The document summarizes a study on customer attitudes toward different tire brands in Kolkata and surrounding areas. ANOVA and Thurstone Case V scale analyses found significant influences of brand and region on sales. MRF was ranked first among the six brands studied. Past experience and price were most important factors for customers when buying tires. The study was limited by its small sample size and scope within Kolkata only.

1. Customers’ Attitude towards Different
Brands of Tyre: An Empirical Study in
Kolkata and Its Outskirts
By
Subhadip Saha
(Student, JIS College of Engg.)
&
Mrinal Kanti Das
(Asst. Prof., JIS College of Engg.)

2. Needs & Necessities
For Academic For Industry & Business
The research provides opportunity to The Indian tyre industry recovered
students to demonstrate the application remarkably in FY10 following the
of their knowledge, skill & slowdown in FY09. This was a result
competencies required during the of growing demand for automobile
session. The research also helps the industry, growing replacement base
students to devote their skill to analyze and the overall recovery in the
the problem to suggest alternative economy. The growth in the Indian
solution to evaluate them & to provide tyre industry is expected to increase in
feasible recommendation on the future due to significant demand from
provided data. the automobile industry.

3. Objectives
Here are some basic (main) objectives of this study:
 To know the influence of different brands of tyre on its sales.
 To know if there is any significant influence of different regions under
study on sales.
 To ascertain the current position/rank of different brands of Tyre
selected for our study.
 To sought out the various administrative areas which require
improvements of different key market players.
 To extract various factors play in mind of a customer before buying a
tyre.

4. Research Methodologies
Sources of data: Primary data have
been collected through
Convenience Sampling technique
for selecting consumers as well as
dealers of different areas with the
help of Personal Discussions,
Documentary Observations &
Field Observations.
Research design: To get clarity of
the problem statements,
exploratory study was carried out.
Tools and techniques used: For
analyzing data following
Data collection period: Three techniques has been used.
months (June, July, August)’12
data were collected to analyze the
 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
performance of the tyre companies.
 Thurstone Case V Scale
Sample Size: Based on 104
 Graphical Presentation
Customers &20 Dealers

5. ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
ANOVA
Source of SS df MS F P-value F crit *
variation
Brands 19.95918 6 3.326531 9.715232 2.3E-06 2.363751
Regions 6.816327 6 1.136054 3.317881 0.010538 2.363751
Error 12.32653 36 0.342404
Total 39.10204 48
*Sources: Primary data
* Means critical value of F obtained from table with α =0.05
Null Hypothesis 1: There is no significant influence of different brands of tyre on sales.
Null Hypothesis 2: There is no significant influence of different regions on sales.
As the critical value of F (6, 6) with α =0.05 is 2.363751 which is lesser than the calculated value
of F=9.715232, we reject the null hypothesis that implies significant influence of different
brands of tyre on the sales.
On the other hand, it is found from the above table that the critical value of F (36, 6) with = 0.05 is
2.363751 which is also lesser than the calculated value of F = 3.317881. So we have to reject the
null hypothesis that indicates there is significant influence of different regions on sales.

6. ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
Paired Comparison Matrix
Absolute Figure
Brand MRF CEAT JK Ralco Apollo Birla
MRF - 0.05 0.25 0 0.15 0.10
CEAT 0.95 - 0.85 0.20 0.80 0.70
JK 0.75 0.15 - 0.05 0.35 0.10
Ralco 1 0.80 0.95 - 0.85 1
Apollo 0.85 0.20 0.65 0.15 - 0.40
Birla 0.90 0.30 0.90 0 0.60 -
Relative Figure
Brand MRF CEAT JK Ralco Apollo Birla
MRF - 1 5 NA 3 2
CEAT 19 - 17 4 16 14
JK 15 3 - 1 7 2
Ralco 20 16 19 - 17 20
Apollo 17 4 13 3 - 8
Birla 18 6 18 NA 12 -
*Sources: Primary data

7. ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
Thurstone Case V Scale
Brand MRF CEAT JK Ralco Apollo Birla
MRF - -1.65 -0.67 -3.49 -1.04 -1.28
CEAT 1.65 - 1.04 -0.84 0.84 0.53
JK 0.67 -1.04 - -1.65 -0.39 -1.28
Ralco 3.49 0.84 1.65 - 1.04 3.49
Apollo 1.04 -0.84 0.39 -1.04 - -2.05
Birla 1.28 -0.53 1.28 -3.49 2.05 -
Total 8.13 -3.22 3.69 -10.51 2.50 -0.59
Average 1.355 -0.537 0.615 -1.751 0.417 -0.098
Adding the 3.106 1.214 2.366 0 2.168 1.653
MOD value
of the
highest
negative
Rank 1 5 2 6 3 4
*Sources: Primary data
The table reflects that MRF has been ranked first amongst six brands of tyre
manufacturing companies & Ralco stood 6th considered for this study.

8. ANALYSIS &
FINDINGS
Administrative areas require improvements
Birla
Apollo
Ralco Dealer supports
Billing & credits
Inventory tracking
JK
Shipping
Order processing
CEAT
MRF
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
*Sources: Primary data

9. ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
Factors play in mind before buying a tyre
Brand name
Price
Past experiences
After sales service
*Sources: Primary data
Here we can see that the most common factor upon which customers trust is Past
experience of the product. Next to it is none other than Price of that particular
product. Brand name & after sales service plays a little role in making decision to
buy a tyre.

10. Conclusion
Based on the objectives that we set, following are the conclusions:
There must have some significant influences of different brands of tyre
as well as different regions on its sales.
Birla, Apollo, JK & CEAT needs to focus on its Inventory Tracking
system where as Ralco suffers from Dealer Supports facility & MRF
has to speed up its Order Processing system.
Past Experiences & Price are the most important factors play in mind of
a customer before buying a tyre followed by Brand Name & After Sales
Service.
& overall, As we had expected before conducting the study, MRF is
the market leader at present followed by JK Tyres .

11. Limitations
1) Shortage of time span may become a constraint.
2) Lack of Dealer’s & Customer’s cooperation & support may be a major
constraint.
3) Study was conducted in a small part of Kolkata & its outskirts, so the
result of the study may not be applicable to other areas.
4) Sample of 104 Customers & 20 Dealers may not represent the whole
universe (population) & we cannot draw inference about the whole population
on the basis of small sample.

12. Thank you
all!