Home > Back to Publisher > Report Information

Paying More for Brands and Packaging in the 2009 Recession

EPM Communications Inc
August 1, 2009
42 Pages - SKU: RS2528767

Abstract Table of Contents Related Reports

All-New Special Report
From The Consumers Network, Inc.

With the differences between store brands and national brands fuzzier than ever, packaging has the potential to play a decisive role in consumer purchase decisions -- and your profitability.

Consumers expect national brands to cost more than store brands. But even value shoppers are willing to pay more for certain packaging attributes. Inside Paying More for Brands and Packaging In the 2009 Recession you'll discover the packaging attributes that consumers say would lead them to pay more or buy a more expensive national brand. The new research shows:

Why and how reusable and refillable packages are gaining on recyclables
How brands are losing market share by failing to meet packaging expectations
How many consumers say they will pay more for “less packaging”
What attributes lead consumers in different demographics to buying brands or paying more
The differences in male and female green packaging decisions
How much more important packaging is to large households and mothers of small children
The difference that employment makes - and the strong desire of the unemployed to buy products and packages made in the U.S.
The difference that income and education make in what consumers are willing to pay for and what brand attributes they are willing to support
How income and education determine what packaging attributes consumers will pay for
The difference having children makes in adults’ willingness to pay more, and how the importance of multipacks grows along with the children and the size of the household
and much more.

Paying More for Brands and Packaging In the 2009 Recession: Table Of Contents; Introduction; Executive Summary; Methodology; At a glance: Most wanted packaging attributes; Tables and comments
Section I. Buying national brands for packaging attributes: Table 1. Buying national brands for packaging attributes - in order of 2009 results; Table 2. Changes of 5 percentage points or more from 2008-2009; Table 3. Male/female differences in buying national brands for packaging attributes; Table 4. Females buying national brands for packaging attributes - 2008-2009; Table 5. Males buying national brands for packaging attributes - 2008-2009; Table 6. Buying national brands for packaging attributes by income, 2009; Table 7. Buying national brands for packaging attributes by level of education, 2009; Table 8. Buying national brands for packaging attributes by age, 2009; Table 9. Buying national brands for packaging attributes by ages of children in household, 2009; Table 10. Older women buying national brands for packaging attributes, 2008- 2009; Table 11. Buying national brands for packaging attributes by levels of education, 2009; Table 12. Buying national brands for packaging attributes by region, 2009; Table 13. Buying national brands for packaging attributes by household size, 2009
Section II. Willingness to pay more for packaging attributes: Table 14. Willingness to pay more for packaging attributes, 2008-2009; Table 15. Differences of five percentage points or more in willingness to pay more for packaging attributes in 2008-2009; Table 16. Willingness to pay more for packaging attributes by age, 2009; Table 17. Willingness to pay more for packaging attributes with and without children, 2009; Table 18. Willingness to pay more for packaging attributes in households with children, 2008- 2009; Table 19. Willingness to pay more for packaging attributes in households without children, 2008-2009; Table 20. Willingness to pay more for packaging attributes in households with children, based on the age of children, 2009; Table 21. Household size and willingness to pay more for packaging attributes, 2009; Table 22. Willingness to pay more for packaging attributes based on employment status, 2009; Table 23. Malesí willingness to pay more for packaging attributes, 2008-2009; Table 24. Older womenís willingness to pay more for packaging attributes, 2008-2009; Section III. Willingness to buy national brands for packaging attributes versus willingness to pay more for them; Table 25. Willingness to buy national brand for packaging attribute versus willingness to pay more for them, 2009; Table 26. Differences of 5 percentage points and more in willingness to buy national brand for packaging attributes versus willingness to pay more for them, 2009; Table 27. Femalesí willingness to buy national brands for packaging attributes versus willingness to pay more for them, 2009; Table 28. Malesí willingness to buy national brands for packaging attributes versus willingness to pay more for them, 2009; Table 29. Willingness of higher income respondents to buy national brands for packaging attributes versus willingness to pay more for them, 2009; Table 30. Willingness of college graduates to buy national brands for packaging attributes versus willingness to pay more for them, 2009; Table 31. Willingness to buy national brands for packaging attributes versus willingness to pay more in households with children, 2009
About the author, Mona Doyle, and The Consumer Network

Paying More for Brands and Packaging in the 2009 Recession

Share this report

Other tasks

Research Assistance

Related Markets

Consumer Loyalty Reports

Free Alert Me service