This research attempts to measure the factors affecting brand loyalty at Ker and Downey (KnD) resort chains located in the Annapurna region. Structured questionnaires were administered in the survey. 200 tourists who stayed in the Ker and Downey resort were approached and data were gathered. Structure equation modeling technique was applied to examine the influential factors affecting brand loyalty at Ker and Downey resort. It was found that perceived facilities and service quality were the most influential factors on brand loyalty. Marketing managers should concentrate on services provided by KnD and tries to know how it is perceived by tourists.

1. Brand Loyalty ofTourists forBrand Loyalty ofTourists for
Ker and DowneyKer and Downey
Dr. Dhruba Kumar Gautam
Associate Professor,Tribhuvan
University
Dr. Sajeeb Kumar Shrestha
Lecturer,Tribhuvan University
December 1-2, 2016
Greater Noida
BIMTECH 1

2. Background of the StudyBackground of the Study
State of connectedness to the brand
(Aaker, 1991).
Tendency to buy the brand as their earlier
primary choice (Yoo and Donthun, 2001).
Sincere commitment to repurchase the
likely products/brands frequently in the
future (Oliver, 1999).
Observable behavior and can be measured
easily (Dekimpe and others, 1997).
2

3. Ker and DowneyKer and Downey
American company for 20 years in Africa and Nepal.
Ker and Downey Resort (KnD) is the chain resort in
the Annapurna region with wider extension of
lodges in Bandipur and Jomsom.
Five chain lodges in the Annapurna region - Sanctury
lodge, Gurung lodge, Himalayan lodge, Seti river
camp, Mala lodge, and three mountain lodge (Ker
and Downey Nepal, 2013b).
3

4. 4

5. ……
Ker & Downey offers the finest, most
complete adventure program in Nepal.
Provides services to trekkers.
Distance of all the lodges is one day trekking
distance providing comfort services with the
gift of mountainous panorama from the height.
Lodges are promoted as the comfort lodge in
the Annapurna region.
Adventure Quest Nepal Private Limited
(AQN) looks all the KnD reservations and
management.
5

6. 6

7. ……
Itineraries
- Royal Nepal Spectacular (13 nights)
- Annapurna Base Camp (ABC trekking, 12 nights)
- Scared mountain Trek (9 nights)
- Scared Mountain Trek and River Float (11 nights)
- Everest Trekking (12 days),
- PoonHill Trekking (11 nights) and
- Nepal Family Itinerary (8 nights)
7

8. Research Questions andResearch Questions and
ObjectivesObjectives
Questions:
What are the determining factors for brand
loyalty at KnD resort?
Objectives
To examine the effect of antecedent factors
influencing brand loyalty at KnD resort.
8

9. Figure 1: Research Framework
9
Research Framework
Perceived
Facilities
Service
Quality
Price
Value
Brand
Image
Brand
Loyalty
H2
(γ2
)
H1
(γ1
)
H3
(γ3
)
H5
(γ5
)
H4
(γ4
)
H6
(γ6
)
H7
(β7
)

10. Hypotheses
 H1
(γ1
) = Perceived facilities has effect on brand loyalty.
 H2
(γ2
) = Perceived facilities has effect on brand image.
 H3
(γ3
) = Service quality has effect on brand loyalty.
 H4
(γ4
) = Service quality has effect on brand image.
 H5
(γ5
) = Price value has effect on brand image.
 H6
(γ6
) = Price value has effect on brand loyalty.
 H7
(β7
) = Brand image has effect on brand loyalty
10

11. MethodologyMethodology
Research design: Descriptive and
Explanatory.
Population: Tourists who had stayed at KnD
lodges in Annapurna region.
Sample: 200 visitors approached during study
Sample Methods: Convenience Sampling.
Data: Primary data.
Instrument: Structured questionnaire.
Tools of Analysis: SEM
11

12. AnalysisAnalysis
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
 Bartlett's test of Sphericity (Chi-square 412.103; sig. 0.000)
 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) = 0.762
 Sample number were adequate.
 Five factors were drawn cumulatively accounted 62.72
percent of the total variance.
 Statements with factor loadings greater than 0.5 were
grouped in the corresponding factor.
12

13. 13
Table1: Rotated Component Matrix
Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1 2 3 4 5
Pv4 0.726
Cs2 0.715
Bi6 0.665
Sq2 0.661
Bl3 0.819
Pv1 0.754
Sq3 0.581
Pv2 0.813
Bl4 0.762
Bl11 0.727
Bl10 0.646
Bl9 0.773
Bi5 0.723
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a Rotation converged in 6 iterations.

14. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
14
Model Fit Indices
 CMIN/DF = 2.315,
 GFI = 0.911
 CFI = 0.902
 RMSEA = 0.041
 RMR = 0.020
 So, the model was fairly fitted (Byrne, 2001; Hair and
others, 1998; Joreskog and Sorbom, 1993).
 .

15. Validity and Reliability of the Model
 Discriminant Validity
 AVE should be greater than 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
 AVE should be greater than MSV
 AVE should be greater than ASV.
 Convergent Validity:
 Construct Reliability (CR) should be greater than 0.7
 CR should be greater than AVE.
15

16. Table3: Validity and Reliability of ConstructsTable3: Validity and Reliability of Constructs
16
CR AVE MSV ASV
Brand
Loyalty
Perceived
Facilities
Service
Quality
Price
Value
Brand
Image
Brand
Loyalty
0.870 0.524 0.486 0.137 0.723
Perceived
Facilities
0.850 0.512 0.486 0.188 0.697 0.724
Service
Quality
0.790 0.524 0.265 0.130 0.109 0.492 0.710
Price Value
0.880 0.532 0.265 0.082 0.225 0.496 0.515 0.734
Brand Image
0.870 0.510 0.023 0.008 0.226 0.151 0.512 0.095 0.708

17. Figure 1: Final Overall Measurement Model 17

18. Figure 2: Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) 18
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)

19. 19
Variance Explained by Structural Model
• Brand image was (0.08 or 8%) and
• Brand loyalty was (0.92 or 93%).

20. 20
Hypotheses Testing
Table 2
Hypothesis From To
Standardized
Coefficients
S.E. t-value Remarks
H2
(γ2
) Perceived Facilities
Brand
Image
.087 .162 .537
Not
Accepted
H4
(γ4
) Service Quality
Brand
Image
-.073 .139 -.524
Not
Accepted
H5
(γ5
) Price Value
Brand
Image
.067 .129 .520
Not
Accepted
H7
(β7
) Brand Image
Brand
Loyalty
-.619 .475 -1.304
Not
Accepted
H1
(γ1
) Perceived Facilities
Brand
Loyalty
.684 .261 2.622 Accepted
H3
(γ3
) Service Quality
Brand
Loyalty
.422 .256 2.648 Accepted
H6
(γ6
) Price Value
Brand
Loyalty
.391 .250 1.562
Not
Accepted

21. FindingsFindings
Perceived facilities and service quality has
shown effect on brand loyalty.
Weaker role of brand image.
Price value has shown no effect on brand
image and brand loyalty.
21

22. ConclusionConclusion
Perceived facilities and service quality were
the major factors KnD chain resort.
Consistent with Suhartanto (2011) that
perceived facilities (value) and service quality
are the predictors for determining brand
loyalty.
Service quality stand for the facilities of the
KnD are modern and staff performance is
right at the time.
22

23. ……
Perceived facilities should be given and value
should be generated from it.
Marketing manager should keep in mind
when promoting the resort in the tourism
sector.
23

24. 24
• Thank You.