pp 1–12 | Cite as

Non-deceptive deliberate purchase of brand lookalikes: a BOP customer value perspective

  • Ramendra SinghEmail author
  • Sangeeta Trott
Research Article


In this article, we unravel new insights about how bottom of pyramid (BOP) consumers derive value through purchase and consumption of deliberate lookalike brands. We analyse in-depth interview data of 12 BOP consumers and 8 BOP retailers from Mumbai, India, related to purchase and sales of counterfeit brands. Our results suggest three different themes that constitute the BOP customers’ value model for deliberate counterfeit purchases: (1) cost–benefit analysis, (2) status symbol, and (3) value for money. Our research provides fresh insights of how BOP consumers derive various aspects of value by balancing risks and returns from purchase of counterfeits, while also using these goods as status symbols. The managerial relevance of the research lies in leveraging BOP consumer insights on the value perceived in the use of deliberate lookalike brands, and how the customer value is embedded in BOP socio-economic context, which firms can leverage to tailor their communications to these segments.


Deliberate lookalikes Brand Bottom of pyramid (BOP) India Customer value 



  1. Ang SH, Cheng PS, Lim EAC, Tambyah SK (2001) Spot the difference: consumer responses towards counterfeits. J Consum Mark 18:219–235Google Scholar
  2. Arksey H, Knight P (1999) Interviewing for social scientists. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Babin JB, Darden RW, Griffin M (1994) Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitaarian shopping value. J Consum Res 20(4):644–656Google Scholar
  4. Banerjee AV, Duflo E (2007) The economic lives of the poor. J Econ Perspect 21(1):141–168Google Scholar
  5. Belk WR (1999) Leaping luxuries and transnational consumers. In: Batra R (ed) Marketing issues in transitional economies. Kluwer, London, pp 39–53Google Scholar
  6. Bernard RH (2000) Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Bian X, Moutinho L (2009) An investigation of determinants of counterfeit purchase consideration. J Bus Res 62(3):368–378Google Scholar
  8. Bian X, Haque S, Smith A (2015) Social power, product conspicuousness, and the demand for luxury brand counterfeit products. Br J Soc Psychol 54(1):37–54Google Scholar
  9. Bickle G, Schegel A, Fassbender P, Klein U (2006) Some personality correlates of business white -collar crime. Appl Pyschol Int Rev 55(2):220–223Google Scholar
  10. Bloch PH, Bush R, Campbell L (1993) Consumption accomplices in the product demand side investigation. J Consum Mark 10(4):27–36Google Scholar
  11. Boland RJ Jr (1986) Phenomenology: a preferred approach to research on information systems. In: Trends in information systems. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 341–349Google Scholar
  12. Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3:77–101Google Scholar
  13. Bryman A (2015) Social research methods. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Budiman S (2012) Analysis of consumer attitudes to purchase intentions of counterfeit bag product in Indonesia. Int J Manag Econ Soc Sci 1(1):1–12Google Scholar
  15. Burawoy M (1991) Ethnography unbound: power and resistance in the modern metropolis. University of California Press, CAGoogle Scholar
  16. Carpenter MJ, Lear K (2011) Consumer attitudes towards counterfeit fashion products: Does gender matter? J Text Appar Technol Manag 7(1):1–16Google Scholar
  17. De Matos CA, Ituassu CT, Rossi CAV (2007) Consumer attitudes towards counterfeits: a review and extension. J Consum Mark 24(1):36–47Google Scholar
  18. Eastman JK, Goldsmith RE, Flynn LR (1999) Status consumption in consumer behaviour” scale development and validation. J Mark Theory Pract 7:41–52Google Scholar
  19. Echardt MG, Mahi H (2004) The role of consumer agency in the globalization process in the emerging markets. J Macromark 24(2):136–146Google Scholar
  20. Eckhardt GM, Mahi H (2012) Globalization, consumer tensions, and the shaping of consumer culture in India. J Macromark 32(3):280–294Google Scholar
  21. Eisend M, Schuchert-Guller P (2006) Explaining counterfeit purchases: a review and preview. Acad Sci Rev. articles/eisend 12-2006.PDF. Accessed 25 JanGoogle Scholar
  22. Fontes A, Fan JX (2006) The effects of ethnic identity on household budget allocation to status conveying goods. J Fam Econ Issues 27(2):643–663Google Scholar
  23. Franses HP, Lede M (2015) Cultural norms and values and purchase of counterfeits. J Appl Econ 47:5902–5916Google Scholar
  24. Gentry JW, Putrevu S, II CS, Commuri S (2001) How now Ralph Lauren? The separation of brand and product in a counterfeit culture, ACR North American AdvancesGoogle Scholar
  25. Gentry WJ, Pulveu S, Schultz C (2006) The effect of counterfeiting on consumer search. J Consum Behav 5(3):245–256Google Scholar
  26. Goodman JD, Cohen M (2004) “Consumer Culture”—a reference handbook. ABC-CLIO Inc, Santa BarbaraGoogle Scholar
  27. Grossman GM, Shapiro C (1988) Counterfeit trade–product trade. Am Econ Rev 78:59–75Google Scholar
  28. Hammond AL (2007) The next 4 billion: market size and business strategy at the base of the pyramid.
  29. Harris LC, Dumas A (2009) Online consumer misbehaviour: an application of neutralization theory. Mark Theory 9(4):379–402Google Scholar
  30. Haynie LD, Armstrong PD (2006) Race- and gender-disaggregated homicide offending rates. Differences and similarities by victim offender relation across cities. Homicide Stud 10(1):3–32Google Scholar
  31. Higgins GE, Wolfe SE, Marcum CD (2008) Music piracy and neutralization: a preliminary trajectory analysis from short-term longitudinal data. Int J Cyber Criminol 2(2):324–336Google Scholar
  32. Illaria B, Veronica G, Silvia G (2016) Consumers’ awareness of luxury brand counterfeits and their subsequent responses: when a threat becomes an opportunity for the genuine brand. J Prod Brand Manag 25(5):452–464Google Scholar
  33. Khandeparkar K, Motiani M (2018) Fake-love: brand love for counterfeits. Mark Intell Plan 36(6):661–677Google Scholar
  34. Kumra R, Malik A (2014) An exploratory study of counterfeit purchases among rural bottom of pyramid customers in India. Int J Bus Emerg Mark 6(4):316–339Google Scholar
  35. Lee HS, Yoo B (2009) A review of the determinants of counterfeiting and piracy and the proposition for future research. Korean J Policy Stud 24(1):1–38Google Scholar
  36. Lichtenstein DR, Netemeyer RG, Burton S (1990) Distinguishing coupon proneness from value consciousness: an acquisition–transaction utility theory perspective. J Mark 54:54–67Google Scholar
  37. Maldonado C, Hume EC (2005) Attitudes toward counterfeit products: an ethical perspective. J Legal Ethical Regul Issues 8(2):105–117Google Scholar
  38. McColl-Kennedy JR, Vargo SL, Dagger TS, Sweeney JC, Van Kasteren Y (2012) Health care customer value co-creation practice styles. J Serv Res 15(4):370–389Google Scholar
  39. Nwankwo S, Hamelein N, Khaled M (2014) Consumer values, motivation and purchase intention for Luxury goods. J Retail Consum Serv 21(5):735–744Google Scholar
  40. Pels J, Sheth JN (2017) Business models to serve low income consumers in emerging markets. Mark Theory 17(3):373–391Google Scholar
  41. Penz E, Stottinger B (2008) Corporate image and product similarity—assessing major demand drivers for counterfeits in a multi-country study. Psychol Mark 25(4):352–381Google Scholar
  42. Penz E, Schlegelmilch BB, Stöttinger B (2009) Voluntary purchase of counterfeit products: empirical evidence from four countries. J Int Consum Mark 21(1):67–84Google Scholar
  43. Phau I, Teah M (2009) Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: a study of antecedents and outcome of attitude towards counterfeit of luxury goods. J Consum Mark 26(1):15–27Google Scholar
  44. Poddar AJ, Banerjee S, Ellen P (2012) Exploring the Robin hood effect: moral profiteering motives for purchasing counterfeit products. J Bus Res 65(10):1500–1506Google Scholar
  45. Ponzford M (2016) Curtailing counterfeit consumption: deciphering ethical attitudes and consumer intention. J Civ Legal Sci 5(1):167Google Scholar
  46. Prahalad CK, Hammond A (2002) Serving the world profitably. Harv Bus Rev 80(9):48–57Google Scholar
  47. Richins ML (1994) Valuing things: the public and private meaning of possessions. J Consum Res 21:504–521Google Scholar
  48. Richardson PS, Dick AS, Jain AK (1994) Extrinsic and intrinsic cue effects on perceptions of store brand quality. J Mark 58(4):28–36Google Scholar
  49. Ronkainen IA, Cusumano JL (2001) Correlates of intellectual property violation. Multinatl Bus Rev 9:59–65Google Scholar
  50. Rubin HJ, Rubin IS (1995) Qualitative interviewing: the art of hearing data, 2nd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. Santos JF, Ribeiro CJ (2006) An exploratory study of the relationship between counterfeit and culture. Polytech Stud Rev III(5/6):227–243Google Scholar
  52. Saroja S, Tomas G-A (2008) Integrated approach to understanding consumer behaviour at the bottom of the pyramid. J Consum Mark 25(7):402–412Google Scholar
  53. Sharma P, Chan RYK (2011) Counterfeit proneness: conceptualization and scale development. J Mark Manag 27(5–6):602–626Google Scholar
  54. Sharma P, Chan RYK (2016) Demystifying deliberate counterfeit purchase behaviour: towards a unified conceptual framework. Mark Intell Plan 34(3):318–335Google Scholar
  55. Sheth JN (2011) Impact of emerging markets on marketing: rethinking existing perspectives and practices. J Mark 75(July):166–182Google Scholar
  56. Sheth JN, Sisodia R (2012) The 4 A′s of marketing: creating value for customer, company and society. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  57. Stanley ThomasJ, Danko WilliamD (1996) The millionaire next door. MJF Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  58. Stottinger B, Penz E, Munwar K, Mubbisher (2015) Consumer and vendor perceptions of sport goods counterfeits in four counterfeit hubs. J Brand Strategy 4(3):281–290Google Scholar
  59. Strauss A, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research, Sage, grounded theory procedure and techinques. Sage, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar
  60. Tang F, Tian V, Zaichkowsky J (2014) Understanding counterfeit consumption. Asia Pac J Mark Logist 26:4–20Google Scholar
  61. Teddlie C, Yu F (2007) Mixed methods sampling a typology with examples. J Mixed Methods Res 1:77–100Google Scholar
  62. Thaichon P, Quach S (2016) Dark motives: motives-counterfeit purchase framework: internal and external motives behind counterfeit purchase via digital platforms. J Retail Consum Serv 33:82–91Google Scholar
  63. Thompson CJ, Locander WB, Pollio HR (1990) The lived meaning of free choice: an existential phenomenological description of everyday consumer experiences of contemporary married women. J Consum Res 17(3):346–361Google Scholar
  64. Trigg AB (2001) Veblen, Bourdieu, and conspicuous consumption. J Econ Issues 25(1):99–116Google Scholar
  65. Van Kempen L (2004) Are the poor willing to pay a premium for designer labels? A field experiment in Bolivia. Oxf Dev Stud 32(2):205–224Google Scholar
  66. Van Kempen L (2007a) Are the poor willing to pay a premium price for designer labels: a field experiment in Bolivia. Oxf Dev Stud 32(3):205–224Google Scholar
  67. Van Kempen L (2007b) Status consumption and ethnicity in Boliva: evidence from durables ownership. Int J Consum Stud 31(1):76–89Google Scholar
  68. Vishwanathan M, Jung K, Venugopal S, Minefee I, Jung IW (2014) Subsistence and Sustainability: from micro-level behavioral insights to macro-level implications on consumption, conservation, and the environment. J Macromark 34(1):8–27Google Scholar
  69. Walthers A, Buff CL (2008) Attitudes towards counterfeiting and counterfeit products: Have they changed? J Int Bus Econ 8(3):79–87Google Scholar
  70. Wan WWN, Luk W-L, Yau OHM, Tse ACB, Sin LYM, Kwong KK, Chow RPM (2009) Do traditional chinese cultural values nourish a market for pirated CDs? J Bus Ethics 88:185–196Google Scholar
  71. Wee C-H, Tan SJ, Cheok K-H (1995) Non price determinants of intention to purchase counterfeit goods. Int J Mark Rev 12(6):19–46Google Scholar
  72. Wilcox K, Kim HM, Sen S (2009) Why do consumers buy counterfeit luxury brands. J Mark Res 46(2):280–286Google Scholar
  73. Woodruffe HR (1997) Compensatory consumption go why do women go shopping when they’re fed up and other stories. Mark Intell Plan 15(7):325–334Google Scholar
  74. Xuemei B, Veloutsou C (2007) Consumers’ attitude regarding non-deceptive counterfeit brands in UK and China. J Brand Manag 14(3):211–222Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Institute of Management Calcutta 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.K-303, New Academic BlockIIM CalcuttaCalcuttaIndia
  2. 2.ITM-SIA Business School, P-88MIDCDombivli, Thane, MumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations