Exploring sport brand double jeopardy: The link between team market share and attitudinal loyalty

Abstract

Marketers are charged with the responsibility of attracting consumers and encouraging loyalty to their brands. Double Jeopardy, a marketing law observed across numerous product and service settings, contends that loyalty is largely influenced by a brand's market share. There have been suggestions that sport may be one of a few areas immune to such effects, providing researchers with an opportunity to test how sport brand loyalty may be impacted by market share. The current research capitalises on this opportunity by assessing the effects of market share on attitudinal loyalty reported by a sample of 794 Australian sport fans. ANOVA tests revealed fans of high market share brands displayed higher levels of attitudinal loyalty towards their favourite teams in comparison to small market share team fans. Further tests revealed differences existed in terms of the brand association perceptions held by high and small market share team fans, and how these contributed to predicting attitudinal loyalty. Consequently, sport marketers should be cognisant of double jeopardy effects when evaluating sport brands and formulating marketing strategies, though future research is needed to determine the full applicability of double jeopardy within the sport context.

The Effect of League Brand on the Relationship Between the Team Brand and Behavioral Intentions: A Formative Approach Examining Brand Associations and Brand Relationships

“…Findings related to Hypothesis 1 support the influence of team brand associations on team-related behavioral intentions thus supporting and extending previous research that highlights the influence of team brand associations on team loyalty (Doyle et al, 2013a;Gladden & Funk, 2001) and behavioral intentions (Biscaia et al, 2013). Simonin & Ruth, 1998).…”

“…(Gladden & Funk, 2001). The items were derived from the TAS following previous applications to measure brand associations in the Australian context (Doyle et al, 2013a;Kunkel et al, 2016).…”

“…While brand awareness is commonly generated through socializing agents, such as the media or peer group influence, subsequent consumer interaction with the sport brand initiates evaluations of attributes and benefits that the brand provides, which represent brand associations. Positive associations are formed if the sport brand satisfies consumers' personal and social needs and the brand takes on functional, emotional, and symbolic meaning for the consumer if these brand associations are congruent with consumers' self-concept and reflect consumers' values (Funk & James, 2006 (Bauer et al, 2008), and the Australian football market (Doyle, Filo, McDonald, & Funk, 2013a). Building on these insights, Kunkel, Doyle, Funk, Du, and McDonald (2016) (Doyle, Kunkel, & Funk, 2013b;Funk & James, 2006), merchandise purchase (Kwon & Kwak, 2014), and media consumption (Doyle et al, 2013b).…”

“…Building on these insights, Kunkel, Doyle, Funk, Du, and McDonald (2016) (Doyle, Kunkel, & Funk, 2013b;Funk & James, 2006), merchandise purchase (Kwon & Kwak, 2014), and media consumption (Doyle et al, 2013b). Researchers, however, have typically focused on the influence of brand associations on loyalty (Bauer et al, 2008;Doyle et al, 2013a;Funk & James, 2006;Gladden & Funk, 2001;Ross et al, 2008). Biscaia et al (2013) did test the influence of brand associations on behavioral intentions; however, they operationalized intentions with 7-point Likert scale items and called for future research to test the reliability of the findings.…”

“…Based on this connection, the relationship between the team brand and team behavior (e.g., Biscaia et al, 2013;Doyle et al, 2013a;Funk & James, 2006;Kunkel et al, 2016) may be partly mediated by consumers' perceptions of the league. This relationship is reflected in the third hypothesis.…”