UNIQLO in Boston Market

UNIQLOCathy Chao Jalika ContehTina Hsieh Tracy Hwong

Tino Lin

U N IQ LO

U N IQ LOU N

IQ LO

U N IQ LOU N

IQ LO

U N IQ LO

U N IQ LOU N IQ LO

U N IQ LOU N IQ LOU N

IQ LO

U N IQ LO

Introduction

Founded in 1984 by Ogori Shōji

Started with several roadside stands and evolved into retail stores in international locations

A Japanese-based, casual-wear clothing company

Mission: “Create clothing with new and unique style and satisfy customers worldwide.”

STRENGTHS/ WEAKNESSES

Inexpensive

Durable and versatile clothing

Appeals to women

Japanese technology

Famous designers

lack of brand awareness

lack of “fashionable” pieces

UNIQLO’s idea of “ Stylish” may differ from customers

Situation Analysis

Situation AnalysisOPPORTUNITIES/THREATS

• large market• easy acceptability• connection to

Boston culture• easy expansion• globalization

• lack of differentiation

• very competitive industry; hard to enter the market

• customer loyalty to more familiar brands

Marketing Problems

• Customer loyalty to more familiar brands• Fierce competition• Low brand awareness

Research Objective

Indentify frequency levels of consumer purchase

Examine consumer’s perception of style

Explore consumers’ acceptance of Asian brand

Evaluate attitudes towards UNIQLO brand image

Explore collaboration with UNIQLO and Boston culture

Gauge customers’ purchase intention(s)

Develop marketing progress of UNIQLO

MethodologyFocus Group Interview

• 8 participants(Convenience Sampling): -5 females and 3 males -Age under 28 -7 students, 1 full time worker -All Strivers and Makers(VALS II)

• Key measures: Shopping behavior, Brand perception, Purchase intention

and Overall recommendation

• Showing concept board + website

MethodologySurvey

• Data collection method: person-to-person interview• Sampling methods and samples: -Non probability-Convenience Sampling -Total 100 respondents between the ages of 18-35 -68 females and 32 males• Key measures: -Shopping patterns, buying motivations, Overall

evaluation, Purchase intention and Promotion recommendation

MethodologySurvey

• Data analysis: SPSS -Frequency, Crosstabs and T-test measures• Action standard(High): -Top 2 box of 60% and a mean score of 3.50 -Low brand awareness and highly competitive

market

Result: FGIBefore Concept Board

• Buying BehaviorShopping frequencyNeed-based buyersConcerns when buying clothing: Quality, Price

• PerceptionJapanese-made clothingFashionStyle

• Brand AwarenessPositive: most people have heard of the brand

Result: FGIAfter Concept Board

• Overall evaluation– Casual– Affordable price– Variety of choice– Comfortable to wear– Competitors:

H&M, American Apparel, the Gap, Zara

• Strength– Designed for individual, young people– Good customer service– Style

• Weakness– Poor Quality

Result: FGIAfter Concept Board

• Best locationNewbury St.Quincy Market (if to open a flagship store)

• PromotionT-shirt contestCampus campaignCouponStudent discount

• RecommendationMore quality control

Result: SurveyBefore Concept Board

H&M American Eagle

Urban Outfitters

The Gap Zara Other American Apparel

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

7567

57 5648

32 29

Brand Preference

Gender Difference:Female respondents prefer H&M (89%)Urban Outfitters (68%)Zara (58%) more.

H&M

Motivations for shopping Total %Value of the money 76Good materials 48Brand reputation 54Famous designers 14Store location 36Variety choices 47Service 10Fashion style 72Other 2


Motivations for shopping Total %

Value of the money 76

Fashion style 72

Good materials 48

Brand reputation 54

Famous designers 14

Store location 36

Variety choices 47

Service 10

0

20

40

60

80

100

26

50

60

86

Motivations for Shopping

Male Female

Gender Difference:Female respondents focus on Fashion Style (86%) & Variety Choices (60%)


32%

35%

19%

9%

5%

Money Spent on Clothing

Under $50 $50-$99$100-$149$150-$199$200+

Age Difference:Respondents aged 18-24 spend $50-$99 (43%) more.Respondents aged 25 and above spend under $50 (40%) more.

Total Females Males 18-24 25 and above

Top 2 box % 62 72 46 75 49

Result: SurveyAfter Concept Board


1

2

3

4

5

3.72 3.853.51

3.84 3.6

Overall Evaluation of UNIQLO

Action Standard:Top 2 box %: 60%Mean Score: 3.50


Top 2 box % 62 69 53 71 53



1

2

3

4

5

3.7 3.853.45

3.79 3.6

Purchase Intention of UNIQLO

Action Standard:Top 2 box %: 60%Mean Score: 3.50


Likes & Dislikes about UNIQLO

Likes 32%

39%

27%

Stylish & Fashionable

2 3

Affordable Price

Good Quality

1

18%

28%

10%

Dislikes

12 3

DesignOrdinary

The name & model

Evaluation by Attributes Mean

Cheap vs. Expensive 3.54

Simple vs. Decorative 3.80

Low quality vs. High Quality 4.98

Unfashionable vs. Fashionable 4.78

Flimsy vs. Durable 4.80

Unreliable vs. Reliable 5.06

Ordinary vs. Innovative 4.55

Plain vs. Colorful 4.46


Gender Difference:Male respondents perceive UNIQLO as more Innovative (4.41)Colorful (4.10)Expensive (3.79).Female perceive UNIQLO as more Reliable (5.12).

Age Difference:18-24 respondents perceive UNIQLO as more Durable (4.90)Colorful (4.55)


Top 2 box % 31 31 32 33 30Mean 2.87 2.82 2.95 2.96 2.77


Purchase Intention When Connecting with Boston Cultures

The respondents of this research showed moderately low level of purchase intention when connecting with Boston Cultures and failed to pass the action. There was no difference in terms of gender and age.


Gender Difference:Female prefer Gift card (31%) more.

Age Difference:Respondents aged 18-24 prefer In-store promotion (85%)


Preferences of Communication Tools: Word of Mouth (75%), Social Media (67%) and Magazines (58%) are superior information sources. Gender Difference: Female respondents prefer Word of Mouth (84%) more. Male respondents prefer Online Video (47%) and TV (55%).

Preference of Location: Newburry street stands as the best location for UNIQLO’s first store in Boston Gender Difference: Female respondents prefer Quincy Market (23%) more. Male respondents prefer Copley Place Mall (47%) more. Age Difference: 18-24 years old respondents prefer Newburry Street (87%), Copley Place Mall (46%), and Downtown Crossing (39%) more.

Conclusion

(1) Brand Acceptance

(2) Brand perception:a. Affordable prices;b. Mostly perceived as “reliable”, “good quality” and “durable”;c. Little interest is shown in UNIQLO cooperating with Boston local culture, the form of which will not encourage higher purchase intention.

(3)Purchase intention:a. People care about the style of clothing;b. Fashion and style is one of the biggest motivations that lead to people’s purchase intention.

Action Standard

OverallImpression

Purchase Intention

Top 2 Box % 60 62 69

Mean Scores

3.50 3.72 3.70

Recommendation

• Newbury Street with a smaller store

• Magazines and social media• holiday or seasonal sales, in-

store promotion and on-line coupon

• To try launching campaigns or contests, e.g. T-shirt designing contests or social events, to raise its brand awareness

• To maintain or change slightly the current prices

• To target female group ranging from 18 years old to 24 years old

• To put more focus on its style Produc

t Concep

t

Price

PlacePromotion

RecommendationDirection for Future Research

(1) To conduct more future research to find the balance between “simple” and “ordinary”.

(2) To conduct similar researches in terms of segmentations other than age and gender, such as races, types of careers, body sizes and etc.

Like: simplicity-32%

Dislike: ordinary-28%

Limitation of the StudyRecommendation

(1) sampling methodConvenience sampling (non-probability) lack of external validity

(2) sample variety and sizeStudent-conducted research project the majority of the sample chosen: student identity the sample size was restricted (the size not large enough to guarantee representativeness)

Thank You!!

U N IQ LO

U N IQ LOU N

IQ LO

U N IQ LOU N

IQ LO

U N IQ LO

U N IQ LOU N IQ LO

U N IQ LOU N IQ LOU N

IQ LO

U N IQ LO

Business

UNIQLO in Boston Market