Brand Preferrence of Packaged Milk

BRAND PREFERENCE FOR PACKAGED MILK WIT H SPECIAL RE RE FE FERE NC NCE TO TO GANDHIPURAM AR AREA

A.SUKUMAR M.Com., M.Phil., PGDCA., Coimbator e, e, Ta Tamil Na Na d du u, In India

SYNOPSIS A study on brand preference for packaged milk with special reference to Gandh Gandhipu ipuram ram is a descr descript iptiv ivee study study aimi aiming ng at assum assuming ing the level level of consum consumer er satisfaction and factors that had influenced the brand preference for packaged milk.

The researchers selected a sample of 150 with stratified random sampling meth method od.. Th Thee resp respon onde dent ntss have have enou enough gh know knowle ledg dgee to resp respon ond d the the stru struct ctur ured ed undisguised questionnaire which had both open ended and close ended questions.

The primary data was collected and suitably edited and tabulated using the simple percentage percentage method. The statistical statistical tool like chi-square test was adopted to test the association between certain preference and the dominant factors that influence brand preference for packaged milk in Gandhipuram.

In conclusion, the researchers find the preferred brand of packaged milk and the factors which made to prefer the particular brand of milk.

1



INTRODUCTION AND DESIGN OF THE STUDY 2.1. INTRODUCTION: Milk is an essential commodity, which is inevitable in our day-to-day life. Hardly is any human being who does not taste milk through out his life. India being basically agricultural country milk and dairy products are by-products of several million million agricult agricultural uralists ists..

Gone are the days days when when milk milk can be purchase purchased d only

from milk vendors. In these days when almost all items are sold in readymade forms in packets and milk is no more exception. It can be purchased at any time from a grocery shop. It is also good from health point of view as it is purified and the cholesterol content is removed from it. Several brands are available in the form of packet milk. The term “Brand Preference” means the preference of the consumer for one brand of a product in relation to various other brands of the same product available available in the market. Customer Customer may be buyer or user. Buyer is the person who makes actual or uses the product or service. The choice of the consumers is revealed by brand preference. This brand preference is the comparatively investing and a new field of study. This study “BRAND “BRAND PREFEREN PREFERENCE CE FOR PACKAGED PACKAGED MILK WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO GANDHIPURAM AREA” gives a clear picture on

users of packaged milk.

2


2.2.


STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: Brand preference is an attempt to understand and predict human action in

buying decision. These actions can play a great role in future market potentials of packet packet milk milk..

Dairy Dairy indus industry try in in India India is fast fast growin growing g and expan expanding ding one. one.

Studies on brand preference for various brands of packet milk will definitely help in its future growth and development in the right direction. In this project entitled “Brand preference for packaged milk with special reference to Gandhipuram area”, an attempt is made to study the brand preference for milk in Gandhipuram area among consumers.

3


2.3.


OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY: The objective of the study is to find the brand preference for packet milk

among consumers in Gandhipuram. In the study the researcher aims at analyzing the following aspects: 1) To find out the brand brand prefe preferen rence ce for packe packett milk milk in Gandh Gandhipu ipuram ram area area among among packet milk consumers. 2) To study the relati relationsh onship ip between between the various various personal personal factors, factors, such as quality, quality, quantity, price, advertisement, health, consideration, taste, fat content, packaging with preference for packet milk. 3) To find out the different different factors for preferring preferring the the particular particular brand. brand. 4) To know the source sourcess of inform informati ation, on, which which provide provide about about packet packet milk milk to the consumers. 5) To know know the degree of of satisfaction satisfactionss derived derived by the consumers. consumers. 6) To find out the alternati alternative ve choice of of consumers consumers in case case of non-availabi non-availability lity of their preferred brand. 7) To find out the awareness awareness of the the consumers consumers about the packet packet milk. milk.

2.4.

LIMITATIONS OF STUDY: The present study is an opinion survey. The analysis has been carried out

based upon the information collected from the respondents. The result of the study applies more specially to the consumer’s in Gandhipuram are and care has to be exercised in extending the result to other area.

4


2.5.


METHODOLOGY: This study aims to identify the impact of brand preference on packet milk

among the consumers for its purpose data were collected by survey methods through questionnaire. This questionnaire contained the questions regarding the size of the packet and the reasons for preferring that brand of packet milk.

2.5.1. 2.5.1. SAMPLI SAMPLING: NG: Tota To tally lly 150 respo responde ndent ntss have have been been inte intervi rview ewed ed and and the the data data have have been been collected. The area of study has been restricted to Gandhipuram area totally 150 respondents were selected at random for the purpose of the study.

2.5.2. 2.5.2. FRAME FRAME WORK OF ANALYSI ANALYSIS: S: Thee study Th study of brand brand prefe preferen rence ce for packet packet milk milk has has been been made made throu through gh questionnaire method. 150 respondents are selected randomly and were asked to answer the question based upon their answer the classification of respondents are done and are analyzed and interpreted. Percentages and chi-square test is used while analyzing and interpreting the data. 2.5.3.

SOURCES OF DATA : Thee study Th study is based based on prima primary ry data data only. only. Th Thee requi require red d inform informat ation ion was

collect collected ed through through the question questionnair nairee from the consume consumers rs directly directly by intervi interviewin ewing g them.

5



2.5.4. 2.5.4. STATISTIC STATISTICAL AL TOOLS TOOLS USED: USED: A simple statistical tool such as percentage, two-way table and chi-square test is employed for the purpose of analysis of data.

6


2.6.


SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY : Milk is an essential essential commodity. commodity. It cannot be avoided in one’s day-to-day day-to-day life.

Now a day’s several brands are available in the market as packed milk. Hence it is interesting interesting to study which brand is widely used by the consumers consumers and the reasons for selecting a particular brand.

7



INDIAN DAIRY INDUSTRY 3.1. INTRODUCTION: India India with with 234 mill millio ion n cows cows and 225 milli million on buffa buffaloe loess has the large largest st population population of cattle in the world. Total cattle population population in the country as on October 2007 stood as 513 million. More than fifty percent of the buffaloes and twenty percent of the cattle in the world are found in India and most of these are milk cows and milk buffaloes. India’s milk production has increased by 5 percent. The milk production in India accounts for more than 15 percent of the total world output and 57 percent of the total Asia’s production. The top five milk producing nations in the world are India, USA, Russia, Germany and France. Milk production has grown at a fast pace during the last three decades, milk yield are: 1) Lack Lack of use of scien scientifi tificc practic practices es in milkin milking. g. 2) Inadequa Inadequate te availa availabili bility ty of fodder fodder in all all seasons. seasons. 3) Un-availability of vetenary health services.

3.2. FRESH MILK: Over 50 percent of milk produced in India is buffalo milk and 45 percent is cow milk. The buffalo milk contribution to total milk produce is expected to be 54 percent in 2005. Buffalo milk has 3.6 percent protein, 7.4 percent fat, 5.5 percent milk sugar, 0.8 percent cash and 82.7 percent water. While presently (for the year 2005) the price of buffalo milk is ruling at $ 261$313 per metric tone that of cow is ruling at $170-$267 per metric tone. Fresh p past asteur euriz ized ed milk milk is avail availabl ablee in packag packaged ed form form.. Howev However, er, a large large part part of milk milk consumed in India is not pasteurized, and is sold in loose form by vendors sterilized milk is scarcely available in India. Packaged milk can be divided according to fat content as follows: Whole (full cream) milk – 6 percent fat. Standardized (toned) milk – 4.5 percent fat. Doubled toned (low fat) milk – 3 percent fat.

8



Another category of milk, which has no small market, is favoured milk.

3.3. CONSUMER HABITS AND PRACTICES: Milk has been an integral integral part of Indian food for centuries. There are regional disparities disparities in production production and consumption consumption also. The per capita availability availability in north is 278 gm, south 148gm and in the east only 93 person per day. In India 46 percent of the total milk produced is consumed in liquid form and 47 percent is converted into traditional products like cottage butter, ghee, punier, khoya, curd, Malay, etc., only 7 percent of the milk goes into production of western products milk powders, processed butter and processed cheese. The remaining 54 percent is utilized for conversion to milk products. Still, several consumers in urban areas prefer to buy loose milk from vendors due to the strong perception that loose milk is fresh. Also the current level of processing and packaging capacity limits the availability packaged milk. Presently only only 12 perc percen entt of the the milk milk mark market et is repr repres esen ente ted d by pack packag aged ed and and bran brande ded d pasteurized pasteurized milk value at about Rs.8,000 Rs.8,000 crores. Quality of milk sold by unorganized unorganized sector however is inconsistent and so is the price across the season in local areas.

3.4. MARKET SIZE AND GROWTH: Market size for milk (sold in loose or packaged) is estimated to be 36 million MT valued at Rs.470bn. the milk surplus states in India Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. The manufacturing of milk products is concentrated in those milk surplus states. The top 6 states viz. Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Gujarat together account for 58 percent of national production.

9



MAJOR DAIRY PRODUCT MANUFACTURERS M ANUFACTURERS

Some of the major dairy products manufacturers in the country. Company

B r a nd s

Nestle India Limited

Milk food Limited Smithkli kline

Milk

Major products maid,

Cerelac, Sweete Sweetened ned condense condensed d milk, milk, matted matted

Lactogen, Milo, Eveready.

foods, milk and dairy water.

Milk food

Ghee, Ice-cream and other milk

Beec eecham Horlicks, Maltova, Viva.

Limited

products. Malted milk food, ghee, butter, powdered milk, milk fluid and other milk based baby foods.

Indian Industries Limited

Indiana

Condensed

milk,

skimmed

milk

powder, dairy milk whitener, chilled and processed milk. Guja Gujara ratt Milk

Co-O o-Opera perati tive ve Amul

Butter,

marketing

ch cheese

an and

ot other

mi milk

products.

federation limited H.j. Heinz limited Cadbury

Milk man

Flavoured

milk,

powder, ghee. Malted food.

Bournvita

10

cheese,

milk



3.5. PACKAGING TECHNOLOGY : Milk was initially sold door-to-door by the local milk man. When the dairy cooperatives initially stated marketing branded milk. It was sold in glass bottles sealed with foil. Over the years several developments in packaging media have taken place. In the early early 80’s 80’s plast plastic ic pou pouch ches, es, replac replaced ed the bottl bottles. es. Plast Plastic ic pou pouch ches es made made transportation and storage very convenient besides reducing costs. Milk packet in plastic pouches / bottles have a shelf life of just 1-2 days that too only if refrigerated. In 1996, Tetra packs were introduced in India. Tetra packs are aseptic lamination lamination packs made of aluminium, aluminium, paper, board and plastic. Milk stored in tetra packs and treated under ultra-High Temperature (UHT) technique can be stored for four months without refrigeration. Most of the dairy consumer – operatives in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Punjab and Rajasthan sell milk in tetra packs.

3.6. EXPORT POTENTIAL : India has the potential to become one of the leading players in milk and milk product exports.

3.7. LOCATIONAL ADVANTAGE : India is located a midst deficit countries in Asia and Africa. Major importers of milk and milk products are Bangladesh, china, Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Philippines, Japan, UAE, Oman and other gulf countries are located close to India.

11



3.8. INDIAN (TRADITIONAL) MILK PRODUCTS There are large variety of traditional Indian milk products such as Makkhan – unsalted butter Ghee – butter oil prepared by heat clarification, for longer shelf life Kheer – a sweet mix of boiled milk, sugar and rice. Basundi – Milk and Sugar boiled down till it thickness. Rabri – Sweetened cream. Dahi – a type of curd.

LOW COST OF PRODUCTION : Milk production is scale insensitive and labour intensive. Due to low labour cost, cost of production of concerned in export competitiveness are:

QUALITY: Signifi Significant cant investm investment ent has to be made made in milk milk procurem procurement ent equipme equipments, nts, chilling and refrigeration facilities. Also training has to be imported to improve the quality to bring in international standards.

12



ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONS Introduction: In this chapter, brand preference for packaged milk among packet milk users in Gandh Gandhip ipura uram m area area was was analy analyzed zed.. As the the first first phase phase of this this study study,, data data were were collected collected from 150 Respondents. In the next phase the information information collected from the Resp Respon onde dent ntss were were anal analy yzed zed rega regard rdin ing g the the vari variou ouss fact factor orss infl influe uenc ncin ing g bran brand d prefere preference nce like Age, Sex, Occupat Occupation, ion, Educat Educationa ionall Qualifi Qualificati cation, on, Marital Marital Status, Status, Monthly Income, Size of the Family, Number of Children in the Family and their preference.

13



Table 4.1 AGE WISE CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS S.No

1 2. 3. 4. 5. Total

Age Below 20 21 - 30 31 - 40 41 - 50 above50

No. of Respondents 20 36 40 19 35 150

Percentage

13 24 27 13 23 100

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, 20 persons belong to the age limit of 20. 36 persons belong to the age limit of 21 – 30. 40 persons belong to the age limit of 31 – 40, 19 persons belong to the age limit of 41-50, The remaining 35 persons belong to the age limit of Above 50.

14



CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS ON THE BASIS OF AGE

35

above 50

41 - 50

p u o r G e g A

19

31 - 40

40

21 - 30

36

Below 20

20

0

10

20

30

Number of respondents

15

40

50



Sex: Sex is one of the important important factor factor to determine determine the level of satisfaction satisfaction and brand preference. Most of the females had experienced with the packaged milk. So the sex wise classification is important to this research.

Table 4.2 SEX WISE CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS

S.No

Gender

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Male

37

25

2.

Female

113

75

150

100

Total

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, 113 persons are Female and the remaining 37 persons are male.

16


Gender wise classification of respondents

Male, 37

Female, Femal e, 113 11 3

17




TABLE – 4.3 COMPOS POSITION

OF

RESPONDENTS

ON

THE

BASIS

OF

MARITAL STATUS

S.No

Marital Status

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Married

101

67

2.

Unmarried

49

33

150

100

Total

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, 101 persons are belong to the married group, and 49 persons are belong to the unmarried group.

18



Marital status wise classification of respondents

4 9 , d e e a r r i m U n

0 1 1 , d e r r i e a M

19



Educational qualification: Educational Educational qualification qualification is influencing the purchase decision decision of each person. If they are educated they expect to know about the full details and usage of the product. It is not so if the consumers are uneducated. The table 4.4 shows the educational wise classification of the Respondents.

Table – 4.4 EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION WISE CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS

S.No

Educational

No. of

qualification

Respondents

Percentage

1

Upto HSC

37

25

2.

U.G

79

53

3.

P.G

29

19

4.

Others

5

3

150

100

Total

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, 29 persons are post graduates, 37 persons belong to “upto HSC” group, 79 persons belong to Graduates and 5 persons belong to other groups.

20



Educational qualification wise classification of Respondents

79 80 70 60 50 s t n e 40 d n o p 30 s e R f 20 o . o 10 N 0

37

29 5

Upto HSC

U.G

P.G

Educational qualification qualification

21

Others



Table 4.5 OCCUPATION WISE CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS S.No

Occupation

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Business

18

12

2.

Profession

19

13

3.

Employed

47

31

4.

House Wife

29

19

5.

Student

22

15

6.

Retired

7

5

7.

Agriculture

6

4

8.

Others

2

1

150

100

Total

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, 18 persons are doing Business, 19 persons are Professional peoples, 47 persons are Employed persons, 29 persons are House wife, 22 persons are students, 7 persons are retired, 6 persons are agriculturists and 2 persons were others.

22



Occupation wise classification of Respondents

2

Others

6

Agriculturist

7

Retired n o Employee i t a p u c c Students O

47 22 19

Profession

29

Houswife

18

Business

0

10

20

30

No. of respon re spondents dents

23

40

50



FAMILY INCOME: Incom Incomee is the deci decidin ding g facto factorr of

purcha purchase. se. The total total respon responden dents ts were were

classified on the basis of their family income level

Table – 4.6 COMPOSITION OF RESPONDENTS ON THE BASIS OF THEIR FAMILY INCOME (PER MONTH)

S.No

Family Income

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Less than Rs.5,000

40

27

2.

Rs.5,001 – Rs.10,000

45

30

3.

More than Rs.10,000

65

43

150

100

Total

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, respondents, 40 persons belong to the income limit of Rs.5000. 45 persons are belong to the income limit of Rs.5,001 to Rs.10,000. The remaining 65 persons are belong to More than Rs.10,000 limit.

24



Family income wise classification of Respondents

Less than Rs.5000, 40 More than Rs.10000, 65

Rs.5001 - Rs. 10000, 45

25



FAMILY SIZE: Family size is one of the main factor to decide the consumption level of the all consum consumabl ablee produc products. ts. In this this way way the the fami family ly size size wise wise class classifi ifica cati tion on is more more important.

Table – 4.7 COMPOS COMPOSITI ITION ON OF THE RESPONDE RESPONDENTS NTS ON THE BASIS BASIS OF FAMILY SIZE

Family S.No

No. of Respondents

Percentage

Size

1

2-3

63

42

2.

4–6

70

47

3.

More than 6

17

11

1 50

1 00

Total

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, 63 persons are belong to 2 – 3 family size group, 70 persons belong to 4 – 6 family family size group, group, the remaining remaining 17 persons belong to More More than 6 family group. .

26



Family size wise classification of Respondents

Morthan 6 members s r e b m e M y l i m a F f o . o N

17

4 - 6 members

70

2 - 3 members

63

0

20

40 No. of respondents

27

60

80



Table – 4.8 COMPOS COMPOSITI ITION ON OF THE RESPONDE RESPONDENTS NTS ON THE BASIS BASIS OF CHILDREN IN FAMILY

S.No

No. of Children in Family

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

One child

1 07

71

2.

2 children

30

20

3.

3 children

13

9

1 50

10 0

Total

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, 107 persons are belong to One child family group, 30 persons belong belong to 2 children children family group, group, the remaining remaining 13 persons belong belong to 3 children children family group.

28



Classification of Respondents on the basis of the number of children in family

13 107

30

1 children 2 children 3 children

29



Table – 4.9 COMPOS COMPOSITI ITION ON OF RESPO RESPONDE NDENTS NTS ON THE BASIS OF THE BRAND OF MILK PURCHASED BY THEM

S.No

Brand Name

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Aavin

68

45

2

Arokya

41

27

3

Aroma

4

3

4

Cowma

14

9

5

Sakthi

11

7

6

Others

12

8

15 0

10 0

Total

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, 68 persons had used Aavin, 41 persons had used Arokya, 4 persons had used Aroma, 14 persons had used Cowma, 11 persons had used Sakthi, and remaining 12 persons had used other milk.

30



Consumed Brand wise classification of Respondents

70 60 68 50 40 41

30 20

4

10

14

11

12

0 Aavin

Arokya

Aroma

Cowma

Brand Name

31

Sakthi

Others



Table No. 4.10

INFLUENCED FACTOR WISE CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS

S.No

Factor

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Price Quality Fat Control Taste Relatives Availability Advertisement Friends

9

Health Condition

10 11

Doctors Others

Total

No. of Respondents

Percentage

11 62 31 24 8 5 2 2

7 41 21 16 5 3 1 1

3

2

1 1 1 50

1 1 10 0

INFERENCE: Out of 150 respondents, 11 persons belong to Price, 62 persons belong to Quality, 31 persons belong to Fat control, 24 persons belong to Taste, 8 persons bel belon ong g to Rela Relati tive ves, s, 5 pers person onss belo belong ng to Avai Availa labi bili lity ty,, 2 pers person onss belo belong ng to Advertisement, 2 persons belong to Friends, 3 persons belong to Health condition, 1 person belong to Doctors, and the remaining 1 person belong to others as a factor which had influenced their purchase decision.

32



Factors influenced to Buy the particular Brand of Milk

Others

1

Docutors

1

Health condition

3

Friends

2

Advertisement

2

r o t c a F

Availability

5 8

Relatives

24

Taste Fact control

31

Quality

62 11

Price 0

10

20

30

33

40

50

60

70



Table - 4.11

CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS ON THE BASIS OF THE WAY HOW THEY CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE PARTICULAR BRAND

S.No

Know the Brand through

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Friends

28

19

2

Doctors

38

25

3

Advertisement

63

42

4

Relatives

11

7

5

Shop Keepers

7

5

6

Others

3

2

1 50

10 0

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 28 persons know through Friends, 38 persons know through Doctors, 63 persons know through Advertisement, 11 persons know through Relatives, 7 persons know through Shop Keepers, and 3 persons know through Others about the Brand.

34



Way to Know the Particular Brand

3

Others

7

Shop keepers

11

Relatives

63

Advertisement

38

Doctors 28

Friends 0

10

20

30

35

40

50

60

70



Table 4.12

CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS ON THE BASIS OF THE CHANCE TO CHANGE THE BRAND WHEN THEIR FAMILY INCOME INCREASES

S.No

Change the Brand No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Yes

27

18

2

No

123

82

15 0

1 00

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 27 persons are change their brand and 123 persons are not change their brand even their family income will increase.

36



Chance to Change the Preferred Brand Frequently

140

123

120 100 80 60 40

27

20 0 Yes

No

37



Table – 4.13

CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS ON THE BASIS OF SIZE OF THE PACKET THEY HAVE PURCHASED

S.No

Size of Package

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

250 ml

58

39

2

500 ml

86

57

3

1 litter

6

4

150

100

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 58 persons belong to 250ml group, 86 persons belong to 500ml group, and 6 persons belong to 1 litter group.

38



Packet Size Milk Packet

6 58

86

250 ml 500 ml 1 liter

39



Table –4.14

CLAS CLASSI SIFI FICA CATI TION ON OF RESP RESPON ONDE DENT NTS S ON TH THE E BASI BASIS S OF THEIR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE MANUFACUTURER NAME OF PARTICULAR BRAND

S.No

Know the manufacturer manufacturer name

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Yes

47

31

2

No

103

69

15 0

10 0

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 47 persons have knowledge about the manufacturer and 103 persons have no idea about the name of the manufacturer of their preferred brand.

40



Respondents Knowledge about the Manufacturer Details

103

No

47

Yes

0

20

40

60

41

80

100

120



Table –4.15

CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS ON THE BASIS OF THE SCARCITY OF THEIR PREFERRED MILK IN MARKET

S.No

Scarcity of milk

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Yes

43

29

2

No

107

71

1 50

10 0

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 43 persons belong to Yes group, and 107 persons belong to No group for the question about Scarcity of their preferred brand.

42



Scarcity of the Preferred Milk in Market

120 100 80 60 107 40

43

20 0 Ye s

No

43



Table – 4.16

THE TH E PREF PREFER ERRE RED D BRAN BRAND D OF MILK MILK HAS HAS ENHA ENHANC NCED ED TH THE E RICHNESS OF TEA/COFFEE

S.No

Enhances the richness of Tea/Coffee

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Yes

11 0

73

2

No

40

27

15 0

1 00

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 110 persons said their brand of milk had enhanced the richness of Tea/Coffee and 40 persons said that No.

44



The milk enhances the richness of Tea / Coffee

120

100 80 60

110

40 40

20 0 Yes

No

Table – 4.17

45



CHANGE THE PREFERRED BRAND OF MILK WHEN THEIR FAMILY INCOME INCREASES

S.No

Change the brand when family income increases

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Yes

66

44

2

No

84

56

1 50

10 0

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 66 persons belong to Yes group, and the remaining 84 persons belong to No group for the question any Future change of brand.

46



Change the brand when the family income level is Increases

90 84

80 66

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Yes

No

47



Table – 4.18

RESPONDENTS ARE CLASSIFIED ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SATISFACTION LEVEL TOWARDS PRICE

S.No

Degree of of Sa Satisfaction

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Highly Satisfied

56

37

2

Satisfied

74

49

3

Not-Satisfied

20

13

15 0

1 00

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 56 persons belong to Highly Satisfied group, 74 persons belong to Satisfied group, and 20 persons belong to Not-Satisfied group.

48



Satisfaction level towards Price

20

Highly Highly satisfactory satisfacto ry Satisfactory 56

74

49

Not Satisfactory



Table – 4.19

RESPONDENTS ARE CLASSIFIED ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SATISFACTION LEVEL TOWARDS QUALITY

S.No

Degree of Satisfaction

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Highly Satisfied

49

33

2

Satisfied

56

37

3

Not-Satisfied

45

30

1 50

10 0

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 49 persons belong to Highly Satisfied group, 56 persons belong to Satisfied group, and 45 persons belong to Not-Satisfied.

50



Satisfaction level towards Quality

45

49

Highly Highly satisfactory satisf actory Satisfactory Not Satisfactory

56

51



Table – 4.20

RESPONDENTS ARE CLASSIFIED ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SATISFACTION LEVEL TOWARDS THE TASTE

S.No


No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Highly Satisfied

54

36

2

Satisfied

46

31

3

Not-Satisfied

50

33

15 0

1 00

Total INFERENCE:


52



Satisfaction level towards Taste

54 52 54 50 48

50

46

46

44 42 Hig Highly sa satitisfa sfact ctory ory

Satis Satisfac factor toryy

Satisfaction level

53

Nott Satis No Satisfac factor toryy



Table – 4.21

RESPONDENTS ARE CLASSIFIED ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SATISFACTION LEVEL TOWARDS PACKAGING

S.No


No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Highly Satisfied

70

47

2

Satisfied

41

27

3

Not-Satisfied

39

26

1 50

10 0

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 70 persons belong to Highly Satisfied group, 41 persons belong to Satisfied group, and 39 persons belong to Not-Satisfied.

54



Satisfaction level towards Packaging

39

Not Satisfactory

41

Satisfactory

70

Highly Highly satisfactory satisfactor y

0

10

20

55

30

40

50

60

70



Table – 4.22

RESPONDENTS ARE CLASSIFIED ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SATISFACTION LEVEL TOWARDS ADVERTISEMENT

S.No


No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Highly Satisfied

48

32

2

Satisfied

56

37

3

Not-Satisfied

46

31

1 50

10 0

Total INFERENCE:


56



Satisfaction level towards Advertisement

60

50

40

30

20 48

56

46

10

0 High ghly ly satis tisfac factory tory

Satis tisfac factory tory

57

Not Satis tisfac factory tory



Table – 4.23

CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS ON THE BASIS OF THE REASO EASON N TO SE SEL LECT ECT OT OTHE HER R BRAND RAND IN SCA SCARCIT RCITY Y OF THEIR PREFERRED BRAND OF MILK

S.No

Reason to select other brand

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Same Price

48

32

2

Same taste

15

10

3

Same quality

18

12

4

Same Packaging

27

18

5

No other alternative

42

28

1 50

10 0

Total INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, 48 persons belong to Same price group, 15 persons belong to Same taste, 18 persons belong to Same Quality, Quality, 27 persons belong to same packaging, 42 persons belong to No other alternative was the reason to select any other brand.

58



Reason to select the other Brand milk at a time of Scacity of Milk

No other alternatives

42

27

Same quality 18

Same taste 15

Same packaging

48

Same price 0

10

20

59

30

40

50



Table – 4.24

RESPON RESPONDEN DENTS TS ARE CLASSIF CLASSIFIED IED ON THE BASIS OF THE BRAND SUGGESTED TO THEIR FRIENDS OR RELATIVES

S.No

Suggested the Brand to friend

No. of Respondents

Percentage

1

Yes

11 3

75

2

No

37

25

15 0

1 00

Total

INFERENCE:

Out of 150 respondents, respondents, 113 persons had suggested suggested their brand to their friends and 37 persons had not suggested their brand to their friends.

60



Suggested the brand to their friends and relatives

37

No

113 11 3 Yes

0

20

40

60

61

80

100

120



CHI-SQUARE TEST: Chi-square test is applied to test the goodness of fit, to verify the distribution of observed data with assumed theoretical distribution. Therefore it is a measure to study the divergence of actual and expected frequencies; Karl Pearson’s has developed a method to test the difference between the theoretical (hypothesis) & the observed value.

Chi – square test (

2

) = (O – E)2 / E

Degrees Of Freedom Freedom = V = (R – 1) (C -1)

Were, ‘O’ = Observed Frequency ‘E’ = Expected Frequency ‘R ’ = Number of Rows ‘C’ = Number of Columns

For all the chi-square test the table value has taken @ 5% level of significance.

62



CHI – SQ SQUA UARE RE TES EST T IS CONDU ONDUCT CTED ED TO EXTE XTENT THE RELATIONSH SHIIP BETWE WEE EN THE AGE AND LEVEL OF SATISFACTION Cross Table:

Satisfaction Level Age Below 20 21 - 30 31 - 40 41 - 50 abov50 Total

Highly Satisfactory 2 3 4 0 1 10

Satisfactory 14 26 25 12 27 104

Not Satisfactory 4 7 11 7 7 36

Total 20 36 40 19 35 150

Hypothesis: HO: There is no significant relationship between age and level of satisfaction. O 2 3 4 0 14 26 25 12 4 7 11 7

E 10.00 2.40 2.67 1.27 104.00 24.96 27.73 13.17 36.00 8.64 9.60 4.56

O-E -8.00 0.60 1.33 -1.27 -90.00 1.04 -2.73 -1.17 -32.00 -1.64 1.40 2.44

(O-E)2 64.00 0.36 1.78 1.60 8100.00 1.08 7.47 1.38 1024.00 2.69 1.96 5.95

Total

Degree of freedom Calculated value Table value

-

(O-E)2/E 6.40 0.15 0.67 1.27 77.88 0.04 0.27 0.10 28.44 0.31 0.20 1.31 1 1 7. 0 5

8 117.05 12.59

INFERENCE: Thee calc Th calcul ulat ated ed valu valuee is more more than than the the tabl tablee valu value. e. So, So, the the Null Null hypothesis is rejected. Hence, there is a significant relationship between Age and level of satisfaction.

63



CHI – SQ SQUA UARE RE TES EST T IS CONDU ONDUCT CTED ED TO EXTE XTENT THE RELATION RELATIONSHIP SHIP BETWEEN BETWEEN THE OCCUPATIO OCCUPATION N AND LEVEL OF SATISFACTION Cross Table:

Satisfaction Level Occupation

Total

Highly Satisfactory

Satisfactory

Not Satisfactory

Business

1

15

2

18

House wife

3

19

7

29

Profession

2

13

4

19

Students

2

14

6

22

Employee

2

31

14

47

Retired

0

5

2

7

Agriculturist

0

5

1

6

Others

0

2

0

2

Total

10

104

36

150

Hypothesis: HO: Th Ther eree is no sign signif ific ican antt rela relati tion onsh ship ip betw betwee een n occu occupa pati tion on and and the the leve levell of satisfaction. O 1 3 2 2 2 0 0 0 15 19 13

E 1.20 1.93 1.27 1.47 3.13 0.47 0.40 0.13 12.48 20.11 13.17

O-E -0.20 1.07 0.73 0.53 -1.13 -0.47 -0.40 -0.13 2.52 -1.11 -0.17

64

(O-E)2 0.04 1.14 0.54 0.28 1.28 0.22 0.16 0.02 6.35 1.22 0.03

(O-E)2/E 0.03 0.59 0.42 0.19 0.41 0.47 0.40 0.13 0.51 0.06 0.00


14 31 5 5 2 2 7 4 6 14 2 1 0 Total

15.25 32.59 4.85 4.16 1.39 4.32 6.96 4.56 5.28 11.28 1.68 1.44 0.48

-1.25 -1.59 0.15 0.84 0.61 -2.32 0.04 -0.56 0.72 2.72 0.32 -0.44 -0.48

Degree of freedom Calculated value Table value


1.57 2.52 0.02 0.71 0.38 5.38 0.00 0.31 0.52 7.40 0.10 0.19 0.23

-

0.10 0.08 0.00 0.17 0.27 1.25 0.00 0.07 0.10 0.66 0.06 0.13 0.48 6 .59

14 6.59 23.68

INFERENCE: Thee calc Th calcul ulat ated ed valu valuee is less less than than the the tabl tablee valu value. e. So, So, the the Null Null hypot hypothes hesis is is accep accepted ted.. Hence Hence,, there there is no signi signific ficant ant relat relatio ionsh nship ip betw between een the the occupation and level of satisfaction.

65



FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 5.1. FINDINGS: 

27% of the respondents are in the age group of 31-40 years.



75% of the respondents are female.



67% of the respondents are married.



33% of the respondents are Undergraduates.



31% of the respondents are Employed.



43% of the respondent’s family income is More than Rs.10,000.



47% of the respondents are 4-6 members in family.



70% of respondents have 1 child.



45% of the respondents have used Aavin milk.



41% of the respondents have agreed that the quality is the major influenced factor to buy the particular brand of milk.



82% of the respondents are not ready to change the brand of milk even their family income increase.



57% of respondents are buying the 500ml size of packet.



69% of respondents have no knowledge about the name of the manufacturer.



71% of respondents are agrees that there is no scarcity of the preferred brand of milk.



73% of respondents are agrees that their preferred brand enhances the richness of tea / coffee.



56% of respondents were not ready to change their brand while the family income increases.

66





49% of respondents were satisfied with their brand price.



37% of respondents were satisfied with their brand quality.



36% of respondents were highly satisfied with their brand taste.



47% of respondents were highly satisfied with their brand packaging.



37% of respondents were satisfied were satisfied with their brand advertisement.



32% of respondents select the other brand due to the same price.



75% of respondents recommend their brand to their friends and relatives.



Thee analy Th analysis sis of the survey survey revea revealed led that that ther theree is a signi signific fican antt relat relatio ionsh nship ip between Age and level of satisfaction.



The analysis analysis of the survey revealed revealed that there is no signifi significant cant relationshi relationship p between occupation and level of satisfaction.

67



5.2. SUGGESTIONS: Based upon the study conducted, the following are the suggestions made to improve the packet milk : 1. Price Price should should be minimi minimized. zed. The price price is the importa important nt criteria criteria while while selecting selecting the particular brand. 2. Tast Tastee play playss an impo import rtan antt role role for for usin using g the the pref prefer erre red d bran brand. d. So all all the the companies should concentrate on the Taste and quality of the milk. 3. Most ost of the respon sponde den nts come ome to know now about bout the the pro product duct throu hrough gh adver adverti tisem semen ent. t. So the compa companie niess may may give give maxim maximum um impor importan tantt to the the advertisement, it may increase the knowledge of the product. 4. Major Majority ity of the respo responde ndent ntss says says that that the quali quality ty of the produc productt will will makes makes them to purchase the product consistently. So the companies should consider the quality of the product.

68



5.3. CONCLUSION Milk is a very essential essential daily using commodity. Milk is useful to all the group of members. In Gandhipuram the packaged milk is widely used and liked by the respondents. From this study the researcher conclude that the packaged milk is more pref prefera erabl blee than than the the vendo vendorr milk milk in Gandh Gandhip ipura uram. m. Aavin Aavin milk milk was was prefe preferre rred d by majority of the respondents.

*****

69



BIBLIOGRAPHY

PHILIP KOTLER

:

“ MARKETING MANAGEMENT” PRENTICE HALL OF INDIA (P) LTD, NEW DELHI.

S.A.SHERLAEKAR

:

“ MARKETING MANAGEMENT” HIMALAYA PUBLISHING HOUSE, MUMBAI.

S.C.GUPTA V.K.KAPOOR

:

“ FUNDAMENTALS OF APPLIED STATISTICS” SULTAN CHAND & SONS, NEW DELHI.

INTERNET SOURCE

:

www.indiandairyindustry.com www.google.com

70



A STUDY ON BRAND PREFERENCE FOR PACKAGED MILK WITH SPECIALLY REFERENCE TO GANDHIPURAM TOWN

I. Personal profile: 1.1 Age

:

1.2 Gender

:

Male

Female

1.3 Marital Status 1.4 Educational Qualification

: :

Married Upto HSC

Unmarried P.G. U.G.

Others (Specify) 1.5 Occupation

:

Business

Student

House Wife Profession Employee

Retired Agriculturist Others (Specify) 1.6 Fa Family in income (p (per mo month) : Less th than Rs Rs.5,000 Rs.5,001 - Rs.10,000 More than Rs.10,000 1.7 Family Members : 2–3 4–6 More than 6 1.8 Children in family

:

II. Brand Preference: 2.1 Which Brand is usually consumed in your family? Aavin Arokya Aroma Cowma Sakthi Others 2.2 If you use more than one brand of milk during a period mention the brands and reasons. Brand Reason a) b) c) d)

71



2.3 Which of the following factor(s) influence(s) you to choose this brand? Price Quality Fat control Taste Relatives Availability Advertisement Friends Health condition Packaging Doctors Others (Specify) 2.4 How did you know this brand? Friends Advertisement Relatives

Doctors Shop keepers

Others

(Specify) 2.5 a) Have your ever changed your brand? b) If yes, mention the reason: Price raise Lack of availability Poor taste Poor quality

Yes

No

Improper packaging More fat control Others (specify)

2.6 Which size of of packer do you prefers? prefers? 250 ml 500 ml

1 liter

2.7 a) Do you know the name of the manufacture of your preferred brand? Yes No 2.8 Have you ever had the scarcity of milk in the market? Yes No 2.9 a) In case of non-availability of your preferred brand, what will be your next best alternative choice? 2.10 Do you feel that your your preferred brand of of the milk enhances the richness of Tea / Coffee? Yes

No 72



2.11 Will you change the brand brand if your family income income level is increases? Yes

No

2.12 State the degree of of satisfaction in in the following: following: S.No.

Characteristi stics

1.

Price

2.

Quality

3.

Taste

4.

Packaging

5.

Advertisement

Highly Satisfactory

Satisfactory

Not Satisfactory

2.13 Mention the reasons for selecting the next brand: Same price Same packaging Same taste No other Alternative Same Quality 2.14 Have you ever suggested your preferred brand of milk to your friends or relatives? Yes

No

73

Brand Preferrence of Packaged Milk

Recommend Documents