Understanding purchase determinants of luxury vintage products

Abstract

Despite increasing interest toward luxury vintage products, companies often struggle to understand why consumers buy those products. This article is aimed to advance knowledge about luxury vintage product consumption by identifying the latent determinants of Italian consumersʼ purchasing of these products. The article utilizes the means‐end chain (MEC) approach and the laddering interview technique to achieve this goal. Results show that consumers buy luxury vintage products mainly to satisfy their individual identity, improve their self‐confidence, and achieve a sense of fulfillment. The hierarchical value mapping resulting from the MEC analysis demonstrates that luxury vintage product consumption is undeniably aimed to improve consumersʼ perception of their desired and ideal individual self‐image. The article discusses the managerial implications of the study, along with its limitations and directions for future research.

“Please don't buy!”: Consumers attitude to alternative luxury consumption

“…In this type of exchange, consumers pay for the experience of temporarily using the products through rental or membership fees (Lawson, Gleim, Perren, & Hwang, 2016). (Amatulli et al, 2018;Roux & Guiot, 2008), customers' perceived value of pre-loved goods (Sihvonen & Turunen, 2016), differences in consumers' behavior (Cervellon et al, 2012), and on the impact on brand equity of renting luxury products (Vogel et al, 2019).…”

“…In the still underdeveloped body of research focusing on collaborative fashion consumption, it is possible to observe similar drivers to These determinants should not be seen as dichotomized, but rather overlapping. Secondhand consumption can be influenced by both hedonic and utilitarian reasons (Bardhi, 2003), whereas vintage is driven simultaneously by psychological and functional drivers (Amatulli et al, 2018), and renting and swapping are linked to product satisfaction and experiential aspects (Armstrong et al, 2015). Thus, based on the theory of reasoned Action, a framework was developed where either the product-related factors or those that are experiencerelated are beneficial to describing the CLC motivational drivers.…”

“…Scholars suggest that collaborative consumption and sharing are often linked to sustainable behavior and anti-consumption orientations as a way of reducing waste (Ozanne & Ballantine, 2010); indeed, acquiring a used good is a way to prolong the lifespan of products and leave a positive impact on the environment (Amatulli et al, 2018;Beard, 2008;Belk, 1988;Roux & Guiot, 2008). The alternative acquisition modes of CC are also considered to be a political tool Park & Joyner-Armstrong, 2017), that is, to avoid the traditional market (Guiot & Roux, 2010) and to relieve consumers from feelings of guilt from overconsumption (Aptekar, 2016).…”

“…In the luxury domain, researchers have investigated consumer antecedents to vintage (Amatulli, Pino, De Angelis, & Cascio, 2018) and secondhand luxury products (Cervellon, Carey, & Harms, 2012), but, to our knowledge, no studies have compared together attitudes with vintage, pre-loved, and shared products yet, above all in the case of young consumers (Yan, Bae, & Xu, 2015)-those who are more likely to engage in collaborative consumption compared to other age groups (Owyang, Samuel, & Grenville, 2014).…”

Negative brand meaning co‐creation in social media brand communities: A laddering approach using NVivo

“…The resulting summary table features the ACVs (in columns) and the informants (in rows), as well as the pathways between the ACVs. The summary table is then transformed into a hierarchical value map (HVM) in the form of an orthogonal 1 × 1 matrix (also called an implication matrix; Amatulli, Pino, De Angelis, & Cascio, ).…”