THE STUDY OF CONSUMERS’ ATTITUDE AND
BEHAVIOR TOWARD RESTAURANTS UTILIZING
DAILY DEAL PROMOTION IN THAILAND
BY
MR. TANAPHUM SRINAWAKOON
AN INDEPENDENT STUDY SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE PROGRAM IN MARKETING
(INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM)
FACULTY OF COMMERCE AND ACCOUNTANCY
THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC YEAR 2014
COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
THE STUDY OF CONSUMERS’ ATTITUDE AND
BEHAVIOR TOWARD RESTAURANT UTILIZING
DAILY DEAL PROMOTION IN THAILAND
BY
MR. TANAPHUM SRINAWAKOON
AN INDEPENDENT STUDY SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE
OF MASTER OF SCIENCE PROGRAM IN MARKETING
(INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM)
FACULTY OF COMMERCE AND ACCOUNTANCY
THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC YEAR 2014
COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
(2)
Independent Study Title THE STUDY OF CONSUMERS’ ATTITUDE
AND BEHAVIOR TOWARD RESTAURANT
UTILIZING DAILY DEAL PROMOTION IN
THAILAND
Author MR. TANAPHUM SRINAWAKOON
Degree Master of Science Program in Marketing
(International Program)
Major Field/Faculty/University Faculty of Commerce and Accountancy
Thammasat University
Independent Study Advisor
Professor Kenneth E. Miller, Ph.D.
Academic Years 2014
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to analyze the consumers’ perception and
behavior towards restaurants utilizing online daily deal (ODD) as part of their
marketing activity. The study has been chosen to be an independent study topic which
focuses on contemporary topic in applied marketing. The result of this study will
provide restaurant businesses with valuable consumer insight that can essentially
assist them in deciding whether ODD is the right marketing program to pursue.
The survey techniques applied to this research are both qualitative and
quantitative approaches. The qualitative research has been conducted an in-depth
interview with 5 ODD consumers to gain preliminary understanding of the customer
insight and gather background information for designing the questionnaire.
Consequently, the quantitative research using the survey questionnaire has been
distributed to the target respondents in order to validate the key findings from
preceding stage. The sample selection used the convenience sampling concept.
Appropriate statistical analysis has been used to analyze the research findings.
From the result of the study, it can be concluded that consumers hold negative
perception towards the restaurants utilizing daily deals in term of quality of products
and services being offered through the program. Furthermore, consumers hardly pay
(3)
beyond face value of the deal and hardly return to the restaurants for a full price
purchase.
Keywords: Online daily deal, Perception, Behavior, Restaurant
(4)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to thank my advisor, Professor Kenneth E. Miller, for
his guidance and encouragement throughout this whole project. His valuable
feedbacks and advices greatly helped developing and improving many aspects of this
report. In addition, I would like to extend my appreciation to all my friends and
family who have strongly support me in completing the project. Finally, I cannot
express enough thanks to MIM program and MIM director, Asst. Prof. Pannapachr
Itthiopassagul, for providing me with countless invaluable opportunities to learn
during these past two years.
Mr. Tanaphum Srinawakoon
(5)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT (2)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (4)
LIST OF FIGURES (6)
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Online Daily Deal (ODD) 2
1.3 Research Objectives 2
CHAPTHER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 3
2.1 Effect of Discount Pricing 3
2.2 ODD Situation in the US 3
2.3 ODD in Thailand 4
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 5
3.1 Exploratory Research 5
3.2 Descriptive Research 5
3.3 Sample Selection and Sampling Method 6
3.4 Data Collection 6
3.5 Activity Timeline 7
CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS 8
4.1 Key Findings from Exploratory Research 8
4.2 Key Findings and Analysis from Descriptive Research 8
4.3 Limitations of Study 21
CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 22
5.1 Summary of Findings 22
5.2 Recommendations 23
REFERENCES 24
APPENDICES 25
Appendix A: Questionnaire Survey 26
(6)
LIST OF FIGURES Figures Page 4.1: Gender of Respondents 8
4.2: Age of Respondents 8
4.3: Occupation of Respondents 9
4.4: Income of Respondents 9
4.5: Segment of Respondents 9
4.6: Gender of each segment 10
4.7: Age of each segment 10
4.8: Marital Status of each segment 11
4.9: Occupation of each segment 11
4.10: Monthly income of each segment 12
4.11: Frequency of dining at restaurants of each segment 13
4.12: Frequency in searching for online restaurant deal of each segment 13
4.13: Type of restaurant deals purchased of each segment 14
4.14: Preference for Specific Type of Restaurant 14
4.15: Lifestyle of each segment 15
4.16: Respondents’ overall perception towards restaurant 16
4.17: Segments’ perception towards restaurant 17
4.18: Respondents’ overall decision making criteria 18
4.19: Segments’ decision making criteria 19
4.20: Respondents’ overall behavior towards restaurant 19
4.21: Segments’ behavior towards restaurant 20
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The rise of social commerce in Thailand has equipped business with new tool to
market their product and service over the past few years. Launched in 2009, Ensogo.com,
the first social commerce site which offers a pre-purchase discounting coupon or so-called
“deal” in Thailand, is currently number one in its category controlling nearly 90% share
with over 2 million subscribers.
Since the introduction of Ensogo.com, online daily deal has popularly become one
of marketing platform for many businesses in Thailand. Restaurant industry, especially,
finds this new platform to be efficient in raising awareness and bringing in new customers
in a cost effective manner. This is particularly true for those small-medium restaurants
hiding in the corner that cannot afford to go on mass media where cost and effectiveness
cannot truly be justified. Additionally, with an opportunity of up-sell or cross-sell, some
established restaurants see this as another way of creating regular customer traffic and
thereby generating constant stream of revenue for their businesses. Despite all these
attractive features, online deal controversially brings about negative impacts towards the
restaurant in a long run. This is due to the fact that online deal essentially involves a deep
cut in price of product or service which could potentially harm brand equity and customer
loyalty. Since price is strongly connected to quality in the consumers’ mind, a temporary
price reduction intended to increase awareness or bring in short term sales tend to create a
fixed image of inferior product quality and consequently make consumers begin to
perceive everyday price as being too high. This does not only increase price sensitivity
level of new consumers but also alienate current consumers who are willing to pay full
price for the product or service.
Although the negative effects of discount pricing on brand’s equity and customer
loyalty have been revealed and supported by many past researches, none has specifically
reported under the context of online daily deal in restaurant businesses. Therefore, this
research aims to study consumers’ attitude and behavior towards restaurants participating
in daily deal program in Thailand.
1
1 1.2 Online Daily Deal (ODD)
Online daily deal provides businesses with a new platform to market their products
or services to the consumers. Daily deal sites offer heavy bargain pricing on products and
services for limited time, usually 3-5 days. The deals will be made available through
primary channel, the daily deal website, as well as other channels such as social media,
email and mobile application. Customers purchasing the deal are then received electronic
coupon to use with the business providing the product or service under specified term and
condition. From a business owner’s perspective, participating in a deal comes at no upfront
cost. The deal company takes a percentage or commission of each sale (up to 50%) and all
the business needs to do is to come up with a package to sell. This unlocks new
opportunity for many businesses with relatively small marketing budget to promote their
products and services to broader range of consumers. Although, online daily deal is
primarily designed as marketing tool for businesses, some businesses are reported to
constantly utilize it as a direct means in generating profit.
1.3 Research Objectives
• To comprehend overall consumers’ decision making criteria in purchasing online
discounted deal in food and beverage category
• To thoroughly understand attitude and behavior of consumers towards restaurants
utilizing online discounted deal in Thailand
• To provide recommendation based on research findings to restaurants which
currently or will potentially participate in online daily deal program
2
1
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Effect of Discount Pricing
Discount pricing has been known to be one of the most effective pricing strategies
in achieving short-term goal such as attracting new customers and driving sale. However,
using excessively, discount pricing evidently leads to adverse impact on consumers’
perception and behavior towards the brand in the long run. As price is strongly connected
with quality, distortion between the two will immensely affect the perceived value of
product or service. A deep or frequent price cut, especially, signals that the regular price of
product or service is highly inflated. Consumers then become conditioned to sale
promotions and stop purchasing full-price.
2.2 ODD situation in the US
Booming of daily deal market in the US during the past few years has led to many
studies contributing to the subject. Despite positive growth figures, some studies suggest
there is structural weakness of daily deal industry resulting in many shortcomings for
participated businesses. According to the research conducted by Rice University, many
customers who purchase daily deals are "price-sensitive deal-seekers" who are unlikely to
return to the business in the future without similar discounts. This can technically be
translated into loss of promotional dollars. The survey indicated that only 36% of
customers paid beyond the deal’s face value and 30% of customers actually returned for a
full-price purchase. Furthermore, less than half of businesses showed interest in running
another daily deal promotion in the future. Restaurants, in particular, indicated highest
dropout rate since only 20% of participated restaurants found daily deal promotion to be
sustainable marketing program.
3
1 2.3 ODD in Thailand – Ensogo.com
Launching in 2009, Ensogo.com, has quickly become and remained the number
one daily deal site in Thailand with 90% market share, 10 million unique visitors a month
and 2.5 million subscribers. Taking aside group buying mechanism, Ensogo is essentially a
clone of Groupon in the US. Today, Ensogo offers over 300 active daily deals with general
discount rate between 50-90%. The deals are divided into 6 different categories namely
food & beverage, event, health & beauty, services, products, and travel. The most popular
category is Food & Beverage category which makes up to 40% of the total number of deals
offered followed by travel (35%), health & beauty (10%), products (10%), services (3%)
and event (2%). Furthermore, Ensogo boasts of having desirable members’ profile for
many types of businesses. 77% of their members are at the age of 25 and above. Of the
total, 59% are female (53% of which are single with expendable income and 47% married
with high household incomes)
As oppose to international researches reporting shortcoming of online daily deal,
Ensogo claims to contribute to a positive outcome for businesses in Thailand. Survey
conducted by AC Nielson indicated that 75% of customers who previously purchased and
redeemed the deal actually revisited for a full-price purchase. In addition to a high repeat
purchase rate, 65% of customers reported to pay extra when using the deal meaning
businesses can also be profitable through this promotional activity.
4
1
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research was divided into two phases: exploratory research and descriptive research.
3.1 Exploratory Research
3.1.1 Secondary Research
Researchers used several online websites, academic journals and research results as
tools to acquire general knowledge of daily deal industry and consumers’ attitude
and behavior toward participated businesses.
3.1.2 Qualitative Research
For qualitative data purpose, 5 in-depth interviews were conducted as to gain
insightful information of consumers’ attitude and behaviors towards restaurant
exercising online discounted deal. The obtained information was then used to
develop quantitative survey questions. The main target interviewees were frequent
daily deal buyers.
3.2 Descriptive Research
The target respondents of questionnaire were people who have made purchase on
daily deal website particularly in food and beverage category within the past three months.
Set of questionnaires were strictly developed according to the objectives and assumptions
that the researcher has formed based on the information retrieved during qualitative
research phase. The main purpose of conducting descriptive research was to validate key
findings from previous stage. Various types of questionnaires such as multiple choices (i.e.
ranking and rating) and open-ended questions were constructed. In order to gain the most
reliable data possible, researcher pre-launched questionnaires to obtain feedback of the
flow and detected any repetitive, unclear or loaded questions. In addition, short screening
questions were presented to eliminate any respondents who did not fit with the set criteria.
The questions mainly focused on attitude and behavior of consumers’ towards restaurants
offering online discounted deal. Demographic and psychographic of respondents were also
explored in order to establish potential link between variables.
5
1 3.3 Sample Selection and Sampling Method
Target respondents for both exploratory and descriptive researches were people
who have purchased discounted coupon from daily deal website in food and beverage
category within the past three months. In this survey, non-probability sampling method
was employed in the sample selecting stage. The convenience sampling method was
applied to recruit 150 qualified respondents who reside in Bangkok and its vicinity.
3.4 Data Collection
In exploratory research, qualified participants for 5 in-depth interviews were
conveniently recruited using researcher’s personal contact. However, in order to
preliminarily gain insight from various types of consumers, participants for in-depth
interviews were chosen from people of diverse profiles. Recruited participants include 5
consumers who currently purchase discounted deal on restaurants. The interviews were
done on a face-to-face basis and via telephone. The in-depth interview took approximately
one hour and responses were recorded using audio recorder. Data collection from
exploratory research was then developed into a questionnaire survey and distributed in the
online channel.
6
1
12
34
12
34
12
34
12
34
12
34
Data C
ollection
Exploratory Research
Conduct secondary research
Conduct in-dept interview
Descriptive R
esearch
Construct questionnaire
Launch questionnaire survey
Data A
nalysis
Analyse data w
ith SPSS
Final Report
Draft final report
Revise final report
Submit final report
AC
TIVITY
Decem
berJanuary
FebuaryM
archA
pril
3.5 Activity Timeline
7
1
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Key Findings from Exploratory Research: in-depth interview
Generally, with heavy discount offered, respondents perceive that they are able to
obtain something of extra values from purchasing daily deal. However, at the same time,
they feel that the regular price set by restaurants of being too high. Additionally, they
doubt the quality of food and service being offered to daily deal users to be somewhat
different from those of full-price purchase. They perceive that most new restaurants
participating in ODD as a means to primarily promote their restaurants and attract new
customers. On the other hand, established restaurants running ODD are sometimes
perceived to take advantage of ODD in directly generating profit and therefore signal
dishonest. Factors related to the discounted deal such as value of the deal, number of deals,
and term and condition dictate the perception of the users towards the restaurants and
contribute to the purchase decision of the users.
From their experience in redeeming discounted deal, they usually pay attention to
the amount spent and keep it within the deal value. They hardly return for a full-price
purchase, especially to those new restaurants.
4.2 Key Findings and Analysis from Descriptive Research: questionnaire survey
4.2.1 Respondent Profile
Figure 4.2: Age of Respondents Figure 4.1: Gender of Respondents
8
1
Respondents were daily deal users living in Bangkok and its vicinity that had
purchased discounted restaurants deal within the past 3 months. The genders of
respondents were 62% female and 38% male with 15% aged less than 23 years old, 60%
aged 23-30 years old and 23% aged 31-46 years old.
Respondents were categorized into 6 occupation groups with majority being
corporate employee (48%), student (18%) and business owner (11%). Personal income of
all respondents ranged from less than 15,000 THB to 65,000 THB.
Respondents were then divided into heavy users, medium users and light users on the basis
of number of deals purchased each month.
• Heavy User (35 out of 150): make purchase of more than 4 different discounted
restaurant deals per month
• Medium User (68 out of 150): make purchase of 2-4 different discounted restaurant
deals per month
• Light User (47 out of 150): make purchase of less than 2 different discounted deals
per month
Figure 4.5: Segment of Respondents
Figure 4.4: Income of Respondents Figure 4.3: Occupation of Respondents
9
1 4.2.2 Respondent’s Segment Profile
• Demographic of each segment
There was no significant difference in the proportion of gender in each of the
segments. Male presented as a minority in all segments with a ratio of approximately 3:2
(female : male). This followed the same proportion of overall respondent’s profile.
Surprisingly, there was a clear different in age for each of the segment. Almost half
of the light user (44%) has age of over 31. In contrast, approximately 85% of both medium
user and heavy user are those with age of less than 30.
Figure 4.6: Gender of each segment
LIGHT USER MEDIUM USER HEAVY USER
Figure 4.7: Age of each segment
LIGHT USER MEDIUM USER HEAVY USER
10
1
Generally, marital status followed the same pattern as that of the whole respondent
group by having single completely dominated that of married. However, heavy user
showed slight deviation from other segments presenting only 14% of married respondents
versus 26% and 22% in light and medium user respectively.
Corporate employee represented the largest group in all segments. However, there
presented difference in the occupation structure in each of the segment. The secondary
group of light user was business owners (17%) while medium and heavy users were
students (19% and 26% respectively). Another major difference was the proportion of
house-spouse in heavy user which was significantly higher than the other two segments
(17% compared to 6% in medium and 2% in light user).
Figure 4.8: Marital Status of each segment
LIGHT USER MEDIUM USER HEAVY USER
Figure 4.9: Occupation of each segment
LIGHT USER MEDIUM USER HEAVY USER
11
1
The different structure of monthly income in each of the segment above suggested
that there existed a significant difference in income level across all segments. According to
the chart above, light user was shown to have, on average, higher income than the other
two segments. It can be noticed 35% of light user had monthly income of over 35,000 baht
comparing to 25% in medium and 15% in heavy user. Interestingly, majority of heavy
users (70%) has monthly income of 25,000 baht and lower. This indicated that heavy user
has the lowest average income followed by medium user and light user.
In summary, there was a clear difference in demographical data for each of the
segments. This included age, occupation and monthly income which were all highly
correlated with one another.
Figure 4.10: Monthly income of each segment
LIGHT USER MEDIUM USER HEAVY USER
12
1
• Characteristic of each segment
Above chart indicates the frequency of each segments dining at the restaurants. It
can be observed that there was a significant difference in the proportion of restaurant
dining frequency across the three segments. Apparently, higher proportion of heavy user
dined at the restaurant more frequently than that of other segments (26% reported to dine at
restaurant 5-7 times per week). This followed by medium and light users respectively.
Correlating with the frequency of ODD purchase, high user obviously spent more
times in searching for ODD compared to the other two segments. Almost 90% of light
users searched less than or equivalent to 2 times per week for ODD while 70% of high
users looked for ODD 3-7 times per week.
Figure 4.11: Frequency of dining at restaurants of each segment
LIGHT USER MEDIUM USER HEAVY USER
Figure 4.12: Frequency in searching for online restaurant deal of each segment
LIGHT USER MEDIUM USER HEAVY USER
13
1
All type of users tended to purchased dollar promotion rather than item promotion.
However, strong disproportion in purchasing dollar and item promotions presented in
medium and heavy user segments where majority of these users were shown to purchase
dollar promotion (65% of medium users and 77% of high user).
There was no significant difference across segments in term of preference for
specific type of restaurants that they look to purchase. Generally, half of the people did
seek for specific type of restaurant to purchase ODD with and half did not.
Figure 4.13: Type of restaurant deals purchased of each segment
LIGHT USER MEDIUM USER HEAVY USER
Figure 4.14: Preference for Specific Type of Restaurant (i.e. Japanese, Chinese, Thai, Buffet,
LIGHT USER MEDIUM USER HEAVY USER
14
1
From the comparison chart, it can be seen that each of the segment valued
different things and led relatively different lifestyles. For instance, heavy user clearly stood
out in many aspects such as often dining out at restaurants, choosing food by oneself and
like meeting new people. Light user, on the other hand, showed the opposite of those high
users. Additionally, light user tended to pay special attention to quality of food and service
more than the other two segments. Unlike heavy user, they relatively did not like to go out
and try new things.
Figure 4.15: Lifestyle of each segment
15
1 4.2.2 Data Analysis
The statistical tools used to analyze quantitative data from questionnaire survey
include the measure of frequency and central tendency, cross-tabulation, independent t-
test, and Anova. With a complete quantitative data at hand, the data was first divided into
three distinct groups: heavy user, medium user and light user. Analysis was then run
separately on these three groups in accordance to their respective data.
To see the overall picture of consumer’s perception and behaviors towards
restaurants utilizing ODD, statistical data was first analyzed and presented by taking the
whole 150 samples. The data would then be divided according to the segment of high-,
medium- and light users to further study similarities and differences across segments.
Consumers’ Overall Perception
Bar chart above illustrates overall perception of 150 respondents towards
restaurants offering ODD. It can be observed that ODD consumers perceived restaurants
utilizing ODD as part of their marketing activity to promote the names of restaurant. This
perfectly aligns with the objective of both the ODD provider and most of restaurant
owners. Nevertheless, consumers also strongly perceived that restaurants incorporate ODD
in their daily operation to manage demand and generate constant revenue for their
Figure 4.16: Respondents’ overall perception towards restaurant
16
1 businesses. This type of perception can potentially link to other negative views towards the
restaurants.
As seen from the chart, consumers also believed that by using ODD, they are not
getting the same quality of food and the same level of service to that of full-price purchase
from the restaurant. Furthermore, consumer perceived that restaurants utilizing ODD
overprice their food.
It is also worth noting that in consumers’ perception, the number of deals sold and limited
deals reflect the quality of that particular restaurant.
Consumers’ Perception: Comparison between heavy user, medium user and light
user
Figure 4.17: Segments’ perception towards restaurant
17
1
Chart above compares the perception towards restaurant utilizing ODD between
three groups of consumers: heavy user, medium user and light user. Three groups shared
similar view on certain aspects such as the perception of quality of the restaurants with
respect to the number deals sold and offered. Additionally, they all perceived restaurants
offering ODD to overprice the food.
Despite certain level of agreement between the three groups, there were certain
aspects existed the significant statistical different among the three groups. Light users tend
to have the most negative perception towards restaurants utilizing ODD. This can clearly
be seen from the chart where light users obviously perceived restaurants using ODD to
mainly sustain their business which can potentially connect to other aspects such as the
perception on the dishonesty of restaurant, the quality of food and service being offered.
Overall Consumers’ Decision Making Criteria
Chart above indicates level of importance of the 6 major factors that consumers
take into account when making purchase of discounted restaurant deals. As illustrated in
the chart, value of the deal was placed as the primary factor that consumers consider
followed by redemption term and condition and reputation of the restaurant. Interestingly,
out of the 6 factors, customer’s review plays the least role in enticing the purchase of
restaurants’ deals.
Figure 4.18: Respondents’ overall decision making criteria
18
1 Consumers’ Decision making criteria: Comparison between heavy user, medium user
and light user
The chart compares decision making criteria between three groups: heavy user,
medium user and light user. The three groups generally share similar trait when making the
purchase decision on the ODD from restaurants. There were however two notable points
where the three group were statistically different from one another. Unlike other two
groups, light users paid most attention to the reputation of the restaurant offering ODD
when making the purchase while heavy users focused on the value of deal being offered.
Overall Consumers’ Behavior
Figure 4.20: Respondents’ overall behavior towards restaurant
Figure 4.19: Segments’ decision making criteria
19
1
The chart above shows the behavior of consumers before and after making
purchase of discounted restaurant deals. It can be seen that consumers chose to purchase
restaurant deals from new restaurant in order to try new thing. Through the process of
purchasing, consumers compare all alternative available. It is important to note that the
association of purchasing behavior which based on discounted value, term and condition
and the reputation of restaurants with the decision making criteria discussed above. The
post purchase or deal redemption behavior indicated bad news to the restaurant offering
ODD as most consumers hardly pay beyond the face value of the deal or revisit for a full-
price purchase.
Consumers’ Behavior: Comparison between heavy user, medium user and light user
Figure 4.21: Segments’ behavior towards restaurant
20
1
The chart illustrates the comparison in behavior of consumers from three different
groups: heavy user, medium user, and light user. The three groups shared common post-
purchase behavior in not revisiting restaurant for full-price purchase and paying within the
face value of the deal. Heavy users were shown to purchase the deal mainly based on the
discount value while light users made their purchase prioritizing on the familiarity and
reputation of restaurant.
4.3 Limitations of the Study
4.3.1 Time Constraints
The research was scheduled to be conducted in a very short timeframe so the
preplanned exploratory research was needed to be restructured. Similar limitation applied
to descriptive research. The questionnaire survey was primarily planned to be conducted
offline but due to low response rate, questionnaire was unavoidably distributed online as
well to spread coverage and recruit more respondents in the limited timeframe.
4.3.2 Limitations of Sample
As convenience sampling technique was adopted in this survey, data collected
might not accurately represent the population of interest.
4.3.3 Reliability of Data
As all questionnaire survey were conducted and obtained from online channel,
researcher has limited control over the quality of the response. In addition, some questions
may obtain to inquire for some personal information that could cause respondents to feel
uncomfortable to provide the answer. However, the researcher still could not guarantee for
the valid data that were provided by the respondents.
21
1
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
5.1 Summary of Findings
PERCEPTION
From the research, it was found that overall consumers’ perception towards
restaurants utilizing ODD as part of their marketing tool to be mostly negative. Though
understanding of the objective of the restaurants for using ODD as part of their marketing
activity was well received by the consumers, they still perceived the ODD itself to be
untruthful marketing activity which affects the participated restaurants. The major negative
perceptions included dishonesty with respect to the quality of the food and service being
offered through ODD program, the unfair term and condition applied and overprice of the
regular menu. These all could bring about the adverse impacts to the participated restaurant
as it could create a fixed negative image of the brand.
Having studied further into different segments (heavy user, medium user and light
user), it was found that despite the fact that each of segments hold slightly different
perception in some aspects, they generally formed the same negative perceptions towards
the restaurants whom utilize ODD. However, restaurants, to certain extents, can potentially
manage perception of heavy users who did not only show the least hostile perception
towards restaurants running ODD but also the one who regularly make purchase of ODD.
DECISION MAKING CRITERIA
The three key decision criteria in making the purchase of ODD included the
discounted value, the term and condition and the reputation of the restaurants. As
consumers showed to prioritize the discounted value of ODD, this indicated that ODD
mainly brings in non-loyal price-sensitive consumers who make purchase decision
primarily on price.
All segments shared generally the same criteria in making purchase decision on
ODD. As the value discounted stood as the number one criteria across all segments, this
22
1
confirms the inherent weakness of ODD in attracting price-sensitive consumers who
generally focused on the lowest price possible.
BEHAVIOR
The behavior of consumers towards restaurants utilizing ODD reflected that of their
purchase decisions. Survey suggested that consumers purchased ODD as a mean to try new
things at the discounted price. Additionally, consumers hardly pay beyond the deal’s value
and returned for a full-price purchase.
Again, since all segments shared generally the same perceptions, the behaviors of
each segment also follow the same pattern.
5.2 Recommendation
As the research suggests that consumers tend to form negative perception and
consequently behave unfavorably towards restaurants running ODD program, restaurants
who consider take part in ODD therefore need to keep in mind these perceptions of
consumers and carefully manage or find ways to shift these perceptions by communicating
and providing them with an honest and transparent offer. A positive perception can then
potentially lead to the change of consumers’ behavior.
However, since the research strongly suggested the inherent weakness of the ODD
platform itself. Restaurants are therefore recommended to choose other marketing
activities to promote themselves which do not involve the deep discount pricing.
23
1
REFERENCES
• Pisek, C. (n.d.). Case Study: Ensogo. Retrieved November 29, 2014, from
http://doctorpisek.com/2014/01/21/%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%93%E
0%B8%B5%E0%B8%A8%E0%B8%B6%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%A9%E0%B8%
B2-ensogo/
• KResearch Center. (n.d.). Daily deals, new marketing tool for business. Retrieved
November 29, 2014, from
http://startup.ksmecare.com/Article.aspx?mid=53&articleid=328
• Ensogo. (n.d.). Retrieved December 12, 2014, from
http://www.ensogo.com/about
• The impact of discounting on brand equity – how to avoid the quicksand. (n.d.).
Retrieved December 14, 2014, from
http://www.killianbranding.com/whitepaper/discounting/
• Watkins, D. (n.d.). What Is Discount Pricing Strategy?. Retrieved December 17,
2014, from
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/discount-pricing-strategy-794.html
• Utpal M. Dholakia. How Businesses Fare With Daily Deals As They Gain
Experience. Retrieved December 14, 2014, from
news.rice.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012-07-05-DailyDeals.pdf
24
1
APPENDICES
25
1
APPENDIX A
QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY
PART 1: SCREENING QUESTION
1.1 Have you ever purchased online restaurant deal/coupon? [User and Non-User]
[ ] Yes
[ ] No, …………………(please state why)
PART 2: GENERAL INFORMATION
2.1 Which of the following daily deal website do you mostly visit?
[ ] Ensogo
[ ] Groupon
[ ] Others
2.2 How many times per week do you dine at the restaurants?
[ ] less than once a week
[ ] 1-2 times per week
[ ] 3-4 times per week
[ ] 5-7 times per week
2.3 How frequently do you search for online restaurant deal?
[ ] less than 1 time/week
[ ] 1-2 times/week
[ ] 3-4 times/week
[ ] 5-7 times/week
26
1 2.4 On average, how many online restaurant deals do you purchase each month?
[ ] Less than 2
[ ] 2-4
[ ] More than 4
2.5 What type of online restaurant deal do you mostly purchase/prefer?
[ ] Dollar promotion
[ ] Item promotion
2.6 Do you usually look for specific type of restaurant to purchase the deal?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
2.7 If yes, which of the following type of restaurant do you normally make your
purchase? [Multiple answers]
[ ] Thai
[ ] Japanese
[ ] Korean
[ ] Chinese
[ ] International (Italian, French, etc.)
[ ] Hotel Buffet
[ ] Chained Restaurant
[ ] Others
27
1
PART 3: PERCEPTION
3.1 Please rate the following statement based on your level of agreement using 5-point
scale [1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Somewhat Disagree, 3-Neutral, 4-Somewhat Agree and
5-Strongly Agree]
Strongly Disagree
Somewhat Disagree Neutral Somewhat
Agree Strongly
Agree
3.1.1 Restaurants offer online deal to solely promote their restaurant 1 2 3 4 5
3.1.2 Restaurants offer online deal to temporarily generate customer traffic and earn extra income
1 2 3 4 5
3.1.3 Restaurants exploit online deal as another main source of their revenue
1 2 3 4 5
3.1.4 Restaurants offering online deal are ones having hard time keeping their business
1 2 3 4 5
3.1.5 I perceive restaurant offering deal to be somewhat dishonest through set of term and condition
1 2 3 4 5
3.1.6 Quality of food being offered through discounted deal is the same to that of full price purchase
1 2 3 4 5
3.1.7 Service being offered to customer utilizing discounted deal is the same to that of full price purchase
1 2 3 4 5
3.1.8 I perceive restaurants offering online discounted deal to overprice their food (i.e. the normal everyday price is too high)
1 2 3 4 5
3.1.9 Restaurants offer limited online deals are ones with higher standard of food and service
1 2 3 4 5
3.1.10 The higher the number of deals sold, the better the quality of the restaurant deal
1 2 3 4 5
28
1 PART 4: DECISION MAKING CRITERIA
4.1 Please rate the following attributes according to their level of important on your
purchase decision using 5-point scale [1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Somewhat Disagree, 3-
Neutral, 4-Somewhat Agree and 5-Strongly Agree]
Not at all important Very
important
4.1.1 Value of the Deal 1 2 3 4 5
4.1.2 Location of Restaurant 1 2 3 4 5
4.1.3 Redemption Term and Condition 1 2 3 4 5
4.1.4 Reputation of Restaurant 1 2 3 4 5
4.1.5 Limited number of deals 1 2 3 4 5
4.1.6 Customer's Review 1 2 3 4 5
PART 5: BEHAVIOR
5.1 Please circle the number that best describe your behavior using 5-point scale [1-
Strongly Disagree, 2-Somewhat Disagree, 3-Neutral, 4-Somewhat Agree and 5-
Strongly Agree]
Strongly Disagree
Somewhat Disagree Neutral Somewha
t Agree Strongly
Agree
5.1.1 I purchase online restaurant deal based solely on the discount being offered
1 2 3 4 5
5.1.2 I only purchase online deal for restaurant that I have experienced or I am familiar with
1 2 3 4 5
5.1.3 I purchase online restaurant deal based on customers' review
1 2 3 4 5
5.1.4 I purchase online restaurant deal only from well-known restaurants
1 2 3 4 5
29
1 5.1.5 I purchase online restaurant deal based on the number of deals that get sold
1 2 3 4 5
5.1.6 I purchase online restaurant deal based on term and condition applied
1 2 3 4 5
5.1.7 I purchase online deal in order to try out new restaurant or new menu being offered
1 2 3 4 5
5.1.8 I usually look through all restaurant deals available and compare them prior to my final purchase
1 2 3 4 5
5.1.9 I usually buy multiple restaurant deals at once 1 2 3 4 5
5.1.10 I normally pay beyond the face value of coupon upon redeeming at the restaurant
1 2 3 4 5
5.1.11 I usually revisit the restaurant offering discounted deal for a full-price purchase
1 2 3 4 5
5.1.12 I usually redeem the restaurant deal on time 1 2 3 4 5
PART 6: RESPONDANT PROFILE
6.1 Gender
[ ] Male
[ ] Female
6.2 Age
[ ] Less than 23
[ ] 23-30
[ ] 31-46
[ ] More than 46
30
1 6.3 Status
[ ] Single
[ ] Married
[ ] Divorce
[ ] Widowed
6.4 Occupation
[ ] Student
[ ] Corporate Employee
[ ] Own business
[ ] Government officer
[ ] Freelance
[ ] House-spouse
[ ] Unemployed
[ ] Retirement
[ ] Others
6.5 Personal income per month
[ ] Less than 15,000 THB
[ ] 15,000 – 25,000 THB
[ ] 25,001 – 35,000 THB
[ ] 35,001 – 45,000 THB
[ ] 45,001 – 55,000 THB
31
1 [ ] 55,001 – 65,000 THB
[ ] 65,001 - 75,000 THB
[ ] More than 75,001 THB
6.6 To what extent do you agree with each of the following statements. Please indicate
your answer using the 5-point scale [1-Strongly Disagree, 2-Somewhat Disagree, 3-
Neutral, 4-Somewhat Agree and 5-Strongly Agree]
Strongly Disagree
Somewhat Disagree Neutral Somewha
t Agree Strongly Agree
6.6.1 I like to spend time at home 1 2 3 4 5
6.6.2 I like to meet people 1 2 3 4 5
6.6.3 I usually surf internet 1 2 3 4 5
6.6.4 I like to try out new thing 1 2 3 4 5
6.6.5 I often choose food for myself 1 2 3 4 5
6.6.6 I like to dine out at the restaurant 1 2 3 4 5
6.6.7 I often look for special sale promotion 1 2 3 4 5
6.6.8 I pay attention to the quality of food 1 2 3 4 5
6.6.9 I value service provided by the restaurant 1 2 3 4 5
32
33
BIOGRAPHY
Name Mr. Tanaphum Srinawakoon
Date of Birth October 3rd, 1989
Educational Attainment
2011: Bachelor Degree in Electrical and
Electronic Engineering, The University of
Nottingham
Work Experiences 2012-2013: Quality Engineer
Toyota Motor Asia Pacific Engineering and
Manufacturing
33