NIKE COSUMER SURVEY_ final

8/7/2019 NIKE COSUMER SURVEY_ final

1/34

To understand the reasons for

low market share of NIKE in

India

Presented by:

Abhishek Ranjan

Sagnik Raha

Sobhan KhuntiaSourav Dutta

Debashis Sarangi

Prasanna kr Nayakl


2/34

Background

Nike started its operation in India in 1996 with an exclusive

distribution agreement with Sierra. Nike accounts for just 20% of the 400 crore branded sports

apparel market

Nike lags much behind Reebok and Adidas, its major

competitors.

Recently Nike has revamped its operations in Asia through

localization and customization.

Even though Nike is a world leader in Sports apparel

industry, its hasnt been able to replicate its success in India.


3/34

Marketing Objective

To understand the reasons for low market

share of NIKE in India and Suggest Strategiesto strengthen its position in Indian market.


4/34

Research Objective

To assess the Factors that affect the buyingbehavior of the customer.

To understand the importance of certainattributes given a preference by consumers.

To evaluate brand recall and association.

To do an competitors analysis to understandthe threat of direct competition.


5/34

Key Information Areas:

Product Performance

Brand Image

Demographics Income, age, sex, , profession

Awareness spontaneous/top of mind, share of mind/share of heart

Product specs Quality , style, durability, comfort.


6/34

Data Collection:

Primary Research : via questionnaires from

Students and Professionals of different Agegroups , having different purchasing powers.

Secondary Research

Newspaper ArticlesLiterature Review

Business Standard

Internet


7/34

Sample Statistics:

Sample of 60 respondents

Both in person and onlineThe Demographic details of the respondents

are as follows:-


8/34

Classification of the Respondents

Classification of the Respondents:

Gender

Males(81%)

Females(1

9%)

Age

18- 25years(59%)

>25-30

years(25%)

>30-35

years(6%)

>35 years(5%)


9/34

Classification of the Respondents:

OccupationStudent(42%

)

Salaried

Professional(

25%)

Government

Employee(1

0%)Businessma

n(15%)

Yearly Income< 2

Lacs(12%)

> 2 and 4 and < 6

Lacs(23%)

> 6 and < 8

Lacs(9%)

> 8 Lacs(

35%)


10/34

Preference of Sport Apparel Buyers : Factor Analysis

Factors

Value for Money Affordability, Sales promotion Discounts, Warranty & Aftersales service

Aesthetic Appeal Styling, Brand Image, Store Decor

Performance Quality, Durability, Comfort


11/34

B

rand Nike: Factor Analysis

Factors

Aesthetic Appeal Styling, Brand Image, Store Decor

Performance Quality, Durability, Comfort


12/34

Comparative Analysis Nike V/S Other Brands

Based on respondents perception of the Sports Apparel segment vis--vis NIKE and

other brands on the given parameters.

0

5

10

15

0

5

30

35

40

45

Nike

Other Brands


13/34

Brand Awareness: Top ofMind (Overall)

All datain PERCENTAGE ofrespondents

98%

83%93%

83%

TOMA

nike

adidas

reebok

p a


14/34

Brand Awareness: Spontaneous (Overall)

All datain Percentage ofrespondents

92%

81%87%

90%

Overall TOMA

Nike

reebok

Adidas

Puma


15/34

Perception of NIKE: Overall

1: Percentage of respondents associating a particular parameter +vely with NIKE

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%

Quality of Products

Styling

fforda

le Price

Dura ility

Variety

Comfort

vaila

ility

Performance

Innovation

Value for money

Brand image

Promotion

Discounts

Store

ttractiveness

Series1


16/34

Association of Nike with sports

52%

76%

59%

56%

46%

Association with sports

Cricket

Football

Tennis

Basketball

Athletics


17/34

B

rand Personification

73%

14%11%

2%

Brand Ambassadors

Indian Sportstars

Foreign Sportstars

Bollywood

Celebrities

t ers


18/34

Jaccard Analysis

Parameters

Quality of Products Styling

Afforda ility ura ilityProduct Variety Comfort

Availa ility Performance

Innovation Value For Money

Brand Image Quality of Promotions

Sales Promotion Store Attractiveness


19/34

Jaccard analysis results into Jaccard Similarity Coefficients which are also

referred as Jaccard scores. Jaccard analysis is done to find out the variables

in order of their importance for their ability to govern groupability or

similarity with the dependent variable.

Jacard Score Sheet:

Jaccard Analysis


20/34

Jaccard Analysis

Category Drivers Rank

Quality of Products 1

Durability 2

Comfort 3

Promotion 4

Brand Drivers (NIKE)

Comfort 1

Promotion 2

Quality 3

Variety 4

Category Driver, Jaccard Score .


21/34

To understand the relative strengths and weaknesses of elements/attributes, SWOT

(strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threat) analysis is done

SWOT scores are calculated as following:

SWOT Score for a Brand on Attribute A = ( Score of attribute A Attributes average ) - (Average

ofBrands scores on all attributes being considered-Grand Average of scores).

SWOT Scores:

SWOT Analysis: NIKE


22/34

SWOT Analysis: NIKE

Affordability

Value for money

Sales promotions

Availability

Innovation

Promotion

Styling

Variety

Storeattractiveness

Quality

Durability

Comfort

Performance

Strengths Weakness

ThreatsOpportunity


23/34

Stochastic Share Analysis

26.09%

27.07%24.02%

22.83%

StochasticShare

A i as

Nike

Reebok

Puma


24/34

Conclusion:

PUMA s stochastic share is surprising since it is anupcoming brand with not much market penetration.

Reebok as a brand is underperforming but on the other

hand it enjoys the maximum market share.

NIKEs stochastic share and market share are quitedissimilar but the company can leverage on its higher

stochastic share as compared to its competitors.


25/34

Qualitative Analysis


26/34

Approach to Qualitative Research

QualitativeResearch

Focus GroupDiscussion

1 FGDconducted


27/34

Focus Group Discussions Objective: To understand how do prospective buyers relate to

the sports apparel segment and to analyze consumer

preferences

Sampling method: Non-probabilistic sampling Judgmentsampling

Sample size: Focus groups of 6 members .

Respondentprofile: Representation was from people of similar

age group and educational qualification with different family

income levels.

Moderator: Sagnik Raha & Abhishek Ranjan

Division of Qualitative Analysis


28/34

FGD

Topic

Thought Process behind

choosing an apparel

Brand and comfort comes

first

Depends on the occasion.

Brand being a deciding

factor.

Brand assures quality and

durability.

Brand doesnt mean

much. It just ensures a

good fit.

Associating sports apparel

with sports and sports

stars

Cricket and football.

Linked brand with

sachin,yuvraj,roger

federer, saina nehwal

Filmstars were also not

behind the race and some

common names came up.


29/34

Topic

Advertisement and

promotions

Ads over TV and Internet

are common medium of

communication

Most important attributes Affordability and Pricing

Brand Preference Nike and Puma was the

majority

Reebok by some.

FGD


30/34

Consumer Dynamics

61%

33%

35%

65%

61%

57%

44%

Brand switchers

Influenced by Ads

Price Sensitive

Willing to pay premium

Always seeking for discounts

Seeking information

Window shopper


31/34

General Perception of NIKE on given parameters was better than that ofother Sport Apparel Brands other than attributes like:-

Affordability

Factors of sales promotion like discounts

Value for money TOMA for NIKE is higher than the TOMA of other brands probably due to

its international appeal and styling.

NIKE is already associated with

Aesthetic appeal.

Brand Image.

Durability .

Comfort .

Sothe million dollar question is where is NIKE losing the plot..

Conclusions


32/34

NIKEin spite of having all the necessary attributes with respect to theProducts on offer, it might be losing out on the following parameters:

Lack of Promotional schemes like Discounts or packages

Lack ofBrand Association/ Loyalty.

Customers inability to connect with the Brand in terms of national appeal.

Pricing its product a bit higher than expectation, thereby leading toerosion of Doctrine of Value for money .

In ability to provide Indian customers with a varied collection of products

to choose from thereby leading to customers moving to other brands.

Lack of penetration as retail is still pursued via Exclusive showrooms

approx 90%, this leads to lesser visibility and thus leading to lack ofcustomer connect.


33/34

The perceived association of Nike has been majorly with Football, Tennis

and Basketball which clearly brings a loophole in the promotion strategy in

India which is majorly through cricket. We suggest that there is a need for

a proper brand ambassador with whom the product can be associated.

The majority of the customer believes in paying a premium for quality

products(65%) and who always looks out for promotional offers(61%).This

is a contradiction which cannot be solved by resorting to either of the two

types of customers. So, the selling should be more localized maintaining

the same global quality standards but providing timely discount offers to

attract customers.

Proposed Strategies


34/34

Documents

NIKE COSUMER SURVEY_ final