The hedonic valuation of South African wine brands

dc.contributor.advisorVan Rensburg, Paulen_ZA
dc.contributor.advisorRobb, Franken_ZA
dc.contributor.authorPriilaid, David Aen_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2014-07-31T12:36:47Z
dc.date.available2014-07-31T12:36:47Z
dc.date.issued2010en_ZA
dc.descriptionIncludes abstract.
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references.
dc.description.abstractThis study aims to value South African wine brands. Deploying blind and sighted versions of hedonic quality it defines (1) ‘functional’ wine brands as those with consistently higher levels of intrinsic quality as proxied by their blind tasting scores, and (2) placebo-type ‘symbolic’ wine brands as those with statistically significant positive predictive differences between their blind and sighted scores. Through a series of econometric analyses applied to 8225 wines sampled over the eight year period from 2000 through 2007, a higher proportion of functional-to-symbolic brands is notified. Bi-polar clustering is observed in both brand-classes, with positive and negative brand-effects yielding positive and negative ‘non’ brands, respectively. Such clustering extends to those brands presenting simultaneously with both functional and symbolic brand-effects. Here brands decompose into zones of either Symbolic Values (with positive placebos and weak intrinsics) or Functional Values (with negative placebos and strong intrinsics). When these zones are graphed relative to their intrinsic blind to sighted-minus-blind scores, no brands appear to occupy the middleground. Each zone is located approximately one standard deviation left and right of the grand-sample mean intrinsic score. This functional-to-symbolic typology confirms and extends the literature on brands in general (Bhat and Reddy, 1998), and wine brands in particular (Mowle and Merrilees, 2005). Two wine brand valuation techniques are subsequently presented and comparatively assessed. Each is based on the combined use of non-ordinal wine valuation models and discounted cash-flow methodologies. The first price-premium approach defines brand equity value (per bottle) as the difference between a wine’s price and a valuation of its intrinsic worth as measured by blind ratings. The second quality-premium approach defines brand equity value as the difference between a wine’s intrinsic value and (instead of price) the value of its perceived quality when sampled sighted.en_ZA
dc.identifier.apacitationPriilaid, D. A. (2010). <i>The hedonic valuation of South African wine brands</i>. (Thesis). University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Commerce ,School of Management Studies. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11427/5874en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationPriilaid, David A. <i>"The hedonic valuation of South African wine brands."</i> Thesis., University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Commerce ,School of Management Studies, 2010. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/5874en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationPriilaid, D. 2010. The hedonic valuation of South African wine brands. University of Cape Town.en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Thesis / Dissertation AU - Priilaid, David A AB - This study aims to value South African wine brands. Deploying blind and sighted versions of hedonic quality it defines (1) ‘functional’ wine brands as those with consistently higher levels of intrinsic quality as proxied by their blind tasting scores, and (2) placebo-type ‘symbolic’ wine brands as those with statistically significant positive predictive differences between their blind and sighted scores. Through a series of econometric analyses applied to 8225 wines sampled over the eight year period from 2000 through 2007, a higher proportion of functional-to-symbolic brands is notified. Bi-polar clustering is observed in both brand-classes, with positive and negative brand-effects yielding positive and negative ‘non’ brands, respectively. Such clustering extends to those brands presenting simultaneously with both functional and symbolic brand-effects. Here brands decompose into zones of either Symbolic Values (with positive placebos and weak intrinsics) or Functional Values (with negative placebos and strong intrinsics). When these zones are graphed relative to their intrinsic blind to sighted-minus-blind scores, no brands appear to occupy the middleground. Each zone is located approximately one standard deviation left and right of the grand-sample mean intrinsic score. This functional-to-symbolic typology confirms and extends the literature on brands in general (Bhat and Reddy, 1998), and wine brands in particular (Mowle and Merrilees, 2005). Two wine brand valuation techniques are subsequently presented and comparatively assessed. Each is based on the combined use of non-ordinal wine valuation models and discounted cash-flow methodologies. The first price-premium approach defines brand equity value (per bottle) as the difference between a wine’s price and a valuation of its intrinsic worth as measured by blind ratings. The second quality-premium approach defines brand equity value as the difference between a wine’s intrinsic value and (instead of price) the value of its perceived quality when sampled sighted. DA - 2010 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2010 T1 - The hedonic valuation of South African wine brands TI - The hedonic valuation of South African wine brands UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/5874 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/5874
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationPriilaid DA. The hedonic valuation of South African wine brands. [Thesis]. University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Commerce ,School of Management Studies, 2010 [cited yyyy month dd]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/5874en_ZA
dc.language.isoengen_ZA
dc.publisher.departmentSchool of Management Studiesen_ZA
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Commerceen_ZA
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cape Town
dc.subject.otherManagement Studiesen_ZA
dc.titleThe hedonic valuation of South African wine brandsen_ZA
dc.typeDoctoral Thesis
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoral
dc.type.qualificationnamePhDen_ZA
uct.type.filetypeText
uct.type.filetypeImage
uct.type.publicationResearchen_ZA
uct.type.resourceThesisen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
thesis_com_2010_priiliad_d_a.pdf
Size:
937.92 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Collections