Miller et.al (1998) identify three stages in the development of consumption research:
Stage 1 60’s – 70’s
Consumption as an emerging field
Stage 2 70’s – 90’s
Study of consumption as it’s own sub-field
Stage 3 90’s – Today
Development and refinement of the field
Brands are the sum of a consumers experiences and perceptions of a group of products of services.
Sometimes, in the pursuit of market share, large companies use unethical / unsustainable practises to pursue consumers.
‘ Anti-Brand’ sentiment can reach the point where a niche is created in the market for a product with ideals that are diametrically opposed to that of the brand.
Small companies are well placed to enter the market by exploiting this niche, created by the big firms, challenging the dominant discourse within that market sector and building a business based on consumer feedback.
Kumar (2006) cites five reasons for the growth of the anti-brand:
Increased Communication (Internet, Forums, e.t.c)
Growing Lack of Trust in ‘Big Business’
‘ Individualistic’ Consumer Materialism
Ethical / Human Rights Consciousness
“ When people go shopping, economists tell us that they will usually buy the best quality products that they can afford … Sometimes, however, people might boycott a particular brand or company … They might also chose a fair trade coffee label due to a concern for ‘developing countries … Ethical purchasers may, therefore, have political, religious, spiritual, environmental, social or other motives for choosing one product over another” (Harrison et al 2005, p2)
“ The act of buying is a vote for an economic and social model, for a particular way of producing goods” (Ellwod 1984, p8) Ethical Consumerism
Sustainable Food – Innocent Smoothies
Sustainable Transport – Tesla Roadster
Sustainable Electronics – VIA Processor
Sustainable Cleaning Products - EcoVer
Full of Sugar
High ‘e-number’ content
Not particularly nutritious
Not particularly high content of ‘natural’ ingredients.
Sustainability not given a second thought in the production process.
Natyrox - Heard in the news today that the makers of Ribena admitted today that their drink has absolutely no vitamin C when some scientists at a university in New Zealand tested the drink. They have been fined £100,000 pounds for misleading the public. They said they changed the formula to increase shelf- life, but reduced the amount of Vitamin C.
DEV1L - Harsh I think they got off easy they should have been fined millions. When I'm hungover I get Ribena for the vitamin C in it the b$%£&*s no wonder I don't feel any better I'm going back to sunny delight :mad: but I will probably find out that has no vitamins next :(
PyroZania - Sunny D used to/may still have carcinogens in it.
ALEXnkF1 - Why would you want Ribena when you can get Innocent fruit smoothies.