Limited Editions für Marken

Living reference work entry
Part of the Springer Reference Wirtschaft book series (SRW)

Zusammenfassung

Limited Editions bilden als spezielle Form der Produktlinienerweiterung eine immer häufiger eingesetzte Strategie von Marken zur Einführung neuer Produkte. Das dauerhafte Angebot innerhalb der Produktlinie wird dabei um außergewöhnliche, nur begrenzt verfügbare Varianten ergänzt. Die besondere Wirkung von Limited Editions auf den Konsumenten lässt sich anhand knappheits- und kategorisierungstheoretischer Ansätze erläutern und empirisch belegen. Bei der praktischen Umsetzung müssen Chancen und Risiken, die mit der Lancierung von Limited Editions einhergehen berücksichtigt sowie grundlegende Gestaltungsprinzipien beachtet werden..

Schlüsselwörter

Marke Produktlinienerweiterung Limited Edition Markendehnung Knappheit 

Literatur

  1. Aaker, D. A. (1992). Management des Markenwerts. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus.Google Scholar
  2. Aaker, D. A., & Keller, K. L. (1990). Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. Journal of Marketing, 54, 27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aggarwal, S., Jun, S. Y., & Huh, J. H. (2011). Scarcity messages: A consumer competition perspective. Journal of Advertising, 40(3), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aguirre-Rodriguez, A. (2013). The effect of consumer persuasion knowledge on scarcity appeal persuasiveness. Journal of Advertising, 42(4), 371–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Amaldoss, W., & Jain, S. (2005). Conspicuous consumption and sophisticated thinking. Management Science, 51, 1449–1466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Andrews, J., & Smith, D. C. (1996). In search of the marketing imagination: Factors affecting the creativity of marketing programs for mature products. Journal of Marketing Research, 33, 174–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Armstrong, G., Adam, S., Denize, S., & Kotler, P. (2015). Principles in Marketing (6. Aufl.). Melbourne: Pearson Australia.Google Scholar
  8. Banasiak, K. (2005). Here today, gone tomorrow. Food Technology, 59(4), 40–43.Google Scholar
  9. Baumgarth, C. (2008). Markenpolitik: Markenwirkungen – Markenführung – Markencontrolling. Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  10. Berlyne, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bless, H., Greifeneder, R., & Wänke, M. (2007). Marken als psychologische Kategorien: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer sozial-kognitiven Sichtweise. In A. Florack, M. Scarabis & E. Primosch (Hrsg.), Psychologie der Markenführung (S. 31–40). München: Vahlen.Google Scholar
  12. Boush, D. M. (2001). Marken als Kategorien. In F.-R. Esch (Hrsg.), Moderne Markenführung (3. Aufl., S. 809–824). Wiesbaden: Gabler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boush, D. M., & Loken, B. (1991). A process-tracing study of brand extension evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 16–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brock, T. C. (1968). Implications of commodity theory for value change. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock & T. M. Ostrom (Hrsg.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (S. 243–275). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
  17. Czellar, S. (2003). Consumer attitude toward brand extensions: An integrative model and research propositions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20, 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Esch, F.-R. (2014). Strategie und Technik der Markenführung (8. Aufl.). München: Vahlen.Google Scholar
  19. Esch, F.-R., & Winter, K. (2010). Evaluation and feedback effects of limited editions in FMCG categories. In R. Terlutter, S. Diehl, & S. Okazaki (Hrsg.), Advances in advertising research (Bd. 1, S. 21–36). Wiesbaden: Gabler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Feige, S. (2005). Freude an der Abwechslung. Absatzwirtschaft, 48(10), 54–57.Google Scholar
  21. Feige, S., & Koob, C. (2004). Wachstum und Markenprofilierung mit New Seasonals. persönlich – Die Zeitschrift für Unternehmensführung, 11, 54–62.Google Scholar
  22. Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In M. P. Zana (Hrsg.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (S. 1–74), 23. San Diego : Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gierl, H. (2010). Werbung mit Knappheitssignalen: Die Rolle des Typs des Signals, der Produktkategoire und der Sachargumente. Die Unternehmung, 64(2), 137–165.Google Scholar
  24. Gierl, H., Helm, R., & Stumpp, S. (1999). Erklärung des Konsumentenverhaltens durch die Optimum Stimulation Level Theorie. Marketing ZFP, 21(3), 217–235.Google Scholar
  25. Grime, I., Diamantopoulos, A., & Smith, G. (2002). Consumer evaluations of extensions and their effects on the core brand. European Journal of Marketing, 36(11/12), 1415–1438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Haller, P., & Twardawa, W. (2014). Die Zukunft der Marke – Handlungsempfehlungen für eine neue Markenführung. Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
  27. Harnad, S. (1987). Psychophysical and cognitive aspects of categorical perception: A critical overview. In S. Harnad (Hrsg.), Categorical perception – The groundwork of cognition (S. 1–25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hebb, D. O. (1955). Drives and the C.N.S. (conceptual nervous system). Psychological Review, 62(4), 243–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Heintschel, M. (2005). Farbenfroher Supermarkt, Orientierung in übervollen Regalen. Kreativ Verpacken, 4, 30–31.Google Scholar
  30. Hornsey, M. J., & Jetten, J. (2004). The individual within the group: Balancing the need to belong with the need to be different. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(3), 248–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hoyer, W. D., & Ridgway, N. M. (1984). Variety seeking as an explanation for exploratory purchase behavior: A theoretical model. Advances in Consumer Research, 11, 114–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huber, F., Matthes, I., Hamprecht, J., & Ackermann, F. (2012). Erfolgsfaktoren und Rückwirkungseffekte von Limited Editions. Lohmar: Eul Verlag.Google Scholar
  33. Jang, W., Ko, Y. J., Morris, J. D., & Chang, Y. (2015). Scarcity message effects on consumption behaviour: Limited edition product considerations. Psychology and Marketing, 32(10), 989–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kapferer, J.-N. (2008). The new strategic brand management – Advanced Insights and strategic thinking (5. Aufl.). London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  35. Kardes, F. R. (2002). Consumer behavior and managerial decision making (2. Aufl.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  36. Kirsche, M. (2005). Limited-Edition candy provides short – but sweet – sales boosts (04.11.2005). Drug Store News, Consumables, 45.Google Scholar
  37. Kroeber-Riel, W., & Esch, F.-R. (2015). Strategie und Technik der Werbung (8. Aufl.). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  38. Kroeber-Riel, W., & Gröppel-Klein, A. (2013). Konsumentenverhalten (10. Aufl.). München: Vahlen.Google Scholar
  39. Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J.-N. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profiles. Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Leuba, C. (1955). Toward some integration of learning theories: The concept of optimal stimulation. Psychological Reports, 1, 27–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Loken, B. (2006). Consumer psychology: Categorization, inferences, affect, and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 453–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Loken, B., & Roedder John, D. (1993). Diluting brand beliefs: When do brand extensions have a negative impact? Journal of Marketing, 57, 71–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lomax, W., & McWilliam, G. (2001). Consumer response to line extensions: Trial and cannibalisation effects. Journal of Marketing Management, 17(3/4), 391–406.Google Scholar
  44. Lynn, M. (1989). Scarcity effects on desirability: Mediated by assumed expensiveness? Journal of Economic Psychology, 10(2), 257–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lynn, M. (1992a). The psychology of unavailability: Explaining scarcity and cost effects on value. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lynn, M. (1992b). Scarcity’s enhancement of desirability: The role of naive economic theories. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lynn, M., & Harris, J. (1997a). The desire for unique consumer products: A new individual differences scale. Psychology and Marketing, 14(6), 601–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lynn, M., & Harris, J. (1997b). Individual differences in the pursuit of self-uniqueness through consumption. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(21), 1861–1883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lynn, M., & Snyder, C. R. (2002). Uniqueness seeking. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Hrsg.), Handbook of positive psychology (S. 395–410). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Mervis, C. B., & Rosch, E. (1981). Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 89–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Milberg, S. J., Park, C. W., & McCarthy, M. S. (1997). Managing negative feedback effects associated with brand extensions: The impact of alternative branding strategies. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 6(2), 119–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Moccia, S. (2013). Limited Editions: When conformists behave like snobs and snobs behave like conformists. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac.Google Scholar
  53. Montgomery, D. B. (1975). New product distribution: An analysis of supermarket buyer decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 12, 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Munthree, S., Bick, G., & Abratt, R. (2006). A framework for brand revitalization through an upscale line extension. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 15(3), 157–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Oller, S. (2006). Short and sweet – Limited-edition candy is keeping things interesting in the category, but for how long?. CSP, February(2), 72–80.Google Scholar
  56. Ozanne, J. L., Brucks, M., & Grewal, D. (1992). A study of information search behavior during the categorization of new products. Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 452–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pavelchak, M. A. (1989). Piecemeal and category-based evaluation: An idiographic analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(3), 354–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pieters, R., & Warlop, L. (1999). Visual attention during brand choice: The impact of time pressure and task motivation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 16(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Raab, S. K., & Unger, F. (2005). Marktpsychologie: Grundlagen und Anwendungen (2. Aufl.). Wiesbaden: Gabler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Raju, P. S. (1980). Optimum stimulation level: Its relationship to personality, demographics, and exploratory behaviour. Journal of Consumer Research, 7, 272–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Reddy, S. K., Holak, S. L., & Bhat, S. (1994). To extend or not to extend: Success determinants of line extensions. Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 243–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Reynolds, J. (2007). Limited edition, limited appeal? (21. Juni 2007). Marketing Week, Issue 25, 7Google Scholar
  63. Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 573–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Roy, R., & Sharma, P. (2015). Scarcity appeal in advertising: Exploring the moderating roles of need for uniqueness and message framing. Journal of Advertising, 44(4), 349–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Russo, J. E., & Leclerc, F. (1994). An eye-fixation analysis of choice processes for consumer nondurables. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 274–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ruvio, A. (2008). Unique like everybody else? The dual role of consumers’ need for uniqueness. Psychology and Marketing, 25(5), 444–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schmidt-Junker, Y. (2008). Raritäten en masse. Das Geschäft mit limitierten Kollektionen boomt. Ist die begrenzte Verfügbarkeit von Luxusprodukten der Ausdruck ultimativer Exklusivität oder nur cleveres Marketing? Five to nine. Das Lifestyle-Magazin der Wirtschaftswoche, 6(2), 66–67.Google Scholar
  68. Schneider, W., & Hennig, A. (2008). Lexikon Kennzahlen für Marketing und Vertrieb (2. Aufl.). Berlin\Heildelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  69. Sevilla, S., & Redden, J. P. (2014). Limited availability reduces the rate of satiation. Journal of Marketing Research, 51, 205–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Shaw, R., & Merrick, D. (2005). Marketing payback: Is your marketing profitable? Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  71. Simonson, I., & Nowlis, S. M. (2000). The role of explanations and need for uniqueness in consumer decision making: Unconventional choices based on reasons. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 49–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Snyder, C. R. (1992). Product scarcity by need for uniqueness interaction: A consumer catch-22 carousel? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1980). Uniqueness – The human pursuit to difference. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  74. Stock, A., & Balachander, S. (2005). The making of a „hot product“: A signaling explanation of marketers’ scarcity strategy. Management Science, 51(8), 1181–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2002). Urteilsheuristiken. In D. Frey & M. Irle (Hrsg.), Theorien der Sozialpsychologie, Band III: Motivations-, Selbst- und Informationsverarbeitungstheorien (2. Aufl., S. 352–384). Bern: Verlag Hans Huber.Google Scholar
  76. Stroebe, W., Jonas, K., & Hewstone, M. (2003). Sozialpsychologie: eine Einführung (4. Aufl.). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  77. Tauber, E. M. (1981). Brand franchise extension: New product benefits from existing brand names. Business Horizons, 24(2), 36–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Theodore, S. (2004). For a limited time only. Beverage Industry, 95(9), 6.Google Scholar
  79. Thompson, S. (2006). Hershey reaches limits of limited-edition candy. Advertising Age, 77(18), 12.Google Scholar
  80. Thorbjørnsen, H. (2005). Brand extensions: Brand concept congruency and feedback effects revisited. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 14(4), 250–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Tian, K. T., Bearden, W. O., & Hunter, G. L. (2001). Consumers’ need for uniqueness: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 50–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Urban, G. L., & Hauser, J. R. (1993). Design and marketing of new products (2. Aufl.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  83. Verhallen, T. M. M., & Robben, H. S. J. (1995). Unavailability and the evaluation of goods. Kyklos, 48(3), 369–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wahlers, R. G., & Etzel, M. J. (1985): A Consumer Response to Incongruity Between Optimal Stimulation and Life Style Satisfaction. In Advances in Consumer Research, 12(1), 97–101.Google Scholar
  85. Waldmann, M. R. (2008). Kategorisierung und Wissenserwerb. In J. Müsseler (Hrsg.), Allgemeine Psychologie (2. Aufl., S. 376–427). Berlin: Spektrum Akademischer Verlag.Google Scholar
  86. Wicke, L. S. (1994). The logic of product-line extensions. Harvard Business Review, 72(6), 59.Google Scholar
  87. Winter, K. (2009). Wirkung von Limited Editions für Marken. Wiesbaden: Gabler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Wu, W.-Y., Lu, H.-Y., Wu, Y.-Y., & Fu, C.-S. (2012). The effects of product scarcity and consumers’ need for uniqueness on purchase intentions. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 36, 263–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hochschule für angewandte Wissenschaften Fachhochschule AschaffenburgAschaffenburgDeutschland
  2. 2.Lehrstuhl für Markenmanagement und Automotive MarketingEBS Universität für Wirtschaft und RechtWiesbadenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations