaichkowsky. "Understanding counterfeit consumption." Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 26, no. 1 (2014): 4-20. Teah, Min, Ian Phau, and Yu-an Huang. "Devil continues to wear “counterfeit” Prada: a tale of two cities." Journal of Consumer Marketing 32, no. 3 (2015): 176-189. Wilcox, Keith, Hyeong Min Kim, and Sankar Sen. "Why do consumers buy counterfeit luxury brands?" Journal of Marketing Research 46, no. 2 (2009): 247-259.