BRM Final Medha

STUDY ON BRAND PREFERENCE OF MOBILE PHONESIN KATHMANDU

Submitted By:Medha DhitalMBA SPRING2012Term IIIRoll No. 16

Submitted To:Mr. Pravat UpretyCourse InstructorAce Institute of Management

Affiliated toPokhara UniversityIn partial fulfillment of the requirement in the course of Business Research Methodology for the degree ofMaster in Business AdministrationKathmandu, May 2013

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to express our gratitude to our instructor Mr. Pravat Uprety for providing an opportunity to carry this research project and his valuable time and effort in submitting this proposal is highly appreciated.

We would like to thank our friends whose immense support and guidance made this project successful and finally we would like to thank Ace Institute of Management whose direct and indirect support was considered most in submitting this report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The aim of this research is to find out about the brand preference of mobile phones of people residing in Kathmandu. The increasing number of telecommunication networks and huge number of their subscribers has made mobile phones an important medium for communication. Switching mobile phone brands and updating oneself with latest technology in mobile brands has been in the increasing trend as well. Mobile brand preference could be related with various other factors like age group, gender, price of phone, family monthly income, mobile usage purpose, brand attributes and many more. Through this research, we can learn about the mobile brand preference of youth in Kathmandu and help increase sales of various mobile brands.

As we went through the survey, we could find out that most of the youth in Kathmandu valley own a mobile phone and most them own a brand which costs more than NRS 20,000. Since mobile phones are effective and convenient medium for communication, they have a positive influence in the economy of our country. This research could lead to several other findings such as the users of age group 16-24 mostly prefer Wifi attribute in their phone, users of age group 25-30 prefer touch pad feature in mobile phone while users of age group 31-40 prefer FM/Radio in their phone. It can be said that the highest priced mobile brands are purchased by users whose monthly family income is above NRS 50,000 so a different promotional campaigns are required for these users. The users whose monthly family income is relatively low purchase medium priced mobile phones and use them for longer time. So to attract these customers, various offers and discounts should be used as a promotional strategy by mobile brands.

So the findings of this research would also provide insight to mobile brands selling in Kathmandu valley about how they should target different customer groups and use different promotional campaigns for each user group. Likewise, the findings of brand attribute preference can help marketers to make decision regarding which model of their mobile brands would be suitable in Nepalese market.

TABLE OF CONTENTSINTRODUCTION81.1 Background81.2 Problem Statement101.2.1 Objectives111.2.3 Significance of the study11LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK132.1 Literature Review132.2.1 Research Questions172.2.2 Research Hypothesis18RESEARCH METHODOLOGY233.1 Research Plan and Design233.2 Population and Sample233.3 Description of the Sample233.3.1 Sampling Frame233.3.2 Sample unit233.3.3 Determination of Sample233.3.4 Sampling method233.4 Instrumentation243.5 Data collection Procedure243.6 Validity and Reliability243.7 Analysis Plan243.7.1 Data Management and Analysis243.7.2 Method of Data Analysis253.8 Limitation of the Study25CHAPTER 426DATA ANALYSIS264.1 Distribution by Gender264.2 Distribution by Age Group264.3 Distribution by Literacy Level274.4 Distribution by Income Level274.5 Distribution by Price range.................................................................................................284.6 Descriptive Statistics of Brand of Mobile Preferred28 4.7 Analysis Between Age Group and Mobile Brand Preference.............................................29 4.8 Analysis between Literacy Level and Mobile Brand Preferred..........................................314.9 Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Mobile Brand Preferred334.10 Analysis between Price Range and Mobile Brand Preferred354.11 Analysis between Age Group and Mobile Brand Attribute Preference374.12 Analysis between Age Group and Mobile Phone Usage Purpose394.13 Analysis between Gender and Duration of Current Mobile Brand Usage404.14 Analysis Between Age Group and Current Mobile Brand Usage Duration414.15 Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Current Mobile Brand Usage Duration414.16 Analysis between Age and Current Mobile Brand Usage424.17 Analysis between Gender and Current Mobile Brand Usage434.18 Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Price Range444.19 Analysis between Educational Level and Better Features Preference454.20 Analysis of Likert Scale464.21 Analysis of the variables of Likert Scale47CHAPTER 549SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION495.1 Summary and Findings49BIBLIOGRAPHY.....................................................................................................................51ANNEX 1............................................................................................................................53

LIST OF TABLESTable 1: Distribution by Gender26Table 2: Distribution by Age Group26Table 3: Distribution by Literacy Level27Table 4: Distribution by Income Level27Table 5: Distribution by Price Range28Table 6: Descriptive Statistics of Brand of Mobile Preferred28Table 7: Analysis between Age Group and Mobile Brand Preferred29Table 8: Analysis between Literacy Level and Mobile Brand Preferred31Table 9: Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Mobile Brand Preferred33Table 10: Analysis between Price Range and Mobile Brand Preferred35Table 11: Analysis between Age group and Mobile Brand Attribute Preferred37Table 12: Analysis between Age Group and Mobile Phone Usage Purpose39Table 13: Analysis between Gender and Duration of Current Mobile Brand Usage40Table 14: Analysis between Age Group and Current Mobile Brand Usage Duration41Table 15: Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Current Mobile Brand Usage Duration41Table 16: Analysis between Age and Current Mobile Brand Usage42Table 17: Analysis between Gender and Current Mobile Brand Usage43Table 18: Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Price Range44Table 19: Analysis between Educational Level and better Features Preference45Table 20: Analysis of Likert Scale46Table 21: Analysis of the Variables of Likert Scale47

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Theoretical Framework for study of Brand Preference of Mobile Phones16

CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTION1.1 BackgroundMobile phones aren't just a rich person's fashion today. It is transforming the way thousands of people do business in a country where even landline phones were a luxury a decade ago. As an essential element of daily life, the purchase of a mobile phone is an important decision with a variety of mobile phone brands available to choose from. Each mobile phone manufacturer consistently updates their offerings with the latest technological updates and many customers have a preferred brand that suits them or a brand they have become familiar with. Across the globe, even people with low incomes are now adopting cellular phones as tools for enhancing their business.According to Oxford English Dictionary one of the earliest uses of word "mobile" was in association with the Latin phrase "mobile vulgus", i.e. excitable crowd. Today's mobile phones live up to these origins. Cell phone technology introduces new senses of speed and connectivity to social life. If the fixed line telephone has brought communication links into the workplace and homes, the "mobile" puts them straight into the hands of numbers and varieties of individuals.

A brief history of the mobile phone as a technologyThe idea for cellular telephony originated in the US. The first cellular call and the first call from a hand held cellular device also were placed in the US.The mobile phone merges the landline telephony system with wireless communication. The landline telephone was first patented in 1876. Mobile radio systems have been used since the early 1900s in the form of ship to shore radio, and were installed in some police cars in Detroit starting in 1921. The blending of landline telephone and radio communication came after the Second World War. The first commercially available "mobile radiophone service" that allowed calls from fixed to mobile telephones was offered in St. Louis in 1946. By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US. This was a non-cellular system that made relatively inefficient use of the radio bandwidth. In addition, the telephones were large, energy intensive car-mounted devices. In the drive to produce a more efficient mobile telephone system, researchers W. Rae Young and Douglas Ring of Bell Labs developed the idea of cellular telephony, in which geographical areas are divided into a mesh of cells, each with its own cell tower.This allowed a far more efficient use of the radio spectrum and the "cell" phones needed less power to send and receive a signal. The first installation was in 1969 on the Amtrak Metroliner that traveled between New York City and Washington. Four years later Martin Cooper of Motorola made the first cellular call from a prototype handheld cell phone.

The world's first commercial automated cellular network was launched in Japan byNTTin 1979, initially in the metropolitan area of Tokyo. On 6 March 1983, theDynaTAcmobile phone launched on the first US 1G network byAmeritech.In 1991, the second generation (2G) cellular technology was launched in Finland byRadiolinjaon theGSMstandard and ten years later, in 2001, the third generation (3G) was launched in Japan by NTT DoCoMo on the WCDMA Standard.

The history of mobile phone usage in Nepal dates back to 1999 when NTC started providing GSM mobile service from May 1999. Mobile phones have emerged as an important means for communication in Nepal. Its role has been significant in the development of various industries of Nepal. Mobile phones were considered as means of pleasure and luxury some years back, but today it has become the need of almost all people in Nepal for business purposes, convenience as well as for maintaining one's status in the society. At the beginning when NTC started its GSM mobile service with post paid service then there were very few mobile phone users that also within Kathmandu valley only. Later NTC started pre paid service and distributed more than one lakh sim cards. It also improved its network services throughout the country which increased the mobile users in Nepal. Queue were started to be seen outside Nepal telecom's offices for sim card which showed the mobile phone popularity across Nepal. With evolution of other mobile telecommunication service providers like NCELL and UTL, today, almost every adult in Nepal possess a mobile phone of and each individual's mobile phone varies in model and brand from the other's.

Different Brands of mobile Phones available in Nepal

There are many brands of cell phones available in Nepalese market. So far, as contemporary brands of cell phones or mobile phones is concerned in Nepalese market, Nokia, Samsung, Blackberry, Motorola, LG, Sony Ericson, iPhone, Vodafone and so on are seen to exist in the competitive market. Nokia, Samsung, Blackberry, LG, Sony Ericson and iPhone have secured prominent position in the Nepalese market. With the strong presence of these brands, many other brands which also exist in the market are facing hard times and the brand war among these leading mobile brands has provided the Nepalese market with better mobile sets and variety of features.

NokiaThis is popular brand name for the Nepalese cell phone users. This German cell phone brand have produced and launched more than 50 brands of cell phones in the world. For example, some of them are nokia 1100, nokia 6680, nokia 6600, nokia 7260, and so on. Its prices starts from Rs 1500 in Nepal. Main competitors of this brand in Nepal are Samsung, Blackberry, LG and iPhone.

SamsungSamsung offers a wide selection of powerful and stylish internet-ready Smartphones, which include Android, Bada and Windows mobile devices. It has increased its market share in Nepalese market due to its affordable range of prices and and android applications. It is mostly popular among the youngsters of Nepal.

BlackberryBlackBerry is a range of mobile email and Smartphone devices developed and designed by Canadian company Research In Motion (RIM) since 1999. From handsets which were very popular for business users, Blackberry offer an extensive range of handsets for both consumer and business users. It has therefore captured nokia's market in Nepal and is a threat to Nokia, iPhone and samsung.

LGStyle meets function with an LG phone. LG Android and Windows mobile phonescome with touch screens and high quality cameras as well asall the latest features consumers would expect in Smart phones making it one of the major competitor in mobile phone industry across the world as well as in Nepal.

iPhone

TheiPhoneis a line ofsmart phoneswhich is designed and marketed byApple Inc.It runs Apple'siOSmobile operating system, known as the "iPhone OS". In the recent years it has gained huge popularity worldwide. In Nepal also iPhone has captured a huge market especially of the higher income group. It has thus threatened established brands sales such as that of Nokia and Samsung in Nepali market as well as worldwide.

1.2 Problem StatementIn present context, mobile phone has a huge impact in lives of people daily. In our country the mobile phone industry is still in its growth stage, as compared to the industrially advanced countries. It is for the fact that the economy of our country has been in the developing stage. Now-a-days, the customers are more dynamic. Their taste, needs and preference are changing with the advancement in technology and communication with the outside world.

With the increase in mobile phone brands in the market, lots of mobile dealers are cropping up old established brands and new brand of mobiles are entering the market. With the increase in competition locally as well as from global dealers, Nepalese mobile phone dealers are coming up with new and promotional campaigns and schemes to attract the customers.

This research is guided towards determining the preferences of various mobile phone brands by Nepalese customers. The major problems identified regarding the mobile phone brands is to determine the most preferred brand and to identify the attributes which are significant in preference of a specific brand. This research aims at determining how the promotion campaigns of mobile phones have made consumers aware about the different brands of mobile phones. Understanding the type of mobile phone a buyer prefers is a major concern for marketers. This research will help in determining the choice of mobile phone consumer prefers according to their age, income level and educational background inside as well as outside Kathmandu valley and thus selling the brands accordingly which would also help to reduce the risk of the marketer.

1.2.1 ObjectivesThe main objective of this study is to understand the mobile brand preference and the various factors affecting the choice of brand. The objectives of the study are as follows: To identify the profiles of customers of specific brand by gender, age, locality and education level. To determine the preferences of mobile phone brands by Nepalese customers. To identify the product attributes sought by consumers in the mobile phone brand. To assess the customer's perception on brand preference. To determine what people expect from various mobile phone brands. To provide a framework for those brands who want to enter the Nepali mobile phone market. To understand the trend in mobile phone usage by customers.1.2.3 Significance of the studySuccessful marketing of products demand a thorough understanding of customer's taste, choice, preference etc. This study is focused on assessing the buyers in terms of "brand preference". This study will be significant in the following grounds:

Findings of the study will help marketers understand brand preference practices in mobile phone market. It will give information about level of customer involvement in brand searching, analyzing attributes and brand choice for the high involvement product mobile phones. It will also help to develop the profile of specific customer of brands. It will be useful in creating most favourable brand by knowing the buyer perception and response. Marketers can trace out important reasons for brand preference and can focus according to choice, perception and preference of buyers. Deeper understanding of brand preference of customers can help managers to design marketing strategy that will concentrate on customers. It will be a valuable reference for scholars and researchers to conduct further similar research.

CHAPTER 2LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Literature ReviewFor the research, various literatures were reviewed that were relevant in gathering information.

Customer SatisfactionAccording to Philip Kotler consumer satisfaction is defined on, personal feeling of pleasure resulting from comparing a products pursued performance in relation to his or her expectations. Consumer attitude measurements are taken on either potential buries or existing clients buries in order to identify their characteristics. Consumers survey can provide the researcher with a wealth of information, valuable of the marketing function.

Customer satisfaction is one of the main objectives of any organization. Every organization tries to know how satisfied their customers from their products. In general satisfaction is a persons feelings of pleasure or disappointment resulting from comparing a products perceived performance in relation to his or her expectations. If the performance is below expectations, the customer is dissatisfied. If the performance matches the expectations, the customer is satisfied. If the performance exceeds expectations, the customer is highly satisfied.

Many companies aim for high satisfaction because customers who are just satisfied still find it easy to switch when a better offer comes along. Those who are highly satisfied are much less ready to switch. High satisfaction or delight creates an emotional bond with the brand, not just a rational preference. The result is high customer loyalty.

Brand Preference and purchase intention

Brandis the "name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller's good or service as distinct from those of other sellers. One of the indicators of the strength of abrandin the hearts and minds of customers,brand preferencerepresents which brands are preferred under assumptions of equality in price and availability. It can be defined as the priority that the buyer or consumer gives to a brand. It is revealed in the purchase and use of one brand and not of competitive brands.

How does consumer process competitive brand information and make a final value judgement? The consumer arrive at attitude towards various brand through preference among the brand in the choice set. However two factors can intervene between the purchase intention and purchase decision. The first factor is attitude of another. The extent to which person's attitude reduces one's preferred alternative depends on the intensity of other person's negative attitude towards consumer's preferred alternative and consumer's motivation to comply with the other person's wishes.

The stage of consumer decision making process for the purchase shown in the hierarchy of effect model is awareness, knowledge, liking, preference, conviction and purchase.

Awareness: the ability of the consumer to recall a brand name either with or without prompting. Knowledge: the ability of consumer to describe the important attributes of a product or services. Liking: the attitude of consumer toward a product or services. Preferences: the degree to which a consumer feels more positive about a product or services relative to other offering. Conviction: the likelihood that the consumer will purchase the product or services. Purchase: the acquisition of a product or service.

Brand Preference, Product Attributes, and Marketing Mix Variables in Technology Product Markets (S. Sriram and Ramya Neelamegham)

The research done on above topic concludes that the attractiveness of a brand's product line changes over time with entry and exit of new models and with changes in attribute and price levels. In order to account for the potential correlation in the preferences of models offered by a particular brand (e.g., Sony), relative model preferences are captured via their attributes and prices. Authors have allowed for heterogeneity across consumers in their preferences for these attributes and in their price sensitivities in addition to heterogeneity in consumers' intrinsic brand preferences. To allow for time-varying intrinsic brand preferences, they have used a state-space model based on the Kalman filter, which captures the influence of marketing actions such as brand-level advertising on the dynamics of intrinsic brand preferences. Hence, the proposed model accounts for the effects of brand preferences, model attributes and marketing mix variables on consumer choice. They have estimated model parameters on data for the U.S. digital camera market. Overall, finding was that the effect of dynamics in the intrinsic brand preference is greater than the corresponding effect of the dynamics in the brand's product line attractiveness. Assuming plausible profit margins, the authors have evaluated that the effect of increasing the advertising expenditures for the largest and the smallest brands category can increase their profitability by increasing their advertising expenditures. They have also analyzed the impact of modifying a camera model's attributes on its profits. Such an analysis could potentially be used to evaluate if product development efforts would be profitable.

Mobile Phone Operator Brand Preference (Anthony Dadzie, November 2011)

The author Anthony Dadzie conducted a study and the findings are most of the respondent consumers were aware of mobile phone operator brands despite having come across few operator service advertisements. Young males, mainly students in the tertiary institutions, single and of Christian affiliations, dominated the market. Four factors were identified as key determinants of mobile phone operator service choice, namely promotion, price and availability of product, attractive packaging and product quality. There is need for mobile phone operators to incorporate these findings in the formulation of responsive marketing strategies.

Teens and Mobile PhonesbyAmanda Lenhart, Rich Ling, Scott Campbell,Kristen Purcell, Apr 20, 2010

This study is based on the 2009 Parent-Teen Cell Phone usage Survey which obtained telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of 800 teens age 12-to-17 years-old and their parents living in the continental United States and conducted in 4 U.S. cities in June and October 2009 with teens between the ages of 12 and 18. The survey was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. The interviews were done in English by Princeton Data Source, LLC from June 26 to September 24, 2009. Statistical results are weighted to correct known demographic discrepancies.The research concludes that mobile phone usage and daily text messaging among American teens has shot up in the past 18 months, from 38% of teens texting friends daily in February of 2008 to54% of teens texting daily in September 2009. And it's not just frequency teens are sending enormous quantities of text messages a day. Half of teens send 50 or more text messages a day, or 1,500 texts a month, and one in three send more than 100 texts a day, or more than 3,000 texts a month.Older teen girls ages 14-17 lead the charge on text messaging, averaging 100 messages a day for the entire cohort. The youngest teen boys are the most resistant to texting averaging 20 messages per day. Text messaging has become the primary way that teens reach their friends,surpassingface-to-face contact, email, instant messaging and voice calling as the go-to daily communication tool for this age group. However,voice calling is still the preferred mode for reaching parentsfor most teens. This research thus highlights the importance of mobile phone attributes such as text messaging and what marketers need to consider while developing a brand of mobile phone for the target customers.Cell phone users and preference for brand by Harris Interactive

According to the latest survey of cell phone users byHarris Interactive, 54 per cent of U.S. adult cell phone users say they have no preference for an existing brand or a new one offered by their service provider. Meanwhile, the rest differ in opinion between interest in a new brand 27 per cent and an existing brand 19 per cent. The survey also showed that 64 per cent of respondents agree that more competition among cell phone manufacturers will lead to product innovation. 40 per cent believe it will ensure more choices in the marketplace.According to the survey, there is some scepticism about cellular service providers offering their own brand of phones, and approximately one-third think this actually may result in decreased competition and higher prices in the long run. Around 30 per cent agree that smaller wireless service providers who cannot manufacture their own phones will go out of business, and another 21 per cent feels that wireless service providers lack the design skills to build quality handsets."Cellphone manufacturing by the large wireless service providers is the next logical step in this market," said Joe Porus, cell phone vice president and chief architect for the Harris Interactive technology. "If they can pull this off, it will give their bottom lines a nice lift, but a failed entry here could start a new phase of consolidations in the industry. This apple is likely too tempting to leave on the tree new cell phones could be coming your way soon."

2.2 Theoretical Framework

Figure 1: Theoretical Framework for study of Brand Preference of Mobile Phones

2.2.1 Research Questions For the purpose of study, the research will be based on the following questions:1. Is there a significant relationship between gender and mobile phone brand preference?2. Is there a significant relationship between age and mobile brand preference?3. Is there a significant relationship between family monthly income and mobile brand preference?4. Is there a significant relationship between education level/ literacy level and mobile brand preference?5. Is there a significant relationship between brand attributes and mobile brand preference?6. Is there a significant relationship between price of phone and brand preference?7. Is there a significant relationship between age and current mobile brand usage?8. Is there a significant relationship between gender and current mobile brand usage?9. Is there significant relationship between Monthly family income and mobile price range preference?10. Is there a significant relationship between mobile phone usage and mobile purchase behaviour?11. Is there a significant relationship between age and mobile attributes preference?12. Is there significant relationship between age group and mobile phone usage purpose?13. Is there significant relationship between gender and current mobile usage duration?14. Is there significant relationship between age group and current mobile usage duration?15. Is there significant relationship between monthly family income and current mobile usage duration?16. Is there significant relationship between educational level and better features preference?

2.2.2 Research HypothesisThere are various factors that influence the brand preference on mobile phones. It can be external, internal or situational factors. The dependent variable in this study, Study of Brand Preference of Mobile Phones in Nepal is brand preference. Following comprises the list of independent variable taken into account for the study. Age Gender Education Level Income Features Price Usage Brand attributes

Hypothesis formulated for the purpose of study are as follows:

Hypothesis 1:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between gender and mobile phone brand preference.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between gender and mobile phone brand preference.

Hypothesis 2:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between age and mobile brand preference.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between age and mobile brand preference.

Hypothesis 3:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between family monthly income and mobile brand preference.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between family monthly income and mobile brand preference.

Hypothesis 4:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between literacy level and mobile brand preference.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship literacy level and mobile brand preference.

Hypothesis 5:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between brand attributes and mobile brand preference.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between brand attributes and mobile brand preference.

Hypothesis 6:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between price of phone and brand preference. Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between price of phone and brand preference.

Hypothesis 7:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between age and current mobile brand usage. Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between age and current mobile brand usage.

Hypothesis 8:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between gender and current mobile brand usage.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between gender and current mobile brand usage.Hypothesis 9:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between monthly family income and mobile price range preference.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between monthly family income and mobile price range preference.Hypothesis 10:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between mobile phone usage and mobile purchase behaviour.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between mobile phone usage and mobile purchase behaviour.

Hypothesis 11:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between age and mobile attributes preference.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between age and mobile attributes preference.

Hypothesis 12:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between age group and mobile phone usage purpose.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between age group and mobile phone usage purpose.

Hypothesis 13:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between gender and current mobile usage duration.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between gender and current mobile usage duration.Hypothesis 14:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between age group and current mobile usage duration.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between age group and current mobile usage duration.

Hypothesis 15:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between monthly family income and current mobile usage duration.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between monthly family income and current mobile usage duration.

Hypothesis 16:Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between educational level and better features preference.Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is significant relationship between educational level and better features preference.

CHAPTER 3RESEARCH METHODOLOGY3.1 Research Plan and DesignThe main purpose of study is to find out the mobile brand preferences of respondents inside Kathmandu Valley from various gender, age, income level. An exploratory research was carried out to achieve this purpose. The research is quantitative in nature. The data collected is analyzed statistically to interpret findings and results. Primary as well as secondary sources are used. For primary sources of data, questionnaire was used. For secondary data, various sources like internet, books, and journals are used.3.2 Population and SampleThe population for this study is comprised of all people in Kathmandu Valley who possess a mobile phone. For this purpose convenience sampling method is used. To gather the primary information on preference of consumers, questionnaire survey was conducted with 91 respondents.

3.3 Description of the Sample 3.3.1 Sampling FrameAll the people of Nepal who possess a mobile phone. 3.3.2 Sample unit The sample unit for this study is of different age groups. 3.3.3 Determination of SampleThe size of the sample is 91. The sample is divided into sub samples in terms of the four age groups. Each age group have distribution sample size of about 10.3.3.4 Sampling methodFor this study, non-probability sampling is used. It is because determining the population size of people preferring various mobile phone brands is difficult. Therefore, sampling method used is the convenience quota sampling.3.4 Instrumentation The instrument used for this research is questionnaire. The questionnaire included 13 questions that included demographic questions as well as questions regarding customer's brand preference and attributes choice on mobile phone. The questionnaire will focus more on the qualitative aspect of the respondents than the quantitative aspects because of the nature of the research. Questionnaire will consist of various types of question such as ranking scale questionnaires, single response questions, multiple response questions, LIKERT scale and others. Likewise, a structured questionnaire design will be used.

3.5 Data collection Procedure Both primary and secondary source of data are used while conducting the research. The researcher has used secondary sources of data like internet, journals; reports for background study, literature review and problem identification of the research. The researcher has used primary source of data via questionnaire. Questionnaire was distributed to 91 respondents. While selecting the respondents the researcher has ensured that the data are homogeneous in nature and is distributed in terms of age group. We have used the age group of 15-24 years, 25-30 years, 31-40 and 41 above. The questionnaires are self-administered as well as researcher administered.3.6 Validity and ReliabilityFor validity, questionnaires were reviewed with the help of experts opinions and suggestions. Past questionnaires were also referred from reports carried out on similar topics. The questionnaire will ensure that it meets the research objective. A small pre-testing will be done with around 10 samples. In pre-testing, respondents will be asked to find any ambiguities and difficulties in answering the questions. For reliability, the researcher has administered the question personally to each respondent so that there is no inconsistency in answering the question. The results and findings of the research has also been compared with results of similar research. If degree of variance is excessively large, the research will be investigated for reliability. Internal consistency reliability will also be tested using LIKERT scale.3.7 Analysis Plan3.7.1 Data Management and AnalysisFor this research report, SPSS 16.0 and MS EXCEL was used for the analysis if the data. With the help of this software, the data collected from the sources were classified, tabulated and analyzed using statistical tools like mean, median, variance and others according to the needs of the research. Similarly, in case of inferential analysis, both parametric and non-parametric test will be used to determine and study various characteristics of the sample. Parametric tests such as one way ANOVA, independent sample t-test, and Pearsons correlation, whereas non-parametric tests such as chi-square test, Spearmans rank order correlation, were used in the study. Open-ended questions in the questionnaire were analyzed separately.

3.7.2 Method of Data AnalysisThe main source of the analysis of the data is questionnaire. Questionnaire consists of questions related with the mobile brand preference with a view to get the research output as required.

3.8 Limitation of the StudyThe research will have the following limitations: The research has been prepared within a span of one month and thus there was limited time for conducting the research and literature review. The research is based on the sample size of 91 and mainly quantitative measure was taken to measure the brand preference of mobile phones among customers. The age group has been selected above 15 years so as to reduce the response error. Opinions of respondents have been taken as a sense of truth which may not be correct. Research is limited to within Kathmandu Valley.

CHAPTER 4DATA ANALYSIS

In this chapter, the information collected from the questionnaire is analyzed as follows:4.1 Distribution by GenderTable 1: Distribution by Gender

GenderFrequencyPercent

Male3841.8

Female5358.2

Total91100.0

The table shows that 41.8% of the sample size is male and remaining 58.2% is female. So, we can conclude that the mobile phones brand preference is higher in females than in males.

4.2 Distribution by Age GroupTable 2: Distribution by Age Group

AgeFrequencyPercent

16-243740.7

25-302830.8

31-402628.6

Total91100.0

The table shows that 40.7% of the respondents are from the age group 16-24 years, 30.8% from 25-30 years and remaining 28.6% from 31-40 years. So, we can conclude that the mobile brand preference is higher in the youths of age group 16-24 years.4.3 Distribution by Literacy LevelTable 3: Distribution by Literacy Level

Educational QualificationFrequencyPercent

Up to Intermediate1516.4

Bachelors3235.2

Masters and Above4448.4

Total91100.0

The table shows that only 16.4% of the youths have educational qualification of up to intermediate level while 35.2% are studying bachelors level and remaining 48.4% studying masters and above who prefer various mobile phone brands.4.4 Distribution by Income LevelTable 4: Distribution by Income Level

Monthly Family IncomeFrequencyPercent

Less than 25,0002527.4

25000-500003033.0

More than 500003639.6

100100100.0

The table shows that 27.4% of the youths have monthly family income less than NPR 25,000; 33% have between NPR 25,000 and 50,000 while 39.6% have monthly family income more than NPR 50,000.

4.5 Distribution by Price RangeTable 5: Distribution by Price Range

Price RangeFrequencyPercent

less than 500044.4

5000-100001617.6

10000-200003033.0

Above 200004145.1

Total91100.0

The table shows that 4.4% of youth possess mobile phone of price range less than 5000; 17.6% have between 5000-10000; 33% have mobile phone between price range 10000-20000 and 45.1% youth have mobile phone of price range above 20000.

4.6 Descriptive Statistics of Brand of Mobile Preferred

Table 6: Descriptive Statistics of Brand of Mobile Preferred

Brand of mobile PhonenMaximumMinimumMeanStandard Deviation

Nokia91152.81.27

Blackberry91153.11.22

Samsung91152.61.16

iPhone91152.01.18

LG91154.41.09

The table shows that iPhone is mostly preferred by youth with mean of 2.07 while LG brand is the least preferred mobile phone brand with the mean of 4.4.

4.7 Analysis between Age Group and Mobile Brand Preference

Table 7: Analysis between Age Group and Mobile Brand Preferred

nMeanStd. DeviationMaximumMinimumFSig.

Nokia16-24373.31.24415

25-30282.891.1661510.370.00

31-40261.960.99914

Total912.791.26915

Blackberry16-24373.160.898152.650.07

25-30282.751.29515

31-40263.51.44915

Total913.131.22215

Samsung16-24372.111.048146.750.002

25-30282.931.08615

31-402631.16615

Total912.621.16215

iPhone16-24371.921.064150.590.55

25-30282.141.32515

31-40262.231.17715

Total912.081.17615

LG16-24374.141.016150.540.58

25-30284.291.35715

31-40264.310.88425

The table shows that the youths of age group 31-40 years mostly prefer Nokia mobile phone with the highest mean of 1.96 and standard deviation of 0.999; youths of age group 25-30 years prefer Blackberry mobile phone with highest mean 2.75 and standard deviation 1.295; youth of age group 16-24 prefer Samsung mobile phone mostly with highest mean 2.11 and standard deviation 1.048; youth of age group 16-24 years mostly iPhone with the highest mean of 1.92 and standard deviation of 1.064. Similarly, youth of age group 25-30 mostly prefer LG mobile with highest mean 4.29 and respective standard deviation of 1.357.

Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Nokia mobile:Since p value (0.00) < (0.05), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between age group and preference for Nokia mobile brand.

Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Blackberry mobile:Since p value (0.07) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and preference for Blackberry mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for Samsung:Since p value (0.002) < (0.05), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between age group and preference for Samsung mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for iPhone:Since p value (0.55) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and preference for iPhone mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for LG:Since p value (0.58) > (0.05), we do notreject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and preference for LG mobile brand.

4.8 Analysis between Literacy Level and Mobile Brand PreferredTable 8: Analysis between Literacy Level and Mobile Brand Preferred

Mobile BrandLiteracy LevelnMeanStd. DeviationMaximumMinimumFSig.

NokiaUpto Intermediate/+2152.81.265150.4590.634

Bachelors322.621.23815

Masters and Above442.911.30915

Total912.791.26915

BlackberryUpto Intermediate/+2153.471.187150.8220.443


Masters and Above4431.36415

Total913.131.22215

SamsungUpto Intermediate/+2152.130.64131.7220.185



Total912.621.16215

iPhoneUpto Intermediate/+2152.21.373150.1050.900



Total912.081.17615

LGUpto Intermediate/+2154.41.242150.9130.405



Total91

The table above shows that the youths studying upto bachelors mostly prefer Nokia mobile phone with the highest mean of 2.62 and standard deviation of 1.238; youths with educational level masters and above prefer Blackberry mobile phone with highest mean 3 and standard deviation 1.364; youth with education upto intermediate prefer Samsung mobile phone mostly with highest mean 2.13 and standard deviation 0.64; youth of educational level bachelors mostly iPhone with the highest mean of 2.03 and standard deviation of 1.231. Similarly, youth with education level upto masters and above mostly prefer LG mobile with highest mean 4.25 and respective standard deviation of 1.164.Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Nokia mobile:Since p value (0.634) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between literacy level and preference for Nokia mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Blackberry mobile:Since p value (0.443) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between literacy level and preference for Blackberry mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for Samsung:Since p value (0.185) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between literacy level and preference for Samsung mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for iPhone:Since p value (0.9) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between literacy level and preference for iPhone mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for LG:Since p value (0.405) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between literacy level and preference for LG mobile brand.

4.9 Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Mobile Brand Preferred

Table 9: Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Mobile Brand Preferred

Mobile BrandMonthly Family Income nMeanStd. DeviationMaximumMinimumFSig.

NokiaLess than 25,000252.761.332150.0910.913

25000-50000302.731.20215

More than 50000362.861.31315

Total912.791.26915

BlackberryLess than 25,000252.921.288150.6270.537

25000-50000303.131.16715

More than 50000363.281.23315

Total913.131.22215

SamsungLess than 25,000252.521.005150.1670.846

25000-50000302.61.27615

More than 50000362.691.19115

Total912.621.16215

iPhoneLess than 25,000252.441.356152.0090.140

25000-50000302.071.14315

More than 50000361.831.02814

Total912.081.17615

LGLess than 25,000254.361.254150.2040.816

25000-50000304.51.00915

More than 50000364.331.06915

Total914.401.09415

The table shows that the youths with monthly family income 25000-50000 mostly prefer Nokia mobile phone with the highest mean of 2.73 and standard deviation of 1.202; youths with monthly family income below 25000 prefer Blackberry mobile phone with highest mean 2.92 and standard deviation 1.288; youth with monthly family income less than 25,000 prefer Samsung mobile phone mostly with highest mean 2.52 and standard deviation 1.005; youth with monthly family income more than 50,000 mostly prefer iPhone with the highest mean of 1.83 and standard deviation of 1.028. Similarly, youth with monthly family income more than 50,000 mostly prefer LG mobile with highest mean 4.33 and respective standard deviation of 1.069.Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Nokia mobile:Since p value (0.913) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between monthly family income and preference for Nokia mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Blackberry mobile:Since p value (0.537) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between monthly family income and preference for Blackberry mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for Samsung:Since p value (0.846) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between monthly family income and preference for Samsung mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for iPhone:Since p value (0.14) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between monthly family income and preference for iPhone mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for LG:Since p value (0.816) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between monthly family income and preference for LG mobile brand.

4.10 Analysis between Price Range and Mobile Brand PreferredTable 10: Analysis between Price Range and Mobile Brand Preferred

Mobile BrandPrice rangenMeanStd. DeviationMaximumMinimumFSig.

Nokialess than 500073.291.113250.680.567

5000-10000142.711.32614

10000-20000292.591.40215

Above 20000412.881.18715

Total912.791.26915

Blackberryless than 500074.140.9352.1940.094

5000-10000143.211.57815

10000-20000293.171.03715

Above 20000412.91.215

Total913.131.22215

Samsungless than 500071.860.9131.6550.183

5000-100001431.17715

10000-20000292.521.12214

Above 20000412.681.19215

Total912.621.16215

iPhoneless than 500071.430.535121.8940.137

5000-10000142.641.5515

10000-20000292114

Above 20000412.051.18215

Total912.081.17615

LGless than 500074.290.756354.6140.005

5000-10000143.51.40115

10000-20000294.720.70225

Above 20000414.491.12115

Total914.41.09415

The table shows that the youths prefer Nokia mobile phone with price range of 10000-20000 with the highest mean of 2.59 and standard deviation of 1.402; youths with mobile price range above 20000 prefer Blackberry mobile phone with highest mean 2.9 and standard deviation 1.2; youth with mobile price range below 5000 prefer Samsung mobile phone mostly with highest mean 1.86 and standard deviation 0.9; youth with price range below 5000 mostly prefer iPhone with the highest mean of 1.43 and standard deviation of 0.535. Similarly, youth with price range 5000-10000 mostly prefer LG mobile with highest mean 3.5 and respective standard deviation of 1.401.Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Nokia mobile:Since p value (0.567) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between price range and preference for Nokia mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Blackberry mobile:Since p value (0.094) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between price range and preference for Blackberry mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for Samsung:Since p value (0.183) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between price range and preference for Samsung mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for iPhone:Since p value (0.137) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between price range and preference for iPhone mobile brand.Hypothesis Testing for LG:Since p value (0.005) < (0.05), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between price range and preference for LG mobile brand.

4.11 Analysis between Age Group and Mobile Brand Attribute PreferenceTable 11: Analysis between Age group and Mobile Brand Attribute Preferred

AttributesAge GroupnMeanStd. DeviationMinimumMaximumFSig.

Touch Pad16-24373.811.175152.9340.058

25-30284.211.10115

31-40263.421.33215

Total913.821.22615

Bluetooth 16-24373.621.21150.620.541

25-30283.51.03615

31-40263.810.63435

Total913.641.01715

Camera16-24364.530.845152.2330.113

25-30284.540.74435

31-40264.150.67535

Total904.420.77915

FM/Radio16-24373.951.026153.6340.030

25-30283.361.28315

31-40264.080.84525

Total913.81.09815

Memory Card16-24374.570.867154.4860.035

25-30284.320.77225

31-40264.040.66235

Total914.340.80615

Wifi16-24374.780.7121512.9830.000

25-30284.750.84415

31-40263.691.19215

Total914.461.02515

The table shows that the youths of age group 25-30 years mostly prefer touch pad in mobile phone with the highest mean of 4.21 and standard deviation of 1.101; youths of age group 31-40 years prefer blue tooth hand set attribute in mobile phone with highest mean 3.81 and standard deviation 0.634; youth of age group 25-30 prefer camera in mobile phone mostly with highest mean 4.54 and standard deviation 0.74431; youth of age group 31-40 years mostly prefer fm/radio with the highest mean of 4.08 and standard deviation of 0.845; youth of age group 16-24 mostly prefer memory card in their mobile phone with highest mean 4.57 and standard deviation 0.867. similarly, youth of age group 16-24 mostly prefer wifi attribute in mobile with highest mean 4.78 and respective standard deviation of 0.712.Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Touch pad in mobile:Since p value (0.058) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and preference for touch pad in mobile.Hypothesis Testing for Preference for Bluetooth hand set in mobile:Since p value (0.541) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and preference for blue tooth hand set in mobile.Hypothesis Testing for Camera:Since p value (0.113) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and preference for camera in mobile.Hypothesis Testing for FM/radio:Since p value (0.030) < (0.05), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between age group and preference for FM/radio in mobile.Hypothesis Testing for Memory Card:Since p value (0.035) < (0.05), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between age group and preference for Memory card in mobile.Hypothesis Testing for Wifi:Since p value (0.000) < (0.05), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between age group and preference for Wifi in mobile.

4.12 Analysis between Age Group and Mobile Phone Usage Purpose

Table 12: Analysis between Age Group and Mobile Phone Usage PurposePurposeAge GroupnMeanStd. DeviationMinimumMaximumFSig.

Use mostly for Call16-24374.540.96150.20.819

25-30284.610.99415

31-40264.690.83815

Total914.60.9315

Use mostly for Internet16-24373.461.3861510.1590

25-30284.390.95615

31-40262.731.66315

Total913.541.49315

Use mostly for Songs and Multimedia16-24373.541.169150.7540.473

25-30283.890.956152.704

31-40263.691.28915

Total913.691.14215

Use mostly for Camera16-24373.141.159152.7040.072

25-30283.821.0225

31-40263.351.38415

Total913.411.21115

Use mostly for Memory16-24373.271.194150.1840.832

25-30283.071.63115

31-40263.191.05915

Total913.191.29915

The table shows that the youths of age group 16-24 use their mobile mostly for call with the highest mean of 4.54 and standard deviation of 0.96; youths of age group 25-30 use their mobile phone mostly for internet with highest mean 4.39 and standard deviation 0.956; youth of age group 25-30 prefer songs and multimedia mostly with highest mean 3.89 and standard deviation 0.956; youth of age group 25-30 prefer to use camera mostly with the highest mean of 3.82 and standard deviation of 1.02. Similarly, youth of age group 31-40 use phone mostly for memory with highest mean 3.19 and respective standard deviation of 1.059.Hypothesis Testing for use mostly for Call:Since p value (0.819) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and using mobile phone for call purpose.Hypothesis Testing for use mostly for internet:Since p value (0.0) < (0.05), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between age group and using mobile phone for internet purpose.Hypothesis Testing for use mostly for songs and multimedia:Since p value (0.473) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and using mobile phone for songs and multimedia.Hypothesis Testing for use mostly for Camera:Since p value (0.072) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and using mobile phone for camera.Hypothesis Testing for use mostly for memory:Since p value (0.832) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and using mobile phone for memory.

4.13 Analysis between Gender and Duration of Current Mobile Brand UsageTable 13: Analysis between Gender and Duration of Current Mobile Brand Usaget-test for Equality of Means

GendernMeanStd. DeviationtSig. (2-tailed)

No of yrs usageMale382.081.4770.2780.782

Female5321.225

The above table shows that male use their mobile phone for longer time (2.08 yrs) than female (2 yrs) with the standard deviations of 1.477 and 1.225 respectively.

Hypothesis Testing:As p-value (0.782) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between gender and current mobile brand usage.

4.14 Analysis Between Age Group and Current Mobile Brand Usage DurationTable 14: Analysis between Age Group and Current Mobile Brand Usage DurationAge GroupnMean Std. DeviationMinimumMaximumFSig.

16-24372.141.337172.3370.103

25-30281.610.78614

31-40262.351.67218

Total912.031.32918

The table shows that the youths of 31-40 years use the same mobile phone brand for maximum time and the youths of age group 25-30 years use same mobile brand minimum time with the respective standard deviations of 2.35 yrs and 1.61 yrs. Hypothesis Testing:Since p-value (0.103) > (0.05), so we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and mobile phone brand usage duration.

4.15 Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Current Mobile Brand Usage DurationTable 15: Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Current Mobile Brand Usage DurationMonthly Family IncomenMeanStd. DeviationMinimumMaximumFSig.

Less than 25,000252.641.823184.0140.021

25000-50000301.70.91514

More than 50000361.891.0915

Total912.031.32918

The table shows that youth with monthly family income less than Rs. 25000 use the same mobile phone brand for maximum time and the youths with monthly family income Rs. 25000-50000 use same mobile brand minimum time with the respective standard deviations of 1.823 yrs and 1.09 yrs. Hypothesis Testing:Since p-value (0.021) < (0.05), so we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between monthly family income and mobile phone brand usage duration.

4.16 Analysis between Age and Current Mobile Brand Usage

Table 16: Analysis between Age and Current Mobile Brand UsageCurrent Mobile Phone

AgeNokiaBlackberrySamsungiPhoneSony EricsonLGOthersTotal

16-24Count9112640537

% within Age24.30%2.70%32.40%16.20%10.80%0.00%13.50%100.00%

25-30Count345803528

% within Age10.70%14.30%17.90%28.60%0.00%10.70%17.90%100.00%

31-40Count945412126

% within Age34.60%15.40%19.20%15.40%3.80%7.70%3.80%100.00%

TotalCount2192218551191

% within Age23.10%9.90%24.20%19.80%5.50%5.50%12.10%100.00%

The table shows that all age groups use various mobile phone brands with the highest count of 24.30% on Nokia by age group 16-24; 28.60% on iPhone age group 25-30 and 34.60% on Nokia by age group 31-40 respectively.

Chi Square Test:ValuedfAsymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square19.521a120.077

Since p value (0.077) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between age group and current mobile brand use.

4.17 Analysis between Gender and Current Mobile Brand Usage

Table 17: Analysis between Gender and Current Mobile Brand UsageCurrent Mobile Phone

GenderNokiaBlackberrySamsungiPhoneSony EricsonLGOthersTotal

MaleCount958714438

% within Gender23.70%13.20%21.10%18.40%2.60%10.50%10.50%100.00%

FemaleCount124141141753

% within Gender22.60%7.50%26.40%20.80%7.50%1.90%13.20%100.00%

TotalCount2192218551191

% within Gender23.10%9.90%24.20%19.80%5.50%5.50%12.10%100.00%

the table shows that both male and female use various mobile phone brands with the highest count of 23.70% on Nokia by Male and 22.60% on Nokia by female respectively.



Since p value (0.525) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between gender and current mobile brand use.

4.18 Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Price Range

Table 18: Analysis between Monthly Family Income and Price RangePrice Range

Monthly Family Incomeless than 50005000-1000010000-20000Above 20000Total

Less than 25,000Count288725

% within Monthly Family Income8.00%32.00%32.00%28.00%100.00%

25000-50000Count3391530


More than 50000Count33111936


TotalCount814284191


The table shows that the youths of all income levels are not affected by the price of their preferred mobile phone brands.However, youths from monthly family earning more than NPR 50,000 are most likely to buy mobile brands of price range of above 20,000 (50%) while youths from monthly family earning NPR 25,000-50,000 are mostly likely to buy mobile from price range above 20000 and youth from monthly family income above NPR 50.000 are likely to buy mobile phone of price range above 20000 (52.80%).Chi Square Test: ValuedfAsymp. Sig. (2-sided)


Since p value (0.2) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between monthly family income and mobile price range selection.

4.19 Analysis between Educational Level and Better Features PreferenceTable 19: Analysis between Educational Level and better Features PreferenceBetter Features

Educational QualificationNoyesTotal

Upto Intermediate/+2Count31215

% within Educational Qualification20.00%80.00%100.00%

BachelorsCount92332


Masters and AboveCount182644


TotalCount306191


The table shows that youth with educational qualification upto intermediate are mostly affected by better features (80%) while youth with educational qualification of masters and above are least affected by better features in mobile phone.



Since p value (0.255) > (0.05), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between educational qualification and better features preference.

4.20 Analysis of Likert ScaleTable 20: Analysis of Likert ScaleTest Value = 3

StatementnMinimumMaximumMeanStd. DeviationtSig. (2- tailed)

Use mostly for Call104154.600.93016.4660.000

Use mostly for Internet104153.541.4933.4400.001

Use mostly for Songs and multimedia104153.691.1425.7830.000

Use mostly for Camera104153.411.2113.2030.002

Use mostly for Memory104153.191.2991.3720.173

The table shows that the youths use their mobile phone mostly for all six purposes. However, they use their mobile phones mostly for making calls and for songs and multimedia. They use their mobile phone least for memory.Since p-values of usage for call, internet, songs and multimedia, and camera (0.000), (0.001), (0.000), (0.002) each < (0.005), so we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between mobile phone usage and mobile purchase behaviour.

4.21 Analysis of the variables of Likert ScaleTable 21: Analysis of the Variables of Likert ScaleStatementsUse mostly for CallUse mostly for internetFor Songs and MultimediaUse mostly for CameraUse mostly for Memory

Use mostly for CallPearson Correlation-0.0770.177.214*-0.039

Sig. (2-tailed)0.4680.0930.0420.711

N91919191

Use mostly for InternetPearson Correlation.300**.382**0.131

Sig. (2-tailed)0.00400.216

N919191

For Songs and multimediaPearson Correlation.469**.316**

Sig. (2-tailed)00.002

N9191

Use mostly for CameraPearson Correlation.361**

Sig. (2-tailed)0

N91

Use mostly for MemoryPearson Correlation1

Sig. (2-tailed)

N91

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Correlation and Relationship of Call feature with,Internet: There is negative correlation between call and internet feature (-0.077) and since p-value (0.468) > (0.005), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between call and internet features of preferred mobile brand.Songs and Multimedia: There is positive correlation between call feature and songs and multimedia (0.177) and since p-value (0.093) > (0.005), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between call feature and songs and multimedia of the most preferred mobile brand.Camera: There is positive correlation between call feature and camera feature (0.214) and since p-value (0.042) > (0.005), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between Call feature and camera feature preference of most preferred mobile brand.Memory: There is negative correlation between call feature preference and memory preference (-0.039) and since p-value (0.711) > (0.005), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between call feature preference and memory preference of most preferred mobile brand.Correlation and Relationship of Internet feature preference with,Memory: There is positive correlation between internet feature preference and memory preference (0.131) and since p-value (0.216) > (0.005), we do not reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between internet feature preference and memory preference.Songs and Multimedia: There is positive correlation between internet feature preference and songs and multimedia preference (0.300) and since p-value (0.004) < (0.005), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between internet feature preference and songs and multimedia preference of most preferred mobile brand.Camera: There is positive correlation between internet feature preference and camera preference (0.382) and since p-value (0.000) < (0.005), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between internet feature preference and camera preference.Correlation and Relationship of Songs and Multimedia feature with,Camera: There is positive correlation between songs and multimedia preference and camera preference in mobile phone (0.469) and since p-value (0.000) < (0.005), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is significant relationship between songs and multimedia preference and camera preference in mobile phone.Memory: There is positive correlation between songs and multimedia preference and memory preference in mobile brand (0.316) and since p-value (0.002) < (0.005), we reject null hypothesis. Thus, there is no significant relationship between songs and multimedia preference and memory preference in mobile brand.CHAPTER 5SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION 5.1 Summary and FindingsMobile phones are an essential element of daily life today. We accept mobile phones as a part of our everyday lives and an important means of getting in touch with the world around us despite our busy schedules. The purchase of a mobile phone is an important decision with a variety of mobile phone brands available to choose from. With the strong presence of different brands, many the brand war among leading mobile brands has provided the Nepalese market with better mobile sets and variety of features.

As the time has moved on, the number of users of mobile phones have increased tremendously. The use of mobile phone for making phone calls have changed with the introduction of smart phones and wireless technology. User preference has shifted from using mobile phone merely as a means of communication to using it as a storage device, getting connect to social media and conducting business through mobile phones and making lot of money. Male and female brand attribute preference are different, even age group differences shapes the way they prefer one brand over others in the market.

There are several brand of mobile phones in the market that offers variety of attributes at different price ranges for the people. There is high competition among the brands i.e. the potential and the real competitors. Its very visible that youths are more inclined towards the brand with new technologies and new attributes irrespective of their prices. Following conclusion can be drawn from the research conducted:

Brand attributes influence the buying decision of people from all age and educational background. Monthly family income of youth affects the duration they use their mobile brand. Users of age group 16-24 mostly prefer wifi and memory card attribute while age group 31-40 prefer FM/ Radio and wireless bluetooth hand set attribute in mobile phone. Most of the respondents prefer iPhone while LG mobile brand brand was found to be least preferred by youth. Most of the youth in Kathmandu possess mobile phone of price range above NRS 20,000 while very few possess mobile brand of price range below NRS 5,000. Brand features such as touch pad, wifi, blue tooth hand set and memory card affect the preference of mobile phone brand. Mobile phone usage purpose such as call, camera, memory etc determines the choice of brand for the users. Both male and female users have similar mobile brand usage duration of 2 years on average.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Zikmund, W. (2007). Business Research Methodology. Thomson Southwestern.(Megan, 2011) Sriram, S., Neelamegham, .R (n.d.). Brand Preference, Product Attributes, and Marketing Mix Variables in Technology Product Markets

Anthony Dadzie, A., ( 2011 November). Mobile Phone Operator Brand PreferenceLenhart, A., Ling, R., Campbell, S.,Purcell, K., (2010 April 20). Teens and Mobile PhonesRetrieved 2012, from http://pewinternet.org/reports/2012/Teens-and-Mobile-Phones.htmlHarris (n.d.). Cell phone users and preference for brand Wikipedia. (n.d.). Retrieved April 03, 2013, from www.wikipedia.com: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List of mobile phone brands Wikipedia. (n.d.). Retrieved April 03, 2013, from www.wikipedia.com: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branding

ANNEX 1Brand Preference of Mobile Phones of Students of Nepal

This is Medha Dhital from Ace Institute of Management (MBA Term III) and I am conducting a small research on the above topic. The information provided will be kept confidential and will be used solely for academic research. Your response is highly appreciated.

QNoPlease tick one for each criteria group

SectionA:PersonalInformation1. Gender2. Age3. Permanant Address

1. Male2. Female1. 16-242. 25-303. 31-40

1. Kathmandu Valley2. Outside Kathmandu Valley

4Literacy Level5. Monthly Family Income (in NPR)

1. Upto Intermediate/+22. Upto bachelors3. Masters and Above

1. Less than 25,0002. 25,000-50,0003. More than 50,000

Section B: About mobile phones

Q6.Whichmobilephoneyouareusing? (Tick major one)

1. Nokia4. Blackberry2. Samsung 5. iPhone3. LG 6. Others (Specify) .........Q7.In what Price range does your mobile phone fall?

1. Below 5000 2. 5000-100003. 10000-20000 4. Above 20000

Q8.Why did you choose this brand over others?(you can select more than one)

1. Better features2. Reasonable price3. Better outlook4. Catchy advertisement5. Satisfied friends/peers with the brand6. Others (Specify) ...............................

Q9. What brand of phone did you previously own? (you can select more than one)

1. Nokia 2. Samsung3. LG4. Blackberry5. iPhone6. Others (Specify)

Q10. For what purpose do you use your mobile mostly? (Rank on the scale of 5, highest usage gets a score of 5)1. Call2. Internet3. Songs and multimedia4. Camera 5. Memory

Q11. For mobile phone please tick as per the following attributes:In your view, it Is Important To Have The Following Attributes:Strongly Disagree Disagree

NeutralAgreeStrongly agree

Touch pad12345

Bluetooth Head Set12345

Camera12345

FM/Radio12345

Memory Card12345

Wi-Fi 12345

Q12. Which is your favourite mobile phone brand? ( Please choose your 3 favourite brand in order of preference from 1- Most favourite to 3-Least favourite)

1 2 31. Nokia 2. Samsung3. LG4. Blackberry5. iPhone6. Other............(Specify)

Q.13. Howlongyouareusingthe current mobilephone?.........................

The phone has become necessity for most people even though many people still believe that there medical side effects of using mobile phone. NTC is preferred choice for age between 15 and 30 whereas Ncell is preferred for age between 30 and 35. Prepaid sim card are the most popular among the people with post-paid users are mostly from higher age group. Most people spend around 200-500 monthly with average monthly spending of age group 15-20 is less than other group whereas age group 30-35 are highest spender. Phone calls are the most use service by mobile phone users with internet service are being used in abundance. The number of female using NTC as service provider is higher compare to Male. There average monthly spending is dependent on gender with male spending higher amount compare to females. Those who have education level with master and bachelor uses mostly NTC as service provider with number lower with +2 education level. 55

Documents

BRM Final Medha