1
COUNTERFEITING OF LUXURY BRANDS
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENT PAGE
Introduction 1
Scale of counterfeiting 2
Key reasons of counterfeiting growth 3
Exhibit 1: General descriptions of the phenomenon 4
Countries‟ situation and legal authorities 4
Consumers – the demand side 5
Exhibit 2: Social behaviour patterns for goods in Chinese society 6
Manufacturers – Legitimate and Counterfeiters 6
Challenges it poses for brand customer relationship 7
Exhibit 3: Deceptive and non-deceptive counterfeiting 8
Exhibit 4: Dynamic effects of deception in the primary market 9
Conclusion 11
Appendices
Appendix 1: Key reasons of counterfeiting growth 12
Appendix 2: Summary table of supply and demand drivers 13
Appendix 3: Extra costs related to combating counterfeiting 14
Appendix 4: Summary of principal potential effects of counterfeiting 15
References 16
1
Abstract: In today’s world, where luxury brand owners are spending
millions to effectively attract the affluent people towards their brands, these
brands are facing a momentous threat from counterfeit goods
manufacturers. The growth rate of counterfeiting has been epochal during
the last two decades, posing challenges for the governments, genuine-item
manufacturers and consumers as well. This paper identifies the scale with
which counterfeiting is growing, the key reasons of its growth and the
challenges that it poses for brand-customer relationships.
INTRODUCTION
Firms spend their resources and time in building their brands over the period of years to have
prominent positions in consumers‟ minds and to build the desired image equivalent to the
brand identity. For luxury brand owners, brands are the most valuable – though intangible –
assets of the firms; a brand without the brand itself is just another product nowadays. Where
brands have been facing the challenges due to a troubling phenomenon: the „democratization
of luxury‟ (Kennedy) since the last decade, the practice of counterfeiting strong luxury brand
goods is another major problem. One of the main problems that luxury brands are facing in
today‟s globalized world is of counterfeit goods (Hilton et al 2004). Counterfeiting has
become a significant economic phenomenon (Bian and Moutinho 2009; Hamm 2009), and is
referred as „the crime of the 21st century‟ (ACG Report 2003), „world‟s premier criminal
enterprises‟ and „sophisticated network of criminals‟ (Gordon 2002), „organized crime‟
(McCaughey), and „threat to legal marketers of brands‟ (Perez et al 2010).
Counterfeiting - global problem of enormous magnitude – about which James Moody, former
Chief, FBI Organized Crime Division warned saying that counterfeiting will become the
crime of the 21st century is considered as one of the oldest crimes. The counterfeiting of
luxury products – sector in which counterfeiting is widespread (Hilton et al 2004) - is a
longstanding problem itself. But in today‟s world, brand names of leading luxury goods
manufacturers that has been synonymous with sophistication, elegance and style is facing a
significant threat from counterfeits and cheap knock-offs – counterfeits are called by many
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
2
different names like imitation, fake, bogus, copy and overrun, which are little different in
meanings, but there is not much difference in creating similar problems for genuine-item
manufacturers (Yoo and Lee 2005).
SCALE OF COUNTERFEITING
According to Bosworth and Yang (2002), counterfeiting has become a global problem of
enormous magnitude. The phenomenon of product counterfeiting – the illegal practice of
manufacturing goods impersonating other branded goods and sold as registered legal goods
(Staake et al 2009) – had been considered by original goods manufacturers as a serious threat
since the 1970s, albeit it had existed since long (Harvey and Ronkainen 1985). Presently the
markets are flooded with fake products; the presence of counterfeit goods in the world market
has grown over 10,000 percent in the past two decades (Frasca 2009; MarkMonitor® 2009)
and by 1100 percent between 1984 and 1994 (Bian and Moutinho 2009). Recently it has been
estimated that counterfeits account for 6 to 8 percent of world trade (Frasca 2009; Wilcox et
al 2008), and ten percent according to Yoo and Lee (2009). World Customs Organization
2004 report confirmed that global market for such goods exceeded $600 billion and
accounted for 7 percent of the world trade approximately (Wilcox et al 2008), Asia being the
market that incurred more than one-third of the losses due to counterfeiting (Ang et al 2001).
Other figures by Commuri (2009) suggest that counterfeits reduce the sales of genuine-items
by $15 billion to $50 billion, and $250 billion if pirated goods are included out of which
knock-offs account for $9 billion (Commuri 2009). According to Sridhar (2007), “while the
world is growing by three to four percent, counterfeits are growing by 150 percent”.
International Chamber of Commerce in 2004 reported loss of $12 billion every year in luxury
goods sector due to counterfeiting, despite the commendable efforts of luxury brand
marketers (Wilcox et al 2008). Fashion related items are leading in this menace. Counterfeit
products seized by U.S. Customs in 2002 which account for 18 percent of the $98 million
were fashion related items (Hilton et al 2004). 30 million dollars in estimation are lost
annually by French luxury goods industry (Bamossy and Scammon 1985).
Out of the total, only designer jeans counterfeits account for 10 percent of the market. Calvin
Klein‟s counterfeited jeans accounted for $20 million in sales in 1981 compared to $250
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
3
million of sales of original jeans (Grossman and Shapiro 1988). Levi jeans incur 15 million
dollar in losses every year. Cartier Inc. reported the presence of 40,000 copies of its watches
compared to 50,000 originals that were produced by the original brand itself (Grossman and
Shapiro 1988) and reported losses of 15 million dollars per year. Fake designer sunglasses
and designer watches account for about 25 percent share and over 25 percent share
respectively of U.S. market (Bamossy and Scammon 1985).
The increase in counterfeiting sales is also due to advent and subsequent rapid development
of internet; internet has provided sellers and buyers of counterfeited products with additional,
powerful and easily accessible channels. Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) noted that significant share of counterfeit products‟ sales is
attributable to the internet (International Trademark Association (INTA) 2009). The key
factors identified by INTA (2009) include the world wide reach of internet; online payments;
anonymity gained from operating via internet; easier to deceive buyers by showing pictures
of original products – which have made it simpler for counterfeiters to sell their products.
KEY REASONS OF COUNTERFEITING GROWTH
Various authors claim various reasons for growth and expansion in its magnitude and scope.
There are few key players which are playing a significant role in the growth of counterfeiting
which include the economy of the countries; legal authorities; consumers; and manufacturers
of luxury brand goods and counterfeiters as well; both demand and supply side investigations
need to be carried out (Exhibit 1). The main reasons of counterfeiting growth are summarized
in Appendix 1 and 2.
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
4
COUNTRIES’ SITUATION AND LEGAL AUTHORITIES
Various reasons identified by Sridhar (2007) include high illiteracy rate level; low purchasing
power; increasing unemployment rate; ineffective law enforcement; and nexus between
counterfeiters and law enforcers The problem of counterfeiting emerged mainly due to
emerging economies where there is little risk for large profits, low probability to get caught,
low conviction rates and less penalty if convicted (Sridhar 2007; Frasca 2009; Bosworth and
Yang 2002). It is also growing due to weak legal infrastructure and corruptible public
officials (Green and Smith 2002); and countries which have low-cost producing facilities and
poor IP enforcement, and are close to large markets play significant role in driving
counterfeiting activity (Bosworth and Yang 2002). As suggested by Clark (2006), one of the
examples is China where there are noted loopholes and flaws in its copyright and intellectual
property legislation, and due to ineffective law enforcement and absence of serious penalties
counterfeiters continue to sell illegal goods in the market. However, to date no serious actions
have been taken to prevent this (Phau and Teah 2009).
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
5
CONSUMERS – THE DEMAND SIDE
The above mentioned reasons for growth of luxury goods counterfeiting might not be the core
reasons but the certain aspects which provide the added advantage to the main players of the
counterfeiting phenomenon – manufacturers and buyers of luxury goods counterfeits. The
more the demand of counterfeits would be, the more counterfeits would be produced by the
criminals who indulge in this tax-free business. “Since demand is always the key driver of a
market, various researchers have argued that consumer demand for counterfeits is one of the
leading causes of the existence and upsurge in growth of the counterfeiting phenomenon”
(Bamossy and Scammon 1985). The driver for increasing demand is the aspiring attitude of
consumers who wish to buy latest luxury branded products but cannot afford the original
luxury goods (Phau and Teah 2009).
Counterfeits are purchased more when brand equity starts to signify an image instead of the
actual tangible attributes of the product. When consumers start giving more value to the
insignia of a brand on the product instead of the other product attributes, they tend to buy
more low-price low-quality counterfeits instead of originals (Gentry et al 2001; Ang et al
2001). The more successful the brand name would be, the more likely it is to have
counterfeits (Nia and Zaichkowsky 2000; Eisend and Schuchert-Guler 2006).
Moreover, high power distance in various cultures also leads to high demand for counterfeits
of luxury goods; one prominent example is Mexico as it is rated very high on Hofstede‟s
„Power Distance‟ Index. Mexican societies is one of those societies where wealth is
concentrated in hands of few elites and consumption of counterfeits of luxury goods help
remaining people to construct a fake identity which help them to become socially acceptable.
Similarly, the results of a study of how social factors influence the Chinese consumers‟
purchase intentions of counterfeits, conducted by Phau and Teah (2009), reflect that status
consumption is directly proportional to the purchase intentions of counterfeits of luxury
brands. According to Hamm (2009), the collectivist desire to belong to a certain group
presents reasons for growing counterfeit purchases, and only the three aspects of Chinese
collectivist culture „Liwu‟, „Guanxi‟ and „Reciprocity‟ (Exhibit 2) negatively influence the
purchase decisions of luxury goods counterfeits. Singapore is another example where people
are judged solely in materialistic terms and as branded goods are very highly priced in
Singapore, people tend to buy counterfeits of brands to be socially accepted.
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
6
MANUFACTURERS – LEGITIMATE AND COUNTERFEITERS
From the manufacturers‟ perspective, counterfeits of luxury brands do not require much
effort to be sold, nor do they require much money to be manufactured. The amount of money
and time original luxury brand owners spend in establishing brand equity is huge (Commuri
2009), which these counterfeit goods manufacturers do not have to incur. Secondly, the
increase in goods that are worth counterfeiting with the ease of imitating brands due to
advancements in technology (Phau and Teah 2009; Gentry et al 2001), and highly fragmented
channels of distribution are some of the reasons for the catalytic growth of counterfeiting as
is also suggested by Bamossy and Scammon (1985) and Hilton et al (2004). Bosworth and
Yang (2002) also identified over production of goods under license as a source or reason of
counterfeiting.
Furthermore, the premiums charged from the consumer by the legitimate manufacturers of
luxury goods are generally very high from what manufacturers of counterfeits charge to their
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
7
customers. These companies attract counterfeiters because they command purchase prices
that vastly exceed their base manufacturing costs (Gordon 2002). Consumers, who buy
products on the basis of functional attributes of the product, seem to value more on the price
than rest of the factors. Ang et al (2001) in their study of counterfeits found out that
consumers considered the prices of these luxury products to be too high despite the excellent
production quality and other benefits associated with them. Also, the study conducted by Yoo
and Lee (2005) showed that when price information about the brand was provided to the
respondents, the preference for genuine item diminished. But from the luxury brands‟
perspective, price plays a crucial role in communicating and preserving exclusivity and
prestige – as these are the important aspects of luxury brands – “as well as keeping the brand
out of mass consumption” (Kwak and Sojka 2010; Commuri 2009). Gucci in 1980s expanded
its output and made its products widely accessible in many stores which tarnished its image
due to non-exclusivity of the products, and then came the counterfeits which damaged the
brand even more. It had to withdraw its products from the markets in 1990s.
CHALLENGES IT POSES FOR BRAND-CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP
Counterfeiting not only reduces sales of original goods but it also adversely affects the brand
equity and consumer confidence and it hurts channel loyalty (McCaughey), which directly or
indirectly affects the brand-customer relationship. Legitimate manufacturers have to incur
costs of protecting the brand and enforcing intellectual property rights (Appendix 3); and
costs associated with legal remedies (Frasca 2009). Counterfeit products negatively affect the
process of innovation, reduce the sales share of legitimate businesses, damage the brand
reputation, and undermine the ability of luxury brands to benefit from the breakthrough
products. The general effects counterfeiting has on various entities as identified by OECD
(2008) are summed up in Appendix 4.
As far as challenges that counterfeiting poses for brand customer relationship are concerned,
it is a two-edged sword for genuine-item consumers – even if they buy counterfeits being
victim of deceptive counterfeiting or they strictly restrict themselves to the originals, they are
at loss. The buyers of original luxury goods are affected when they buy fake goods due to
deceptive counterfeiting (Exhibit 3) as well as when others buy counterfeited luxury goods
through non-deceptive counterfeiting. “Whether counterfeits are of subpar or equivalent
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
8
quality and whether consumers purchase them willingly or unwittingly, counterfeits appear to
unanimously imperil the equity of the genuine item” (Commuri 2009). If the counterfeit did
not fulfil expectations of the consumer who bought the product not knowing that it was a
counterfeit, he or she would blame the original luxury brand owner for the poor quality.
Even, „vanity‟ counterfeits – products of low intrinsic and low perceived quality (Hilton et al
2004) – though initially do not damage the brand‟s reputation because of the obvious
difference in the quality, but it raises serious concern for the legitimate manufacturers to
distinguish the originals from counterfeits to avoid non-deceptive counterfeiting.
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
9
Counterfeit products affect the brand equity by diminishing the symbolic value of original
luxury goods and as there might not be a noticeable difference in the quality since those
counterfeits are low-priced alternatives of much expensive original luxury goods, it would
eventually result in the erosion of genuine luxury brand equity (Commuri 2009; Phau and
Teah 2009; Grossman and Sahpiro 1988; Bamossy and Scammon 1985) as well as it
decreases the luxury perception associated with the brand (Hamm 2009). The presence of
counterfeits reduces the willingness of a number of potential buyers to buy the original
products when they expect to be deceived, though actual deception takes place on a very
small scale relatively (Exhibit 4). The five perceived value attributes of a luxury brand
mentioned by Hamm (2009) – conspicuousness, uniqueness, quality, hedonism and self
extension – are all negatively affected by the presence of counterfeits in the long-term, if not
in the short run. It still affects some customers of the same brand who buy originals, even
when counterfeiters claim that all of their customers know that they are buying counterfeited
goods. Bosworth and Yang (2002) suggests that counterfeiting disables legitimate
manufacturers to take maximum benefit by shifting demand from them to counterfeiters.
Majority of the respondents in Nia and Zaichkowsky (2000) study felt that less presence of
counterfeits would not have led them to buy originals. These illicit goods take the market
share of original luxury brands and undermine innovation affecting the economic growth
negatively.
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
10
On the contrary, according to the study conducted by Nia and Zaichkowsky (2000), “value,
satisfaction and status of original luxury brand name products are not decreased by the
availability of counterfeits”. Surprisingly, most of the respondents in their study felt that
availability of counterfeit goods actually had a positive impact on the brand equity for
original goods buyers. Even Yoo and Lee (2009), in their „fashion brand counterfeit‟ study
conducted in South Korea reached to the similar conclusion. On the other hand, Wilcox et al
(2008) suggested that counterfeits negatively influence the genuine-item consumers‟ minds
changing their buying preferences, when their attitudes towards it serve as a social-adjustive
function. They found out that it may not only have adverse effects in terms of lost sales, but it
also negatively affects the brand equity in the long-run.
Since the special characteristic of luxury brands are prestige and rarity (Nia and Zaichkowsky
2000), and luxury brands are supposed to be widely popular but not widely accessible
(Commuri 2009), counterfeiters make use of such disparity and break an important rule of
luxury brand management. An important element of luxury brands is „exclusivity‟ which is
negatively affected by the presence of counterfeit items (Commuri 2009); exclusivity is
undermined by the counterfeits (Hamm 2009). By damaging the brand‟s exclusive image, it
ruins the prestigious brand-consumer relationship which in some cases takes years to
develop. On the other hand, Staake et al (2009) suggested that due to excessive presence of
counterfeits, luxury brands companies may witness the increase in brand awareness leading
to additional demand due to network effects (Staake et al 2009).
In preserving brand-customer relationships, understanding what effects does counterfeiting
have on genuine-item consumers is a vital first step as the primary constituency of luxury
brand managers are genuine-item consumers; thus they should be a decisive preoccupation
(Commuri 2009). The study conducted by Hamm (2009) suggested that manufacturers need
to pay attention to the factors generating the demand of counterfeits to curtail the negative
effects due to counterfeits, and identified „advertisement‟ as the right messenger. To reduce
non-deceptive counterfeiting, necessary actions should be taken to make it simple for buyers
of original goods to distinguish between the originals and counterfeits. Changes in the
packaging and the products itself can be made to achieve the objective.
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
11
CONCLUSION
Counterfeiting which is growing by enormous magnitude, poses threats to luxury brands; the
customer loses interest in the brand that is widely counterfeited. The growth in the supply of
luxury goods‟ counterfeits is due to the high demand of those counterfeits from consumers‟
side; counterfeits‟ consumers gain the same brand experience in some aspects in lesser price.
Counterfeits are manufactured and consumed in all economies – emerging economies being
developing countries provide favouring conditions for counterfeiting business.
The longstanding problem of counterfeiting poses challenges for legitimate manufacturers of
luxury brands in developing brand equity and maximising benefits from the resources utilized
in developing brands. The presence of counterfeits not only affects the potential customers of
brands negatively, but it also makes it arduous for legitimate manufacturers to retain their
existing customers. The losses incurred due to counterfeiting businesses are enormous.
Counterfeits undermine the phenomenon of innovation and negatively affect the brands,
economies, consumers of legitimate goods, as well as general public.
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
12
Appendix 1: KEY REASONS OF COUNTERFEITING GROWTH
COUNTRIES’
SITUATIONS/ECONOMIES
GOVERNMENTS/LEGAL
AUTHORITIES
CONSUMERS OF
COUNTERFEITS
MANUFACTURERS
Emerging economies Low literacy level Low purchasing power Low consumerism
level High unemployment
rate Low risk for large
profits Low probability to get
caught Low conviction rates Less penalty if get
caught
Weak legal infrastructure
Corruptible public officials
Nexus between counterfeiters and law enforcers
Slow judiciary process
Loopholes in laws and its enforcement
More demand from consumers’ side
Acceptance is counterfeit goods is more
More value given to insignia of the brand
High power distance cultures
Collectivist cultures
Consumers value more on the price when buying for functional benefits
Find prices of luxury goods to be too high
Lack of counterfeiting morality
Through counterfeits consumers can acquire the same lifestyle depicted by high-fashion brands
Do not view counterfeits as second-rate products
Luxury brand owners
Over production of goods under license
Attract counterfeiters because of premiums charged from consumers
Counterfeit
manufacturers
Counterfeits are easy to sell
Low manufacturing costs
Fast-paced technological advancements
Increase in goods that are worth counterfeiting
Presence of highly fragmented distribution channels
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
13
Appendix 2: SUMMARY TABLE OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND DRIVERS FOR COUNTERFEITS
Source: OECD (2008)
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
14
Appendix 3: EXTRA COSTS RELATED TO COMBATING COUNTERFEITING
Source: OECD 2008
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
15
Appendix 4: SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF COUNTERFEITING
Source: OECD (2008)
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
16
References:
1. ACG Report. Why You Should Care About Counterfeiting: The Anti-Counterfeiting Group
Campaigning Against the Trade in Fakes.
2. Ang, S.H., Cheng, P.S., Lim, E.A.C. and Tambyah, S.K. (2001). Spot the Difference:
consumer responses towards counterfeits. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(3), pp. 219-
235.
3. Bamossy, G. and Scammon, D. (1985). Product counterfeiting: consumers and manufacturers
beware. Advances in Consumer Research, 12(1), pp. 334-349.
4. Bian, X., Moutinho, L. (2009). The role of brand image, product involvement, and knowledge
in explaining consumer purchase behavior of counterfeits. European Journal of Marketing,
45(1/2), pp. 191-216.
5. Bloch, P., Bush, R. and Campbell, L. (1993), Consumer „accomplices‟ in product
counterfeiting. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10(4), pp. 27-36.
6. Bosworth, D. and Yang, D. (2002). The Economics and Management of Global
Counterfeiting. Sixth World Congress on Intellectual Capital and Innovation. September
2002.
7. Clark, D. (2006). Counterfeiting in China: a blueprint for change. The China Business
Review, 33(1), pp. 14-15.
8. Commuri, S. (2009). The Impact of Counterfeiting on Genuine-Item Consumers‟ Brand
Relationships. Journal of Marketing, 73, pp. 86-98.
9. Eisend, M. and Schuchert-Guler, P. (2006), Explaining counterfeit purchases: a review and
preview. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 2006(12).
10. Frasca, R.V. Jr. (2009). Product Counterfeiting: The Economic Scourge of the 21st Century.
[Online]. (URL: http://www.bicsi.org/pdf/winter_2010/Ralph_Frasca.pdf). (Accessed 24
February 2011).
11. Gentry, J.W., Putrevu, S., Shultz, C. II. and Commuri, S. (2001). How Now Ralph Lauren?
The Separation of Brand and Product In A Counterfeit Culture. Advances in Consumer
Research, 28, pp. 258-265.
12. Gordon, P. (2002). Keeping pace with counterfeiters. The Journal of World Intellectual
Property, 5(6), pp. 965-979.
13. Green, R.T. and Smith, T. (2002). Countering Brand Counterfeiters. Journal of International
Marketing, 10(4), pp. 89-106.
14. Grossman, G.M. and Shapiro, C. (1988). Counterfeiting of Status Goods. The Quarterly
Journal of Economics, 103(1), pp. 79-100.
15. Hamm, K. (2009). Effects of Counterfeiting on the Image of Luxury Brands in China. China
Business and Research, No. 004. [Online]. (URL: http://www.frankfurt-
school.de/content/en/ecbc/ecbc_portal/content_files/file7/CBR2009_004_Hamm_Effects_cou
nterfeiting.pdf). (Accessed 10 March 2011).
16. Harvey, M.G. and Ronkainen, I.A. (1985). International counterfeiters: marketing success
without the cost and the risk. Columbia Journal of World Business, 20(3), pp. 37-45.
17. Hilton, B., Choi, C.J. and Chen, S. (2004). The Ethics of Counterfeiting in the Fashion
Industry: Quality, Credence and Profit Issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 55, pp. 345-354.
18. International Trademark Association (INTA) (2009 September). Addressing the sale of
counterfeits. [Online]. (URL
http://www.inta.org/Advocacy/Documents/INTA%20Best%20Practices%20for%20Addressin
http://brandingtodominate.blogspot.com/
17
g%20the%20Sale%20of%20Counterfeits%20on%20the%20Internet.pdf). (Accessed 4 March
2011).
19. Kennedy, D. Luxury Brands: How to maneuver through this moment of austerity. Interbrand.
[Online]. (URL:
http://www.interbrand.com/Libraries/Articles/52_IP_Luxury_Brands_pdf.sflb.ashx).
(Accessed 12 March 2011).
20. Kwak, L.E. and Sojka, F.Z. (2010). If they could see me now: immigrants‟ use of prestige
brands to convey status. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27(4), pp. 371-380.
21. Nia, A. and Zaichkowsky, J.L. (2007). Do Counterfeits Devalue the Ownership of Luxury
Brands? Journal of Product and Brand Management, 9(7), pp. 485-497.
22. OECD. (2008). The economic impact of counterfeiting and piracy. [Online]. (URL:
http://www.oepm.es/cs/OEPMSite/contenidos/ponen/InformeOCDE26feb09/2009_03_03_O
ECD_Study_on_Counterfeiting_and_Piracy.pdf). (Accessed 19 March 2011).
23. Perez, M.E., Castano, R. and Quintanilla, C. (2010). Constructing Identity through the
consumption of counterfeit luxury goods. Qualitative Market Research: An International
Journal, 13(3), pp. 219-235.
24. Phau, I. and Teah, M. (2009). Devil wears (counterfeit) Prada: a study of antecedents and
outcomes of attitudes towards counterfeits of luxury brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing,
26/1, pp. 15-27.
25. Staake, T., Thiesse, F. and Fleisch, E. (2009). The Emergence of Counterfeit Trade: a
literature review. European Journal of Marketing, 43(3/4), pp. 320-349.
26. Sridhar, G. Dr. (2007). Countering Counterfeits. International Marketing Conference on
Marketing and Society, 8-10 April 2007. IIMK. [Online]. (URL:
http://dspace.iimk.ac.in/bitstream/2259/313/1/737-742.pdf). (Accessed 11 March 2011).
27. Wilcox, K., Kim, H.M. and Sen, S. (2008). Why Do Consumers Buy Counterfeit Luxury
Brands? Journal of Marketing Research, XLV.
28. Yoo, B. and Lee, S. (2005 October 6). Do counterfeits promote genuine products? [Online].
(URL http://www.hofstra.edu/pdf/BIZ_mlc_workingpaper7.pdf). (Accessed 5 March 2011).
29. Yoo, B. and Lee, S. (2009). Buy genuine luxury fashion products or counterfeits? Advances in
Consumer Research, 36, pp. 280-286.