Content uploaded by Kameswara Rao Poranki
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kameswara Rao Poranki on Mar 20, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
www.theinternationaljournal.org> RJSSM: Volume: 05, Number: 11, March 2016 Page 195
Customer Brand Preference of Mobile Phones at Hyderabad, India
Kameswara Rao Poranki
Professor in Department of Marketing, FAFS, Al Baha University, Saudi Arabia
Abstract
The markets for Mobile phones are one of the most turbulent today due to increased Competition and
changing consumer brand preferences. The Researchers of this paper aimed to address the question
by analyzing brand is preferred most by mobile phone users in Hyderabad town while purchasing
mobile phones and status and impact of the technical, economical, social and personal criterion by
mobile phone users in Hyderabad. And also wishes to found out the process of decision making while
choosing and purchasing the branded mobile product with respect to their current satisfaction level on
the particular brand. To gather data from 250 respondents we have selected them from mobile
recharge centers, mobile phone shops and public places in Hyderabad town. The data thus collected
were analysed by using simple percentage analysis and by chi-square test.
Key words: Consumer brand Preference, Brand awareness and Level of Satisfaction etc
Originality/value: This piece of research is pivotal to know the consumer brand preferences in a
metro town like Hyderabad to represent the entire population of India in the best mobile market.
Introduction
As per literature, the Mobile phones were introduced in the mid-1980s and in the last two decades
their ownership and use has increased dramatically in many parts of the world. Also, Mobile phone
ownership at the end of 2005 was at near saturation levels in many areas of the world–most notably in
East Asia, as over 90% of all households in South Korea, Japan and urban China own at least one
mobile phone (http://www.ipsosinsight.com). In the Western European markets rank second
collectively in mobile phone prevalence, with roughly 80% of all households owning a wireless
handset (http://www.ipsosinsight.com). And in North America, prevalence of mobile ownership is
slightly less robust: in the U.S., three in four households own a mobile phone, while just over 60% of
Canadian households own a mobile phone today. Interestingly, the popularity of mobile phones is a
result of the communication and flexibility that they facilitate and the personal safety issues that they
overcome. Interestingly, the design of mobile phones is also evolving, with more functions being
added to an increasingly “miniaturized” handset. In themselves, miniaturization and increased
function might make the phone more difficult to use while driving as more concentration may be
required. The Cellular telephone (commonly "mobile phone" or "cell phone" or "hand phone") is a
long-range, portable electronic device used for mobile communication.
Trends in Mobile Phone Usage Worldwide
As per the research findings from the eMarketer website it is found that 4.55 billion people worldwide
to use a mobile phone in 2014. However, the Mobile adoption is slowing, but new users in the
developing regions of Asia-Pacific and the Middle East and Africa will drive further increases. In the
years 2013 and 2017, mobile phone penetration will rise from 61.1% to 69.4% of the global
population, according this report.
www.theinternationaljournal.org> RJSSM: Volume: 05, Number: 11, March 2016 Page 196
Figure-01: Worldwide Mobile Phone Users
Source: www.eMarketer.com
It was noted that Mobile phone users are rapidly switching over to smartphones as devices become
more affordable and 3G and 4G networks advance. The Smartphone users currently account for a
majority of mobile phone users in 10 of the 22 countries included in the forecast according to
eMarketer this to increase to 16 countries during 2014.
Figure-02: Smartphone Users and Penetration Worldwide
Source: www.eMarketer.com
As per the above Figure-02 it was found that the global Smartphone audience surpassed the 1 billion
mark in 2012 and will total 1.75 billion in 2014 and the eMarketer expects Smartphone adoption to
continue on a fast-paced trajectory through 2017 all over the world. Astonishingly, by the end of the
forecast period, Smartphone penetration among mobile phone users globally will near 50%.
The smart growth in India's phone market
According to the latest trends in the Indian Smartphone market is heating up as multinational and
homegrown companies compete to convert customers away from old-generation feature phones. The
cellular penetration at just 73%, handset makers still have room to attract new customers in India and
consumers' are also upgrading, with a thriving replacement market aided by dropping prices and cheap
financing schemes. As per the August report from to technology researcher IDC India (International
Data Corporation), only 10% of India's mobile population uses smartphones but this is the fastest
growing segment, accounting for 29% of handset shipments in the quarter ended June 2014, up from
16% in Q2 2013. As per this research, during the quarter the overall India mobile handset market
stood at 63.21m units with a 5% quarterly growth, while Smartphone shipments grew 11% quarterly
www.theinternationaljournal.org> RJSSM: Volume: 05, Number: 11, March 2016 Page 197
and 84% year-on-year. However, the UK-based consultancy Canalys says that India is now the world's
fastest growing Smartphone market globally and the third-largest market after China and the United
States. Also according to a July report by We Are Social, India has only 243m Internet users, a 19%
penetration rate, but three-quarters of these use their mobile phones to go online. Google says it
expects India to be the world's second-largest Internet market by 2017, driven by mobile usage.
Intestinally, this has contributed to the meteoric rise of local companies. Not even on the map five
years ago, they now account for a third of handset sales and dominate the market share rankings.
According to IDC, in Q2 2014, Samsung Electronics Co. led the overall handset market with a 17%
market share followed by Micromax (14%), Nokia (10%), Karbonn (9%) and Lava (8%). The research
firm IDC says it is noteworthy that Micromax is growing faster than Samsung and that among the top
five vendors, only Micromax and Lava are growing faster than the market, at 18% and 54%
respectively, although Samsung still comfortably leads the Smartphone segment with a 29% share
against 18% for Micromax. Six-year-old Micromax may soon outrun Samsung: indeed, a report from
Hong Kong-based Counterpoint Technology Market Research estimated a 16.6% overall market share
for Micromax in the same June quarter, against 14.4% for Samsung's 14.4%. There are some new
threats from China in this field. Popular Smartphone brands are looking to India. For example, China's
Gionee, earlier a supplier to Micromax, has sold 3milion units since its Indian debut in March 2013
and Taiwanese computer maker Asus entered the Smartphone market in July 2014 with four
smartphones priced between Rs5,999 and Rs16,999, selling over 100,000 units since. This company is
now aims to be among India's top five Smartphone players by end of 2015. Also, China's Xiaomi has
also sold 100,000 units of its flagship Mi3 device, priced at Rs13, 999, since it was launched in July
2014 according to this website (http://www.eiu.com). However, the local companies are also
partnering with international ones. In September, Google, working with MediaTek and Micromax,
Karbonn and Spice, introduced its new Android One smartphones priced as low as Rs6,399 to
capitalize on the mobile Internet shift. From America, US-based Mozilla, which drives open-source
web browser Firefox, partnered Indian phone maker Intex to introduce Firefox smartphones for
Rs1,999 and aims to sell half a million handsets by end-2014. Strikingly, all that feverish activity will
benefit both India's customers and handset makers (http://www.eiu.com).
Literature Review
The researcher of this paper Kameswara Rao Poranki (2015) has rightly noted that, brands are not new
to marketing. He also found that the concept of brand was first used by the ancient Egyptian brick-
makers who drew symbols on bricks for identification (Farquhar, 1990). The researcher Farquhar has
opined that managing brand equity is one of the pivotal aspects for any company. Also in the North
America there is a need for brand identification while growing their cattle forming as a kind of legal
protection and proof of ownership (De Chernatony and McDonald, 2003) which will result creating
powerful brands. The important point of a company strategy revolves around the brand orientation of
consumers and companies identifies the importance of brand management and the spectrum of brand
has been broadened beyond marketing communication and the resource-based theory of marketing
strategy (Wong and Merrilees, 2007, Doyle, 1989). According to Wong opined that there are multiple
roles played by brands for any modern company and according to Doyle, building successful brands
leads to success of any company. The researcher (Festinger, Leon 1964) some researchers have raised
questions concerning the nature and direction of causation in relations between attitudes and behavior.
Some research studies related to segmentation on the basis of personality characteristics have had
negative or inconclusive results. Brand choice also depends on Psychological and Objective Factors
are more useful in the Prediction of Brand Choice. (Evans, Franklin B,1959) and, it is important to find
out the types of consumers (Koponen, Arthur,1960), apart from personality and product use (Tucker,
W. T. and John J. Painter,1961).
www.theinternationaljournal.org> RJSSM: Volume: 05, Number: 11, March 2016 Page 198
Figure-03: Boosting Brand Preference: The Voice of Your Customer
Source: http://beckysebring.com/2015/08/hello-world/
(By BECKY on AUGUST 27, 2015)
As per the above figure-03 it was found that, Brand awareness, the measurement of consumers’
knowledge of your brand and brand image, how consumers perceive your company, product or
service, is a marriage that directly translates to “wallet share.” This is the process of developing a
positive, meaningful and powerful brand image will create customer stickiness that translates into
sales. However, what happens when your brand awareness and image are strong and top of mind yet
your brand preference scores lower on the scale than your competition? How do you affect the
decision making process so your customers will choose your company, your product or service instead
of your competitor’s are the questions to be posed by the marketers. Also, Brand preference is defined
as the “measure of brand loyalty in which a consumer will choose a particular brand in the presence of
competing brands, but will accept substitutes if that brand is not available.” If your brand awareness
or image isn’t the problem then let’s explore three of the most popular issues that impact brand
preference. It’s all about listening to the voice of the customer what type of pricing he/she is interested
and their needs to be fulfilled by the suitable brands and their availability.
Objectives of this research
a) To identify the brand preference of students at Hyderabad associated with different mobile
phones.
b) To assess the students' satisfaction towards the various mobile phones.
c) To know what major features, which a customers' looks for in a mobile before making a
purchase.
d) To identify the factors that influence decision-making in purchasing a mobile phone.
e) To assess the impact of advertisement on the buying decision of students.
f) To conclude other factors, which help in increasing the sale of mobile phones?
Method
We have taken a simple random technique while selecting the sample of 250 for the purpose of this
research. The data thus, gathered in and around the city of Hyderabad, India. We have used probability
research design and it could be a descriptive research. The data collected through primary as well as
secondary sources.
Conclusion
In this research we have made deep study in knowing the brand preferences of student community in
the metro city like Hyderabad in India. Initially we found that Nokia is the most favorite brand of the
www.theinternationaljournal.org> RJSSM: Volume: 05, Number: 11, March 2016 Page 199
college student and 35% student change their mobile phones within 1to2 years and 30% students are
using the mobile phones since last 1 to 2 years. 51% students are ready to pay for a mobile phone less
than 10,000 and they spend according to their family income. 49% students like the Nokia
advertisement most. Mostly students use the mobile phones for talking, SMS and for using the GPRS
function. Mostly students have hands free, Bluetooth and memory card. Interestingly, almost all
students are aware about the GPRS, Bluetooth and MMS service but least students are aware about the
3G function. The most favorite brand among the college students is Nokia and the least favorite brand
is LG. The parameters like appearance, Price, Brand Image and advertisement are the important factors
for the students while purchasing mobile phones. Many students prefer slim, medium in weight and
large in size handset and influenced by the advertisements on television. There is a slight problem with
Nokia as it's hanging service is not so good. The students of Hyderabad are expecting from Nokia that
it should provide better service and try to solve the hanging problem. These students wish that cellular
companies should increase the awareness about the 3G service. Also they are looking at companies
should offer more range of Rs. 10,000 or less than 10,000. It was found that LG and Samsung should
try to expand its market share and also should try to increase the awareness through the television
advertisement. Finally, students opined that all companies should increase their distribution channels
for better reach to the consumers. The researcher of this paper recommends the future researchers to
keep on conduct similar research in many other cites of India to get more desirable results, whereby it
could be used by marketers of various competing companies in ever growing market of India.
References
1) De Chernatony, L. and McDonald. M. (2003). Creating Powerful Brands, Elsevier,
Butterworth Heinemann.
2) Doyle, P. (1989). Building successful brands: the strategic options, Journal of Marketing
Management, 5(1), 77-95.
3) Evans, Franklin B. "Psychological and Objective Factors in the Prediction of Brand Choice:
Ford versus Chevrolet," Journal of Business, 32 (October 1959), 340-69.
4) Farquhar, P. H. (1990). Managing brand equity, Journal of Advertising Research, 30(4), 7-12.
5) Festinger, Leon. "Behavioral Support for Opinion Change, "Public Opinion Quarterly, 28 (Fall
1964), 404-17.
6) Kameswara Rao Poranki (2015) & Mukhtar Yahia Ahmed Gumaa& Dr. Asif Perwej
'Assessment of Brand Preference in the Indian Mobile Phones Market" in
www.theinternationaljournal.org, RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 10, February 2015,pp 128-
136.
7) Koponen, Arthur. "Personality Characteristics of Purchasers, "Journal of Advertising Research,
1 (September 1960),6-12.
8) Tucker, W. T. and John J. Painter. "Personality and Product Use," Journal of Applied
Psychology, 45 (October 1961), 325-9.
9) Wong, H.Y. and Merrilees, B. (2007). Multiple roles for branding in international marketing,
International Marketing Review, 24(4), 384-408.
10) http://www.ipsosinsight.com/pressrelease.aspx?id=3049 (accessed 28 Nov 2006).
11) www.eMarketer.com
12) http://www.eiu.com/industry/article/782421662/the-smart-growth-in-indias-phone-
market/2014-10-27.
13) www.trai.gov.in
14) http ://www.nokia.com/t-aboutus-ttsl-organization. aspx
15) http://www.samsung.co .in/webapp/Aboutus/aboutushome.js
16) http ://www.LG.com/LG.portal? nfpb=true&pageLabel=LG Page AboutLG
17) http://www.motorola.co.in/about.htm
18) http://beckysebring.com/2015/08/hello-world/
19) www.google.com
20) www.scribd.com
www.theinternationaljournal.org> RJSSM: Volume: 05, Number: 11, March 2016 Page 200
ANNEXURE
Table-01: Sex ratio of the Respondents
Particulars
Number
Percentage
Male
139
55.6
Female
111
44.4
The above table tells us the graphical representation of the 250 Respondents.
Table-02: Occupation of the Respondents
Occupation of Respondents' Family
Number
Percentage
Service
109
43.6
Professional
34
13.6
Business
76
30.4
Others
31
12.4
Total
250
100
The above table tells us various occupations of the respondents
Table-03: Family Income level of the respondents
Family income (Indian Rupees)
Number
Percentage
Less than Rs.15,000
101
40.4
Rs.15,001-25,000
61
24.4
Rs.25,001-35,000
52
20.8
Rs.35001 and above
36
14.4
Total
250
100
The above table explains us about the family income levels of the respondents
Table-04: Educational Background of the Respondent’s parents
Educational Background
Number
Percentage
High school
34
13.6
Intermediate
23
9.2
Graduate
89
35.6
Post graduate
98
39.6
Other
6
2.4
Total
250
100
The above table tells us the educational background of the respondent's parents
Table-05: Consumer Brand Preferences
S.No
Brand
Respondents
Percentage
1
Nokia
155
62
2
Samsung
6
2.4
3
Sony Ericson
34
13.6
4
LG
22
8.8
5
Motorola
22
8.8
6
Others
11
4.4
Total
250
100.0
The above table tells us the consumer brand preferences
Table-06: Time Period of using the mobile phones
S.No
Time Period
Respondents
Percentage
1
Less than 1 year
48
19.2
2
1-2 years
75
30
3
2-4 years
56
22.4
www.theinternationaljournal.org> RJSSM: Volume: 05, Number: 11, March 2016 Page 201
4
Above 4 years
71
28.4
Total
250
100.0
The above table explains about the time period of using the mobile phones
Table-07: Frequency of changing the mobile phones
S.NO
Frequency of changing the mobile phones
Respondents
Percentage
1
Less than 1 year
59
23.6
2
1-2 years
88
35.2
3
2-4 years
43
17.4
4
Above 4 years
60
24
Total
250
100.0
The above table tells us the frequency of changing the mobile phones by respondents
.
Table-08: The Price the Consumers are willing to pay for mobile phones.
Consumers willingness to pay for mobiles
Number
Percentage
Less than 10,000
142
56.8
10,000 to 20,000
86
34.4
20,001 to 40,000
15
6
Any amount
7
2.8
Total
250
100
The above table tells us the Consumers willingness to pay for mobiles
Table-09: Influence of TV Ads on consumer brand preferences of mobile phones.
Brand
Number
Percentage
Nokia
122
48.8
Samsung
43
17.2
Sony Ericson
42
16.8
LG
11
4.4
Motorola
24
9.6
Iphone
2
.8
Blackberry
4
1.6
Other
2
.8
Total
250
100
The above table tells us Influence of TV Ads on consumer brand preferences of mobile phones
Chi- square analysis: Chi- square analysis is on the relationship between gender and time period of
usage the mobile phone.
Gender
Less than 1 year
1-2 years
2-4 years
Above 4 years
Total
Male
23
38
32
45
138
Female
25
36
25
26
112
Total
48
74
57
71
250
Ho; there is no significant relationship between the gender and time period of using the mobile phone.
H1; there is a significant relationship between the gender and time period of using the mobile phone.
O
E
(O-E)2
(O-E)2/E
23
26.5
12.25
.462
25
40.8
7.84
.192
38
31.4
.36
.011
www.theinternationaljournal.org> RJSSM: Volume: 05, Number: 11, March 2016 Page 202
36
39.2
33.64
.858
32
21.5
12.25
.570
25
33.2
7.84
.236
45
25.5
.25
.009
26
31.9
34.81
1.091
E
3.429
X2 = Σ (O-E)2 / E = 3.429
Number of degree of freedom: ndf = (row-1) (column –1)
= (2-1) (4-1)= 3
Table value of x2 at 1% level of significant = 7.78
Interpretation: Thus calculated X is less than the tabulated X . X calculated =3.429<X square=7.78.
So we will accept null hypothesis that is there is no difference significance relationship between
gender and time period of change the mobile phones.
Chi-square analysis on the relationship between Income and spending on mobile phones
Income/ Spending
Amount(Indian Rupees)
Less than
Rs.10,000
Rs.10,000-
20,000
Rs.20,000-
40,000
Rs.40,000
& above
Total
Less than 15,000
66
27
4
4
101
15,000 – 25,000
35
23
3
-
61
25,000- 35,000
29
20
1
2
52
35,000 & above
10
18
7
1
36
Total
140
88
15
7
250
Ho: There is no significant relationship between the income and spending on the mobile phones.
Ha: There is a significant relationship between the income and spending on the mobile phones.
O
E
(O-E)2
(O-E)2/E
66
56.66
89.11
1.57
35
34.16
.70
.02
29
29.12
.01
.00
10
20.16
103.2
5.11
27
35.55
73.10
2.05
23
21.47
2.34
.11
20
18.30
2.89
.16
18
12.67
28.40
2.24
4
6.06
4.24
.70
3
3.66
.435
.12
1
3.12
4.49
1-44
7
2.16
23.42
10.84
4
2.82
1.39
.50
-
1.70
2.89
1.7
2
1.45
.30
.21
1
1
0
0
E
26.77
X2 = Σ (O-E)2 / E = 26.77
Number of degree of freedom: ndf = (row-1) (column –1)
= (4-1) (4-1) = 9
Table value of x2 at 1% level of significant = 14.7
www.theinternationaljournal.org> RJSSM: Volume: 05, Number: 11, March 2016 Page 203
Interpretation: HO is rejected since the calculated value of x2 (26.77) more than the table value of x2
(12.59) hence there is a significant relationship between income and spending on mobile phones.
Chi-square analysis on the relationship between Gender and frequency of changing the mobile
phones
Gender
Less than 1 year
1-2 years
2-4 years
Above 4 years
Total
Male
38
45
23
33
139
Female
21
43
20
27
111
Total
59
88
43
60
250
Ho: There is no significant relationship between the income and frequency of changing the mobile
phones.
Ha: There is a significant relationship between the income and frequency of changing the mobile
phones.
O
E
(O-E)2
(O-E)2/E
38
32.80
27.04
.82
45
48.92
15.36
.31
23
23.90
1
.04
33
33.36
.13
.00
21
26.20
27.04
1.03
43
39.07
15.44
.40
20
19.09
.82
,04
27
26.64
.13
.00
E
2.64
X2 = Σ (O-E)2 / E = 2.64
Number of degree of freedom: ndf = (row-1) (column –1)
= (2-1) (4-1)= 3
Table value of x2 at 1% level of significant = 7.78
Interpretation: HO is accepted since the calculated value of x2 (2.64) less than the table value of x2
(7.78) hence there is no significant relationship between gender and frequency of changing the mobile
phones.
