CHina Car Segmentation PDF

Segmentation of the car
market in China
Authors: Adrien SAINT

Imran SYED
Tutor: Anders Pehrsson
Examiner: Sarah Philipson
Subject: Marketing
Level: Master
2013
Table of Contents
Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 5
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 6
1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 6
1.1.1 The growing Chinese car market ............................................................................... 6
1.1.2 Government intervenes to control the car market ..................................................... 7
1.1.3 Changes in Chinese market segments ....................................................................... 7
1.2 Problematization ........................................................................................................... 7
1.3 Research questions ........................................................................................................... 8
1.4 Problem formulation ........................................................................................................ 9
1.5 Delimitations .................................................................................................................... 9
1.6 Outline of the thesis.......................................................................................................... 9
2. Theory .................................................................................................................................. 10
2.1 Market segmentation ...................................................................................................... 10
2.2 Bases for Market Segmentation ..................................................................................... 11
2.2.1 Geographic segmentation ........................................................................................ 11
2.2.2 Demographic segmentation ..................................................................................... 12
2.2.3 Psychographic segmentation ................................................................................... 13
2.2.4 Behavioural segmentation ....................................................................................... 13
2.3 Macro Segmentation ...................................................................................................... 14
2.4 Micro segmentation ........................................................................................................ 15
2.5 Hybrid segmentation: the mix of micro and macro segmentations ................................ 15
2.6 Dynamic segmentation: the predictive implication of segmentation ............................. 16
2.7 State-of-the-art ............................................................................................................... 16
2.8 Model, how the constructs relate.................................................................................... 19
3. Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 21
3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 21
3.2 Population and sample ................................................................................................... 21
3.2.1 Data collection method ............................................................................................ 22
3.2.2 Questionnaire Design .............................................................................................. 22
3.3 Operationalization .......................................................................................................... 23
3.4 Data analysis method ..................................................................................................... 28
3.5 Validity ........................................................................................................................... 28
3.6 Reliability and Replicability........................................................................................... 29
1
4. Empirical Data ..................................................................................................................... 31
4.1 Geographic data: ............................................................................................................ 31
4.2 Demographic data: ......................................................................................................... 31
4.3 Behavioural data:............................................................................................................ 32
4.3.1 Customer behaviour explained by Geographic data ................................................ 33
4.3.2 Customer behaviour explained by Demographics: .................................................. 34
4.4 Psychographic data:........................................................................................................ 35
4.4.2 Respondent’s opinion on global preferences ........................................................... 36
4.4.3 Car owners’ current preferences .............................................................................. 37
4.4.4 Car owners’ preferences for their next purchase ..................................................... 40
4.4.5 Non-car owners’ preferences for their first purchase .............................................. 43
4.5 Macro data for the dynamic aspect ................................................................................ 45
5. Analysis................................................................................................................................ 49
5.1 Control Variables ........................................................................................................... 49
5.2 Hybrid Behavioural segmentation .................................................................................. 49
5.3 Hybrid Psychographic segments .................................................................................... 50
5.4 Dynamic Hybrid Psychographic segments .................................................................... 52
6. Conclusion and discussion ................................................................................................... 53
7. Managerial implications, reflections, further research ........................................................ 55
7.1 Managerial implications ................................................................................................. 55
7.2 Reflections ...................................................................................................................... 57
7.3 Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 58
7.4 Future Research .............................................................................................................. 58
References ................................................................................................................................ 60
Appendix A .............................................................................................................................. 64
The Survey ........................................................................................................................... 64
Survey emails ................................................................................................................... 68
Descriptive statistics ............................................................................................................. 71
Appendix B
Linear regression analysis and linear curve estimates ............................................................. 77
B.1. Customer behaviour explained by Geographic and Demographic data ....................... 77
2
B.1.1. Region of residence................................................................................................ 77
B.1.2. Degree of urbanisation. .......................................................................................... 80
B.1.3. Behaviour by age ................................................................................................... 82
B.1.4. Behaviour by Gender ............................................................................................. 84
B.1.5. Behaviour according to annual income.................................................................. 87
B.2. Psychographic data by Demographic and Geographic ................................................. 89
B.2.1. Psychographs by age .............................................................................................. 89
B.2.2. Psychographs by gender. ..................................................................................... 103
B.2.3. Psychographics with Annual income (Yuan) ...................................................... 115
B.2.4. Psychographics by region of residence. ............................................................... 127
B.2.5. psychographics by degree of urbanisation ........................................................... 143
B.3. Customer psychographics by behaviours ................................................................... 156
B.3.1. Psychographics by car replacement rate .............................................................. 156
B.3.2. Psychographics by experience ............................................................................. 169
B.3.3. Psychographics with frequency of use ................................................................. 187
B.3.4. Psychographics by non-car owners who plan to have a car in the future. ........... 201
B.3.5. psychographics by style of use; long trips ........................................................... 216
B.3.6. Psychographics by style of use; short trips .......................................................... 229
B.3.7. Car owners preferences for the next purchase by loyalty. ................................... 242
3
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This thesis was written between March 20th 2013 and May 25th 2013, at the Linnaeus
University, Campus Växjö. The authors have received support from several people during
this period. In this acknowledgment page they want to thank all these wonderful people, for
their assistance during this thesis.
First of all we would like to thank their examiner Doctor Sarah Philipson who has been
giving the authors support, feedback and inspiration. The authors would also like to thank
their tutor Professor Anders Pehrsson who has supported them by giving much needed
feedbacks and inspiration; he has also given inputs in developing the model used throughout
the thesis. The authors also want to send out their gratitude to the respondents of their survey.
Their contribution to the thesis has been of great value and the authors are very much
thankful for their precious time.
Växjö, May 25th, 2013
Imran Syed Adrien Saint
4
Abstract
The Chinese car market has, through the last decade evolved into the major market in the
world. Its car market from has become the world’s largest market from 2009 until today.
With the emerging market that is China, the demand for cars is supposed to grow even more
in the next decade.
The thesis starts by studying the theories of consumer market segmentation with a hybrid and
dynamic aspect. A quantitative investigation was conducted with the help of a survey. The
survey was sent out to car consumers and potential car consumers who are residing in China.
From this study the authors were able to anticipate possible preferential profiles.
Keywords: China, market segmentation, cars, hybrid
5
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
The history of the automobile is complicated and rich. It dates back to the 15th century, when
Leonardo da Vinci was designing and modelling transport vehicles (library of congress,
2013-3-22). According to the library of congress (2013-3-22) Nicolas Joseph Cugnot built the
first self-propelled vehicle for the French army in 1769. 1832-1839, Robert Anderson in
Scotland built an electric carriage. George Baldwin Selden integrated an internal combustion
engine in the United States in 1876/95.
The first companies to produce automobiles for the public market emerged in 1896,
manufacturing electric gas-powered vehicles (Bentley historical library, 2013-3-22). The love
of cars and their ever-growing necessity in our lives has increased the number of automobiles
to an estimate of over 1 billion vehicles in 2010, from 500 million in 1986 (Autos Cars, 2013-
3-22).
1.1.1 The growing Chinese car market

During the last two decades social and economic events have brought immense opportunities
in soaring emerging markets. Many multinational corporations have made substantial
investments in these countries, as a part of their global expansion strategies, creating more
and more jobs thus increasing the purchasing power of customers. Such an emerging market
is China (Cui, & Liu, 2000).
Half a century ago bicycles were considered a mark of family fortune in China (The guardian,
2013-3-22). Since then, China has become the world’s largest automobile producer and the
largest market with annual sales of some 14 million vehicles in 2009, continuing to expand in
2010 according to APCO (2013-3-22).
The growing car industry does not only give direct economic benefits and a growing number
of car dealerships. It also has powerful multiplier effects for other sectors, like fuelling steel
production and other industries (The guardian, 2013-3-22).
6
1.1.2 Government intervenes to control the car market
The Chinese government has implemented a number of tax adjustments and subsidies for
hybrid electric vehicles, electric vehicles, and traditional vehicles with small engine
displacement, attempting to impact the national consumption (APCO, 2013-3-22).
1.1.3 Changes in Chinese market segments

Richard Cant of Dezan Shira & Associates at the HSBC International Exchange to China said
“For the first time ever there are more people living in China’s cities than in the countryside
and this trend will only continue,” (HSBC, 2013-3-22). There is an increasing middle class in
China (HSBC, 2013-3-22). The Chinese consumers are now spending their disposable
income rather than saving it, as they did before. They are also educated, skilled, price savvy
and internet savvy (HSBC, 2013-3-22). Foreign brands, principally for visible products, are
very popular and trendy among China’s young consumers, as they have status appeal (HSBC,
2013-3-22).
McKinsey (2013-3-22) points out that more of China’s middle class is shifting to premium
cars, notably foreign cars like VW, BMW, Volvo, Aston Martin, et cetera. McKinsey (2013-
3-22) also states in his report that on average Chinese families change car every six to eight
years on average. Premium car owners say that they would like to change their car two to
three years ahead of the average (McKinsey 2013-3-22).
1.2 Problematization
The Chinese customers have shown a strong interest in cars, making it a challenging
environment for marketers, and the industry now sees the market as the most important in the
world. The demand evolved radically and is prone to continue changing. As the Chinese car
market is emerging, the marketing processes are evolving with it as the market changes really
quickly. Segmentation, a key marketing process to reach customers, has to be very efficient
for car manufacturers that want to perform well in the Chinese car market.
The Chinese car market is the most important to consider nowadays for a constructor, and yet
remains really mysterious. Despite the quantities produced being easily sold, no qualitative
trend can be observed, and only absolutely attractive quantities trends are observable. But the
constructors cannot rely forever on the quantities and have to choose a strategy in order to
7
gain market shares on the promising market and be ahead of the competition in the heart of
Chinese people. This is where the importance of segmenting efficiently the market appears.
Segmentation can be made on basic macro dimensions: economic, geographic, culture & and
technology (Grundy, 2006). Specific segments can also be identified by carrying out
segmentation based on micro dimensions, such as life styles, behaviors etcetera (West, Ford
and Ibrahim, 2006). Those segmentation styles are chosen by car makers and have a static
dimension, and feature no flexibility or enough details to gain a clear understanding of the
demand.
The whole environment affecting the segments is bound to evolve (Grundy, 2006). This will
leave the company marketing their cars in an obsolete way, positioning themselves on
segments that they could not target as efficiently, as if they were adapting to them. The
surroundings of car manufacturers are influencing the way segmentation is carried out and in
its results. In this emerging market, with its quickly changing environment, “hybrid
segmentation”; mixing different styles of segmentations, is said to be necessary to have
detailed customer segments (Hassan, Craft and Kortam, 2003).
Micro and macro dimensions are connected and influencing each other continuously, causing
a challenge for companies as their segments evolves (Cannon and Yaprak, 2011). Marketers
and academics like Hasan, Craft and Kortam (2003); Amine and Smith (2009); Cannon and
Yaprak (2011); and Quinn, Hines, and Bennison (2007) have discussed the mix of macro and
macro to anticipate possible segmentation, these studies are rather recent. But there has been
little studies done on segmenting the Chinese car consumers. The study of consumer
preferences of the Chinese car consumers is there for a gap to be recognised. Finding the
different segments and build predictions of their evolution in the near future is a really
practical source of information to actually serve the challenges imposed to firms marketing
cars in China.
1.3 Research questions

What are the main profiles of customers on the Chinese car market?
Can any preferential profiles be anticipated for the near future?
8
1.4 Problem formulation
The purpose of this paper is to study customer segmentation in the Chinese new car market,
and the changes and movements of segmentation that could be predicted for the next
purchase.
1.5 Delimitations
The study is delimited in time and location. The research is made only on the Chinese market
of new cars. The focus is also time-based since the authors will study trends for the next
purchase.
1.6 Outline of the thesis

This thesis continues with a theory chapter containing an introduction about market segmentation
and continues explaining the four vital variables of market segmentation with the heading bases
for market segmentation and the four variables will be explained with the sub-headings
Geographic, Demographic, Psychographic and Behavioural. Then further in the theory chapter
the micro and macro segmentation are explained. Furthermore in the Hybrid segmentation the
mixing and links between macro and micro segmentation are explained. A state-of-the-art
subchapter also explains the acceptability and readability of the sources being used. Further are
the research questions presented and next chapter concerns the methodology part. This chapter
brings up for example the following subheadings; populations and sample, data collection
method, questionnaire design, operationalization, validity and reliability. After this follows the
empirical chapter which consists of summary presentation of the empirical data the authors have
gathered. Next is the analysis chapter which is created by interpreting the empirical data, with the
theory, connected to the background. The second-to-last chapter is the conclusion, which consists
of the findings and results that have been made in the thesis. Also theoretical and managerial
implications, limitations, proposed future research are brought up at the end of the thesis. The
authors’ own reflections are being presented at the last.
9
2. Theory
The four ‘Ps’ of strategic marketing is useful to analyse a marketplace according to Kotler
(1989).
He terms them as ‘probing’. The second step is ‘partitioning’ the market; this is the process
of segmenting clusters of the customers of a market. The third step is ‘prioritising’ the market
segments that a company has possibly greater advantage in pursuing. The fourth step is
‘positioning’; “pinpointing the competitive options in each segment that you're going to
target.” (Kotler, 1989). Partitioning is the term referring to customer segmentation, which is
the focus of the thesis.
2.1 Market segmentation

Market segmentation is an essential element of marketing for goods and services. The
recognition of heterogenic demand needs to be considered before a newly produced product
is being considered to be sold in a market (Wedel and Kamakura, 2000).
Markets as a whole are not entirely homogeneous (Beane and Ennis, 1987). Market segments
are homogeneous subsets of consumers in a particular market (West et al., 2006). Market
segmentation is a vital process to succeed, identifying suitable segments of consumers with
shared preferences for targeting purposes (West et al., 2006; Kotler and Keller, 2009).
Beane and Ennis (1987) gave the following major reasons for market segmentation:
(1) To look for new product opportunities or areas that may be accessible to current
product repositioning; and
(2) To create improved advertising messages by gaining a better understanding of
one’s customers.
In segmenting a market to sell a product it is not necessary to identify all segments, only the
groups that appear to be yearning for the product (Beane and Ennis, 1987).
There are many ways to assess market segmentation. To determine its effectiveness and
profitability some criteria have often been put forward: identifiability, measurability,
sustainability, accessibility, responsiveness and actionable (Frank, Massy, and Wind, 1972;
Wedel and Kamakura, 2000; Beane and Ennis, 1987).
10
Identifiability and measurability are the extent to which marketers are able to distinguish and
approximately measure the clusters of customers according to its size, location and market
from within a market (Wedel and Kamakura, 2000; Beane and Ennis, 1987).
Sustainability/ stability; the segment must be large enough to justify attention (Beane and
Ennis, 1987). Kotler, in Beane and Ennis (1987) says: "a segment should be the largest
possible homogeneous group of buyers that it pays to go after with a specially designed
marketing program". Wedel and Kamakura (2000) states market segments that are steady for
a long enough period can provide a foundation for the development of successful market
segmentation
Accessibility; Segments must be accessible to the managers to some degree. It can be

accessible for example through promotional efforts or through secondary data (Wedel and
Kamakura, 2000).
Actionable; “Market segments are actionable if their identification provides guidance for
decision on the effective specification of the marketing instruments”, (Wedel and Kamakura,
2000).
2.2 Bases for Market Segmentation

There are many ways to segment a market, amongst those, Beane and Ennis (1987)
acknowledge Kotler to divide market segmentation variables into four main parts;
Geographic;
Demographic;
Psychographic;
Behavioural;
2.2.1 Geographic segmentation

Consumer demand or ways to fill that demand differ geographically. When a market is
geographically segmented it simply means that consumer are sub-categorised according to
the consumer needs geographically, it can be by region of a country, population density or
climate (Beane and Ennis, 1987; Kotler and Armstrong, 2011).
11
“Consumers in the Southeast use more vegetable shortening than in any other part of the US.
Since Northeastern and Midwestern regions have more locally unique beer drinking
segments, they have more small beer breweries than any other region. The consumption of
menthol cigarettes is greater in the Southeast than in any other region of the country”. These
are few examples given by Beane and Ennis (1987).
2.2.2 Demographic segmentation

Beane and Ennis (1987) refer to demographic segmentation to be the most prevailing variable
of market segmentation. They think that’s probably because consumers are placed on certain
scales of measurement that can easily be understood; information is easily gathered,
interpreted, and convertible from one study to another. Satisfying the segmentation criteria of
identifiability, substantiality, accessibility, and actionability (Wedel and Kamakura, 2000),
three of the most common demographic variables employed in domestic and international
segmentation include: age, gender, income (Beane and Ennis, 1987; Cleveland et al, 2011).
Examples are Life Stage vitamins (four types depending on age and sex) and disposable
diapers according to the age of infant (Beane and Ennis, 1987). Younger techno-savvy
individuals are less committed to definite patterns and are more open to new perspectives and
products especially when it comes to high-technology products (Cleveland et al., 2011).
It is well recognised that the demand for categories of goods and services alters as they age
and pass through the various life cycle stages (Cleveland et al., 2011).
Income also has a strongly effect on individuals demand or choice of a product (Cleveland, et
al., 2011). Consumers with higher- income tend to buy better and expensive products, which
are also status- enhancing, examples are household appliances, consumer electronics, and
luxury products (Cleveland, et al., 2011).
The demographic variable of gender also has a vital differentiating effect. Males and females
have different characteristics of consumer behaviour; in their shopping patterns, information
processing, judgment, responses to advertising, and the products they tend to buy (Cleveland,
et al., 2011).
12
2.2.3 Psychographic segmentation
According to Beane and Ennis (1987) psychographic or life-style segmentation is tougher to
describe as it is no longer looking at clearly definable, quantitative measures. Psychographic
segmentation, unlike geographic and demographic segmentation, reflects consumers’ choices
depending on personality, values and lifestyles, though there has been no clear agreement
about the variables that should be included (Lancaster and Williams, 2002; Kim and Lee,
2011; Wells, 1975).
Wells (1975), while writing a review article about psychographics, stated: “Twenty-four
articles on psychographics contain no less than 32 definitions, all somewhat different”. While
reviewing a Product-Specific Psychographic Profile Wells (1975) argued that when a
psychographic study is devoted to a product category, it is not essential to rely on item
diversity to get useful relationships. The investigator can focus upon a limited set of relevant,
product-related dimensions that would make more sense regarding the psychographic
dispositions of the population investigated towards the product in question.
Product-specific psychographic profile is a useful tool used to get insights of the market
dispositions towards a product. Such a study is investigating profiles through series of
questions about product attributes (Wells, 1975; Chin-Feng, 2002).
According to Chin-Feng (2002), products attributes are reliable to study personalities and life
styles. He states that the psychographics regarding a product are driven by the brand equity of
the current actors. Due to the personality associated to brands, clusters can be found
investigating the preferences of the customers. The analysis of personality traits and life
styles through their linkage to product attributes is preparing ground to the response an
individual can have when confronted with a purchase decision on the market (Chin-Feng,
2002).
2.2.4 Behavioural segmentation

Originally, benefit segmentation was categorised as a psychographic method, then classified
as behavioural (Kim and Lee, 2011). Kim and Lee (2011) points out “benefits are a function
of consumers’ beliefs about product offerings and promises, which motivate their purchase
decisions, and are therefore the basis of behavioural rather than psychographic
13
segmentation”. Behavioural segmentation pays less attention to economic or age related
issues unlike psychographic segmentation, and concentrates more on consumer related
behaviour, concentrating on psychological attributes and product orientation (Lancaster and
Williams, 2002).
Behavioural segmentation, segments consumers based on knowledge of the product, attitude,

or response to the product. This includes such areas as purchase occasion, benefits sought,
user status, degree of usage, degree of loyalty, readiness stage, and marketing factor
sensitivity (Beane and Ennis, 1987).
Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) recognise that people buy products not only for its use, but
also for what they signify or mean. Consumer behaviour also relates to the multi-sensory,
fantasy and emotive aspects of one's experience with products. These facets of consumer
behaviour are defined as Hedonic consumption; Multi-sensory means several sensory
modalities including tastes, sounds, scents, tactile impressions and visual images. Emotions
represent motivational phenomena with characteristic neurophysiological, expressive and
experiential factors; they include feelings such as joy, jealousy, fear, rage and rapture.
Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) further proposed:
Differences in consumer emotional and imaginary response to products are closely tied to a
variety of subcultural differences, for example ethnicity or nationality.
Differences in consumer emotional and imaginary response to products appear closely tied to
a variety of subcultural differences.
Consumers of many hedonic ally-experienced products are characterized by very distinctive
social class profiles.
2.3 Macro Segmentation

Macro segmentation is a segmentation method relying on macro data. Economic, political,
geographic and demographic are the variables in macro segmentation. These variables are
widely available as secondary data. (Gaston-Breton and Martín, 2011). Studying this
information gives a good insight of the market size and potential (Douglas and Craig, 2011).
14
2.4 Micro segmentation
Gaston-Breton and Martin (2011) stress the need of micro segmentation at a consumer level.
They present three classes of micro-segmentation that have been used in most European
segmentation studies, from product-specific characteristics, such as attitudes toward
attributes, to domain-specific features such as lifestyles, and general characteristics such as
central values. It is important to note that a country's culture has also been recognized as a
significant environmental trait and essential to understand systematic variances in behaviour
(Steenkamp, 2001). For example, markets around the world are getting more and more
cosmopolitan, but the consumption of local foods and fashions are across most countries
dominated by products compliant with the specific country’s ethnic identity (Cleveland et al,
2011).
Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) pointed out in an article some years back, about the different
aspect of consumption. He states that all products, no matter how ordinary they are, may
carry a symbolic significance. This significance in some cases is rich and noticeable to the
users. Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) also mention that many products projects essential
nonverbal indications that must be seen, heard, tasted, felt, or smelled to be appreciated
properly.
2.5 Hybrid segmentation: the mix of micro and macro segmentations

The concept of hybrid segmentation is relying on the principle that segments can be made
more profoundly by combining different segmentation methods. Hybrid segmentation in
different areas of the world, standardising some marketing elements, and adapting others,
could be a good solution (Hassan, Craft, and Kortam, 2003).
Segmenting a market should start with the macro dimensions and refined by micro factors
(Amine and Smith, 2009) to adapt to local behaviours and thus getting better performance.
Successful marketing often depends on balancing product attributes with customer attitudes
and values; psycho-graphic segmentation is a compelling basis for categorizing consumers
internationally, complementing approaches primarily based on demographics, marketers need
to consider the culture variables and subsequent consumer behaviours (Cleveland et al.,
2011). Hybrid segmentation with the combination of all type of segmentation cited in the
15
previous sections is resulting in mass customization. If macro data is associated to micro data,
the segmentation allows the distinction of clear precise segments that can be targeted to
achieve greater customer satisfaction through coherent value delivery (Jiang, 2000).
2.6 Dynamic segmentation: the predictive implication of segmentation

Very few authors have emphasised the importance of dynamic segmentation. Among these
few is Weinberg (1972), who stressed its importance dynamic segmentation. He stressed, that
certain episodes can be predicted by the use of already available records. Weinberg (1972)
referred to Dr. Spock’s example of segmenting the baby product market: on the average,
three months after birth a baby begins to eat solid food, five months later the birth weaning
should begin, and a year later, a baby normally grows six teeth and can chew. Those different
periods are called time sequences. Episodes like these or the application of time sequence can
be beneficial to marketers and researchers in anticipating the future, while segmenting
international market and its trends. A similar approach can be applied to develop time
sequences for other areas such as automobiles (Weinberg, 1972).
According to Holbrook and Hirschman (1982), post purchase consumer behaviours are driven
by a learning effect, transforming the initial behaviour. This phenomenon results in a
feedback loop and depends on the interaction between the purchase experience and the
consumers’ inputs. The consumers’ inputs are defined by the macro and micro factors
influencing them. The customers’ behaviour is thus ever changing, due to the different
contexts the customers could be in. (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982)
Quinn, Hines and Bension (2007) explained and made sense of the particular observed
phenomenon of marketing segmentation, ongoing. The aspect of ongoing, explained by
Weick (1995), is unending and continuous sense-making. In a milieu of dynamic
segmentation, in a world, which is becoming more and more cosmopolitan, cluster behaviour
is always ever hanging and ongoing.
2.7 State-of-the-art
The notion of market segmentation is explained with the help of Beane and Ennis (1987) and
Wedel and Kamakara (2000). Beane and Ennis (1987) review on market segmentation is well
16
accepted and it reviews Kotler (1980) theories. Wedel and Kamakara (2000) dominating
theory on market segmentation is also well accepted and validated.
Cleveland et al. (2011) Lancaster and Williams (2002), and Kim and Lee (2011) are the other
sources that have been used to explain bases and variables for market segmentation. The for
variables geographic segmentation, demographic segmentation, psychographic segmentation
and behavioural segmentation are the most common segmentation variables by Philip Kotler.
The sources are recent and do not have a low acceptance or validation and so are proposals to
fill a gap. These sources have been used to discuss the different segmentation variables.
Gaston-Breton and Martin (2011) and Douglas and Craig (2010) are again very recent articles
and has a low acceptance and validation. Douglas and Craig (2010) is a study that provides a
framework to understand contextual factors as a means to refine entry strategy and develop
effective segmentation strategies. Gaston-Breton and Martin (2011) proposes a two stage
model of international market segmentation. These sources have only been used in our thesis
to understand Macro segmentation.
Cleveland et al, 2011) and Steenkamp (2001) have been used for micro segmentation.
Steenkamp (2001) has moderate acceptance and is well validated. Steenkamp (2001) reviews
and discusses the role of national culture in international marketing research, the frameworks
presented by Hofstede and the Schwartz. Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) is another very
dominating article that has used to explain micro segmentation and to explain behavioural
segments. It has further been used to elaborate more on how knowledge that is gathered
through time effect segmentation. Holbrook and Hirschman (1982)’s article have been highly
accepted and is well validated.
Wells (1975) article review has also been very important in understanding psychographics.
Wells (1975) is well accepted and well validated.
Hasan, Craft and Kortam (2003) introduce hybrid approach to global market segmentation,
which is a vital theory in the thesis. Hasan, Craft and Kortam (2003) has low amount of
acceptance but it is well validated and so it is an emerging theory. Though Amine and Smith
(2009) has a very low acceptance the source has been used to rationalize the concept of
standardisation and adaptation in other words hybrid segmentation. Cannon and Yaprak
17
(2011) have also been used as source for the integration of macro and micro segmentation.
This source has very low amount of acceptance but is thoroughly validated.
Weinberg, C. B. (1972) brings up the issue of changing market segmentation through time
half a century ago but it does not have any acceptance or validation. Holbrook and Hirschman
(1982) have also been reused to explain the dynamic aspect of segmentation. Later Quinn,
Hines, and Bennison (2007) propose that past facts can be used to predict market
segmentation patterns. Quinn, Hines, and Bennison (2007) theories have very low acceptance
but the theories are validated so they are emerging theories. Chin-Feng, 2002 brings up how
products attributes are reliable to study personalities and life styles. Chin-Feng, 2002 is
validated but has low acceptability.
18
2.8 Model, how the constructs relate
Figure 1: The Analysis Model for dynamic segmentation
This model shows the micro and macro segmentation styles. The model features the influence
of the different segmentation styles: micro factors are influenced by macro ones.
Geographic and demographic criteria influence the behaviour of customers and their
preferences. For instance, according to where they live and factors such as their purchasing
power will have different behaviours towards a product offer. Moreover those criteria also
influence their way of thinking towards a product and why they are buying it, their tastes and
preferences. Here, the demographic and geographic data help predicting a behaviour and
psychographics of a person.
The second possible view included in this model is the cascade from macro data, to
behavioural data and then psychographics. Here, the customer profile, so to say, the “why” a
customer buys, is explained by the “how” he purchases, itself explained by the macro data
that are the demographic and geographic sets of variables.
19
The model of analysis therefore includes a diverse set of criteria aimed at a complete
understanding of segmentation, and offers the possibility to predict eventual changes in
segmentation needs with the help of purchase-intention-oriented questions. This last aspect is
particularly important in an uncertain environment, such as the Chinese car market.
This kind of hybrid segmentation includes a dynamic aspect of the interaction between
several criteria influencing the individual and his surroundings. A good understanding of
one’s environment enables to see how one behaves in a specific situation (purchase decision
of a car) and how he can participate into an ever changing, revolving environment. The
authors will use this model in order to build the main profiles of customers on the Chinese
new car market, in the present and what they could be in the future.
20
3. Methodology
3.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the different stages of the research and how it has been used in the
thesis. The data collected derives from quantitative research, an online survey, which was
sent out to China. The authors presented a survey based cross tabulation to study
segmentation of the Chinese car market with a time aspect; they also included secondary data
from different time period to capture a dynamic view of the Chinese car market.
3.2 Population and sample

A population is all the people belonging to a group or a geographical area. A segment of the
population is chosen for research, when sampling is done. Bryman and Bell (2005) states, a
sampling frame is the total list of units who are a share of the population from which a
sample is derived. A convenience sample means that the people in it happens to be available
to the researcher, making it easier, cheaper and less time consuming than a probability sample
which demands more preparations (Bryman & Bell, 2005).
The population consists of students and people from all walks from China. Survey questions
were sent to various companies. The authors found list of China-based companies and
manufacturers; there were no specific choice criteria only they had to be from China. From
the list a lot of emails were invalid so they could not be reached. A major number of peoples
contacted emailed back that the thought the survey link was a spam, and they refused to
answer the survey. The authors have also contacted friends who are residing in China to
answer the survey. The authors have also contacted various universities asking if they could
help the authors circulating the survey within their universities. Unfortunately no
confirmation that the email had been dispatched further to the students has been received.
The authors have also tried approached Chinese individuals with the age group of 65 and
above, by trying to contact various nursing homes for elderly in China via email, but
unfortunately the authors were not able to contact them.
The authors believed that as the study was mainly based on car consumer preferences it was
best if respondents were chosen with a variation in income group, age group. In total 512
individuals have been contacted with the survey. They were also sent five reminders with a
four to five day interval.
21
Due to time restrain the authors had to close the survey with 89 respondents with a response
rate of 17.4%. As the survey was answered by individuals with a varied age and income
group and also from a scattered geographical location, the number of answers is judged
important enough to carry out an analysis.
3.2.1 Data collection method

Surveys can be conducted on paper or electronically. The respondents can answer
individually. The electronic survey is the most common research method today. (Bryman &
Bell, 2007).
The primary quantitative data collection was made via the online survey provider called
Keysurvey. This service provider is convenient to use and to collect data from, since it is easy
to export SPSS files. The SPSS file was ready to use directly in SPSS, the statistical program
used. The authors have used an email–marketing service called MailChimp to send out mass
emails, with this tool the distribution of the surveys was made more efficient than it would
have been, if it had been send out to each email, manually.
3.2.2 Questionnaire Design

Surveys are cheap and quick to administer, and the interviewer does not affect the answers
with their presence, no variation of the questions occur and they can be made when the
respondent has the time for it Bryman and Bell (2007). Bryman and Bell (2007) also pointed
out few disadvantages with surveys; Misunderstandings may occur, regarding what the
researchers are asking about, since the participants cannot ask the researcher directly.
Participants cannot ask follow-up questions, and it is difficult to ask many questions since
researchers risk losing the respondents’ will of participating.
Bryman and Bell (2007) suggested for getting a higher response rate it is important to have a
good introduction letter, where it signifies why the answers are important. Since participants
tend to skip questions it is also good not to have open questions. Closed questions may be
easier to analyse since the coding is easier. It can also be necessary to remind the participants
to answer. (Bryman & Bell, 2005) For their survey the authors had an introduction letter,
which explained shortly the structure of the survey and its purpose. The survey was both in
English and Chinese as the authors were looking for participants only from China. The
22
Chinese translation of the survey was done with the help of a Chinese friend, later the
language and simplicity of the language was reassured by two other Chinese individuals who
were profound in the language. The survey consisted of 16 questions with the simplest
language possible. The survey had mostly closed question. To study the psychographic and
behavioural segmentation the authors used likert scales.
3.3 Operationalization
Questions Theoretical Concept Motivation

Reference
1. Where do you (Beane and Ennis 1987); Geographic Helps segmenting the
live? (Kotler and Armstrong segmentation sample geographically.
- East Coast 2011); (Gaston-Breton and Macro Controls the respondent
- Central China and Martín, 2011); Segmentation to be only from China.
- North East China (Douglas and Craig, (control
- Western China 1982) variable)
2. What size is the (Beane and Ennis 1987) Geographic Refine the first question
city you live in? & (Kotler and Armstrong segmentation on geographical
-Municipality of 2011); (Gaston-Breton and Macro segmentation
China and Martín, 2011); Segmentation
- Sub provincial (Douglas and Craig,
level city 1982)
- Sub prefecture
level city
- Town, village
3. How old are you? Beane and Ennis (1987) ; Demographic Helps segmenting the
(age groups) (Cleveland, M. et al, segmentation sample by age
16-19 2011); (Wedel and and Macro This is also revealing a
23
20-34 Kamakura, 1998); Segmentation control variable to base
35-49 (Gaston-Breton and (control the analysis on and make
50-64 Martín, 2011); (Douglas variable) sense of the other results.
65 and above and Craig, 1982)
4. Gender: Beane and Ennis (1987) ; Demographic Tool to segment the

- Male (Cleveland, M. et al, segmentation sample by gender
- Female 2011); (Wedel and and Macro
Kamakura, 1998); Segmentation
(Gaston-Breton and
Martín, 2011); (Douglas
and Craig, 1982)
5. Annual Income Beane and Ennis (1987) ; Demographic This question is giving
- 30 000 to 46 000 (Cleveland, M. et al, segmentation an insight on the
- 46 000 to 87 000 2011); (Wedel and and Macro revenues available for
- 87 000 to 120 000 Kamakura, 1998) Segmentation the sample
- 120 000 to 163 .
000
- above
6. What factor do (Beane and Ennis 1987); Psychographic This question is divided
you think is the most (Holbrook and segmentation into a series asked in
important for most Hirschman 1982); and Micro order to know what
of the people: (Wells, 1975); (Kim and Segmentation purchasing factor is
- Safety Lee, 2011); (Steenkamp, currently the most
- Brand image 2001); (Gaston-Breton important for a Chinese
- Design and Martin, 2011); person.
- Fuel efficiency (Laroche, 2011)
- Quality
- Technology
- Affordability
- Comfort
- Chinese brand
24
7. How many cars (Beane and Ennis 1987); Psychographic For the experience?
have you bought? (Holbrook and segmentation
Hirschman 1982); and Micro
(Wells, 1975); (Kim and Segmentation
Lee, 2011); (Steenkamp,
2001); (Gaston-Breton
and Martin, 2011);
(Laroche, 2011)
8. Do you have a car Micro and This question is more of

now? behavioural a preparatory question to
segmentation) introduce the other
psychographic and
behavioural questions
8.1.1 How often do (Beane and Ennis 1987); Behavioural To determine the
you use your car? (Lancaster and Williams, and Micro frequency of use of the
- every day 2002); (Kim and Lee, segmentation car
-only on weekends 2011); (Steenkamp,
- less than once a 2001); (Gaston-Breton
week and Martin, 2011);
(Laroche, 2011)
8.1.2 You mainly (Beane and Ennis 1987); Behavioural To determine the sort,
use your car for: (Lancaster and Williams, and Micro type or nature of use of
- long trips 2002); (Kim and Lee, segmentation the car
- short trips 2011); (Steenkamp,
2001); (Gaston-Breton
and Martin, 2011);
(Laroche, 2011)
8.1.3 How often do (Beane and Ennis 1987); Behavioural To determine the
you change your (Lancaster and Williams, and Micro purchase frequency of
25
car? 2002); (Kim and Lee, segmentation car consumers in China.
- every year 2011); (Steenkamp,
- every 2 years 2001); (Gaston-Breton
- in between 2 and 5 and Martin, 2011);
years (Laroche, 2011)
- less than once
every 5 years
8.1.4 If you have (Beane and Ennis 1987); Psychographic Understanding the
ever owned a car, to (Holbrook and segmentation motivation for the last
what degree were Hirschman 1982); and Micro car purchase
the following items (Wells, 1975); (Kim and Segmentation
important when Lee, 2011); (Steenkamp,
purchasing it? 2001); (Gaston-Breton
- Safety and Martin, 2011);
- Brand image (Laroche, 2011)
- Design
- Fuel efficiency
- Quality
- Technology
- Affordability
- Comfort
- Chinese brand
8.1.4.1 Would you (Beane and Ennis 1987); Behavioural This questions the
buy your next car (Holbrook and and Micro loyalty of the respondent
for the same reason? Hirschman 1982); segmentation and the possibility that a
(Wells, 1975); (Kim and purchasing factor lasts in
Lee, 2011); (Steenkamp, time. It gives an
2001); (Gaston-Breton indication for dynamic
and Martin, 2011); segmentation.
(Laroche, 2011)
26
8.1.4.1.1 If you (Beane and Ennis 1987); Psychographic The question investigates
would buy a (Holbrook and segmentation on the possible change in
different car, what Hirschman 1982); and Micro the purchasing reasons
attribute would you (Wells, 1975); (Kim and Segmentation for car owners. It gives
consider the most Lee, 2011); (Steenkamp, an indication for
important for the 2001); (Gaston-Breton dynamic segmentation.
next purchase? and Martin, 2011);
- Safety (Laroche, 2011)
- Brand image
- Design
- Fuel efficiency
- Quality
- Technology
- Affordability
- Comfort
- Chinese brand
8.2 If you do not Behavioural This question prepares to

own a car, do you segmentation the next one and helps
plan to buy one in and Micro assessing the potential of
the future? Segmentation the demand.
8.2.1 If you plan to (Beane and Ennis 1987); Psychographic With this question, the
buy a car, to what (Holbrook and segmentation current non owner of a
degree would the Hirschman 1982); and Micro vehicle is taken in the
following items be (Wells, 1975); (Kim and Segmentation equation, and it
the most important Lee, 2011); (Steenkamp, questions his/her future
to you? 2001); (Gaston-Breton purchase motivation.
- Safety and Martin, 2011); It gives an indication for
- Brand image (Laroche, 2011) dynamic segmentation.
- Design
- Fuel efficiency
- Quality
- Technology
27
- Affordability
- Comfort
- Chinese brand
3.4 Data analysis method

The survey’s data was analysed with the use of the statistical computer PASW Statistics 18
from SPSS Inc. According to Bryman and Bell (2005), the process of deciding how to
analyse the data should be done while gathering it and not after the collection. The choice of
the kind of analyse and the variable choice are crucial. The authors chose the linear
regression analysis, with curve estimates in order to predict sets of variables for behaviours
and psychographics relying on the macro factors included in Demographics and Geographics.
The statistical significance is fixed at 10%, and all results found over this level will be
rejected.
3.5 Validity
Validity could be seen as the most important research criteria, validity is concerned with the
integrity of the conclusions which is generated from performing a research (Bryman and Bell
2007). Bryman and Bell (2007) categorises different types of validity which are typically
used for quantitative research:
 Measurement validity – is also referred to as construct validity. It essentially deals
with the fact, whether or not a measure that is formulated of a concept really does
reflect the concept that it is supposed to be representing. It is important to find
suitable measurements of terms which are stated in the research. Otherwise the
construct validity will be poor and the results questionable.
The authors used simple regression analysis to measure significant relations between
variables. Managerial decisions are often based on these (Anderson et al, 2002). The
questions that were constructed are linked to the theories, as shown in the
operationalization. The questions have been also translated in simple Chinese as the
focus is only on the Chinese car market.
 Internal validity – relates to credibility. This form of validity mainly relates to
causality. Whether a conclusion containing a causal relation is sustainable or not. If it
28
can be seen that it is one specific variable that affects another and makes it to vary,
and that it is not a third variable causing the effect.
This study is based on a single survey, and the relations of the variables are based on
that survey. With time the variations in the independent variable cannot be predicted.
So the internal validity is low.
 External validity – relates to transferability. It stresses whether the results of a study
can be generalized beyond the context at hand for the researcher.
The study is focussed only on China car market which gives it external validity.
 Ecological validity - stresses whether the results of a study can be applied in people’s
everyday life and their natural social context. The ecological validity might become
poor when using surveys, because they disturb the natural situation that the
participants are in.
As this study was based on an email survey, and the presence of the surveyor was
absent, the natural social context was not disturbed so the authors believe the study
consists of ecological validity.
3.6 Reliability and Replicability

Reliability is defined as whether a research would provide the same results if the research
would be done again, with other researchers but with the same circumstances as the original
researchers; that there were no random or temporary conditions in the original research. If the
measurement of the study is not reliable enough this may influence the results differently and
the results may be not reliable. Replicability can be described as, if the investigation of the
study is reproduced by another researcher to study the reliability of the original study.
Detailed explanation of the procedure of the original study must be provided. (Bryman &
Bell, 2007).
The motives and reasoning of the survey questions and the measuring instrument used in the
thesis have all been pointed out in the methodology section. All the steps have been
elaborated in the paper that leads the authors to the results. The authors believe that this
strengthens the study’s reliability and replicability. The authors also believe that if the study
is conducted by another researcher there would not be any major variations. The results have
not been affected by temporary or random circumstances.
29
30
4. Empirical Data
In this chapter the authors have used both descriptive statistics and simple linear regression to
estimate relationship between the variables.
Managerial decisions are often based on this relation. In regression terminology the variables
being predicted are called dependent variable. The variable or variables being used to predict
the dependent variable is called independent variable. Only the relations with significance has
been used in the study; the significant value has been set to sig<0.10. (Anderson et al, 2002)
All the regression tables have been presented in appendix B.
4.1 Geographic data:

When asked their residence region in China, the respondents mainly indicated to be living in
Eastern China. The other regions had far less represented but nevertheless equally mentioned
at around 10% each, whereas the people living in Eastern China amount 72.4% of the
responses. The region of residence is also a control variable in the study. (See Appendix
A.1.1)
The urbanisation rate is really high since it can be observed that 63.2% live in a Municipality
of China. Sub provincial level city, sub prefecture of China and village inhabitants
respectively amount for 11.49%, 17.24% and 8.05%. (See appendix A.1.2)
4.2 Demographic data:

In this part of the questionnaire, people are asked basic information about themselves: their
gender, age and annual incomes.
The results show that the survey reached both male and female respondents in a balanced
way. Women are slightly less represented with 45.98% of the responses whereas men
represent 54.02% of the sample. (See appendix A.2.1)
The 20-34 years old is the main age category reached by the survey with 68.7% of responses,
and is followed by the 35-49 years old age category. The youngest category, from 16 to 19
years old, is represented at 8.05% and the 60 to 64 years old at 4.6%. The oldest age category
31
that is above 65 years old shows no entry. Age is also the second control variable in the
study.
Concerning the question about incomes, the majority of respondents are earning very low
incomes for more than half of them: 34.48% have no incomes at all and 20.69% are in the
first category (10 000 to 30 000 Yuan a year). The other income categories are dispatched at
around 7% of the responses, except for the highest earners who responded for11.49% as well
as the 3rd highest earners (87 000 to 120 000 Yuan a year). (See appendix A.2.3.)
4.3 Behavioural data:

For the questions regarding consumer behaviour, the sample had to respond according to their
consumption habits, and answered questions in order to know if they currently own a car or
not, their level of experience with the purchase of cars, the frequency and style of use, their
replacement rate and their loyalty. For non-car owners, the respondents had to indicate if they
were planning to buy a car.
In the sample, most of the answers show that people do not have a car yet (64.37%), but that
they are very likely to buy one in the future: 93.59% of the respondents are thinking of
buying one. (See appendixes A.3.1. and A.3.2.)
The persons who answered the survey have not purchased many cars in their lives yet, and
can be considered as non-experienced as car purchasers with all responses showing that they
have bought less than four. Half of the sample has never purchased any car and 32.18% only
one. 10.34% have purchased two cars and 3.45% of respondents have bought three cars. (See
appendix A.3.3.)
For the car owners, the consumption style is clearly in favour of short daily trips. (See
appendixes A.3.4. and A.3.5.)
The respondents appear to be loyal to their car attribute since they would mainly make their
next purchase for the same reason. Only 22.58% would change their main car attribute for a
new purchase. (See appendix A.3.6)
32
67.92% of respondents mention that they would use their car a long time and buy a new one
after more than six years, and 22.58% in between 2 and 6 years. People replacing their car
within a short period of less than 2 years represent only 6.46% of the sample. (See appendix
A.3.7)
4.3.1 Customer behaviour explained by Geographic data

This part is dedicated to the following relation of the model:
Figure 2: Customer behaviour explained by Geographic data
Customer behaviour explained by region of residence (See appendix part B.1.1):

Experience is not significant (0.181), neither is frequency of use (0.173), long trips (0.558),
car replacement rate (0.709), and loyalty to attribute (0. 586).
The link between region of residence and short trips has an acceptable significance (0.093).
Customer behaviour explained by the degree of urbanization (See appendix part B.1.2):
None of the behaviours can apparently be explained by the degree of urbanization:
33
Experience is not significant (0.784) and neither frequency of use (0.293), long trips (0.97),
short trips (0.756), replacement rate (0.836) nor loyalty to attribute (0.776) has acceptable
significances.
4.3.2 Customer behaviour explained by Demographics:
Figure 3: Customer behaviour explained by Demographics
Consumer behaviour explained by age (see appendix part B.1.3.):

The statistical significances for the frequency of use (0.55), long trips (0.92), short trips
(0.615), replacement rate (0.937), and loyalty (0.442) are showing no clear relations.
Nevertheless, the experience of a driver appears significant (0.008).
Customer behaviour explained by the gender of the respondent (see appendix part
B.1.4.):
Experience is not significant (0.721), and nor are the frequency of use (0.945), long trips
(0.218), short trips (0.685) and replacement rate (0.101).
Loyalty towards the current car attribute is though significant (0.004).
34
Customer behaviour explained by incomes level (see appendix part B.1.5.):
Again, many behavioural variables cannot be explained by the income level due to
insufficient significance level: experience (0.195), long trips (0.29), short trips (0.14),
replacement rate (0.364), loyalty (0.391), are all over our maximum of 10%.
On another hand, the frequency of use is significant (0.039).
4.4 Psychographic data:
Figure 4: Customer psychographics explained by both macro data and customer behaviour
In this part, the psychographic side of the customer is explained by both the macro
dimensions that are demographics and geographic variables, and by the other micro
dimension that is customer behaviour.
In this type of questions, that is recurrent in the survey and filtered by behavioural answers,
the sample is investigated in terms of preferences for car attributes such as safety, brand
image, design, fuel efficiency, quality, technology, affordability, comfort, Chinese brand.
35
4.4.2 Respondent’s opinion on global preferences
The first question is about what the respondent thinks about the global preferences in China,
and the results show that safety (4.7/5 average) and quality (4.6/5 average) are rated as really
important by most of them. Then come fuel efficiency (4.1/5 average), comfort (4/5 average)
and technology (4/5 average) which are still very important but less than the two first
attributes. The design (3.8/5 average), affordability (3.7/5 average) and brand image (3.4/5
average) are rated averagely and finally, the fact that the car is a Chinese brand (2.1/5
average) is rated as non-important. (See appendix A4)
Respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences by age of the respondents (see appendixes

B.2.1.1 to B.2.1.9):
Seven out of nine psychographic variables cannot be explained by the age of the respondent:
safety (0.373), brand image neither (0.568), fuel efficiency neither (0.742), quality neither
(0.288), technology neither (0.833), affordability neither (0.628), Chinese brand (0.707).
 Design and comfort’s importance perception for the global market are the only
significant relations (respectively 0.006 and 0.014).
Respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences by gender of the respondent (see appendix

part B.2.2.1 to B.2.2.9):
The results fail to give an acceptable explanation of what the respondents think of others’
preferences according to their gender due to statistical significances higher than the limit
fixed by the authors: safety (0.297), brand image (0.135), design (0.346), fuel efficiency
(0.564), quality (0.839), technology (0.731), affordability (0.208), comfort (0.313), Chinese
brand (0.898).
Respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences by annual incomes (see appendixes B.2.3.1

to B.2.3.9):
The statistical significance for each variables being too high, the results could not be
considered valid and the respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences cannot be correctly
explained relying on the annual incomes of the respondents:
Safety (0.664), as well as brand image (0.605), design (0.9), fuel efficiency (1), quality
(0.731), technology (0.516), affordability (0.899), comfort (0.674), and even Chinese brand
(0.975) do not have valid statistical significance that would highlight a valid relation.
36
Respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences by region of residence (see appendixes
B.2.4.1 to B.2.4.9):
The same happens with people’s opinion on others’ preferences according to where they live
in China:
Safety shows no acceptable significance (0.352), nor brand image (0.502), design (0.194),
fuel efficiency (0.297), quality (0.268), technology (0.453), affordability (0.952), comfort
(0.551), and Chinese brand (0.555).
Respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences by degree of Urbanisation (see appendixes

B.2.5.1 to B.2.5.9):
All the psychographic variables cannot be related to the degree of urbanization due to non-
acceptable statistical significances:
Safety (0.237), brand image (0.786), design (0.114), fuel efficiency (0.433), quality (0.131),
technology (0.149), affordability (0.918), comfort (0.103).
 Only one psychographic variable, Chinese brand (significance = 0.060), can be
explained by the degree of urbanisation of the respondent.
4.4.3 Car owners’ current preferences

4.4.3.1 Car owners’ current preferences explained by demographics
For car owners, safety (4.7/5 average) and quality (4.6/5 average) are also the most important
reasons of purchase. Fuel efficiency (4.1/5 average) and comfort (3.9/5 average) appear to
have been important attribute for their last purchase as well. Technology (3.8/5 average),
design (3.7/5 average) and affordability (3.7/5 average) represent an average attribute for
them, which are rated as slightly more important than brand image. Chinese brand (2.4/5
average), once again, cannot be considered as a valid purchase reasons when looking at the
importance granted by the respondents. (See appendix A4)
Car owners’ preferences for their current car according to the age (see appendixes
B.2.1.10 to B.2.1.18):
The other variables are not exploitable:
Safety not significant (0.928), brand image (0.125), fuel efficiency (0.228), quality (0.586),
technology (0.830), affordability (0.277), comfort (0.193), Chinese brand (0.254).
37
 Design is an exploitable variable with a significance of 0.082.
Car owners’ preferences for their current car according to the gender (see appendixes
B.2.2.10 to B.2.2.18):
Safety is not significant (0.457) and cannot be treated, the same happens with the other
psychographic variables: brand image (0.862), design (0.772), fuel efficiency (0.165), quality
(0.712), technology (0.375), comfort (0.171), Chinese brand (0.610).
 The gender though, explains the perception of affordability for car owners
(significance for affordability is 0.084).
Car owners’ preferences for their current car according to their annual incomes (see
appendixes B.2.3.10 to B.2.3.18):
None of the psychographic variables can be explained with annual incomes for car owners:
Safety is not significant (0.253), and neither are brand image (0.233), design (0.972), fuel
efficiency (0.784), quality (0.253), technology (0.652), affordability (0.495), comfort (0.393),
and Chinese brand (0.966).
4.4.3.2 Car owners’ current preferences explained by geographic variables

Car owners’ preferences for their current car according to region of residence (see
The relation regarding car owners’ perception of safety and their region of residence is not
significant (0.250) and neither it is with their perception of brand image (0.347), the design
(0.148), the fuel efficiency (0.519), the technology (0.254), the affordability (0.667), the
comfort (0.281), or the fact a car is from a Chinese brand (0.394).
 The relation regarding car owners’ perception of quality and the region of residence is
significant (0.020).
Car owners’ preferences for their current car according to degree of urbanisation(see
Safety is not significant (0.924) and the significance of brand image (0.431), design (0.639),
fuel efficiency (0.319), quality (0.689), technology (0.408), affordability (0.696), comfort
(0.687) are also non-acceptable.
38
 Chinese brand is significant (0.090) and is the only significant relation with the degree
of urbanisation of car owners
4.4.3.3 Car owners’ current preferences explained by behaviours

Car owners’ preferences for their current car according to the frequency of use (see
Most of the variables cannot be used since they do not reach the 10% limit for statistical
significance that the authors imposed:
Safety is not significant (0.413), brand image (.568), design (0.897), fuel efficiency (0.393),
technology (.32), comfort (0.641), Chinese brand (0.641).
 But a relation in between affordability importance and the frequency of use by a car
owner can be observed (significance is 0.096), as well as a relation with the
importance of quality (significance is 0.021).
Car owners’ preferences for their current car according to the style of use: Long trips
(see appendixes B.3.5.10 to B.3.5.18):
comfort (0.152), and Chinese brand (0.648) cannot be explained by the behaviour variable
“Style of use: long trips” since their significance does not meet the standard of 10%.
 Nevertheless, technology is significant (0.01) and can be related to long trip drivers.
Affordability is significant too (0.012).
Car owners’ preferences for their current car according to the style of use: Short trips
Only one variable is having a statistical significance meeting the 10% standard, all the others
are higher:
Safety (0.521), brand image (0.481), design (0.5), fuel efficiency (0.823), technology (0.347),
affordability (0.125), comfort (0.547), Chinese brand (0.415).
 This significant relation shows a link in between quality perception for short trips
drivers (significance=0.022).
Car owners’ preferences for their current car according to the replacement rate (see
39
The majority of variables having higher statistical significance are therefore not highlighting
any acceptable relation:
Safety (0.323), design (0.439), fuel efficiency (0.898), quality (0.807), technology (0.236),
affordability (0.258), comfort (0.372), Chinese brand (0.396).
 Brand image is the only significant variable (0.039) enabling the observation of a
relation between its importance and the replacement rate of car owners.
4.4.4 Car owners’ preferences for their next purchase

When asked what importance they would grant to the different attributes for the next
purchase, car owners answered that, again, quality (4.5/5 average) and safety (4.7/5 average)
would be the most determining criteria. Then come comfort (4.1/5 average), fuel efficiency
(4/5 average) and technology (4.1/5 average). Affordability (3.8/5 average), design (3.8/5
average) and brand image (3.6/5 average) still appear important but less than the first
attributes. Chinese brand is not judged as important (2.6/5 average). (See appendix A4)
4.4.4.1 Car owners’ preferences for their next purchase explained by

Demographics
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to their age (see appendixes
B.2.1.19 to B.2.1.27):
Most of the variables cannot be related to the age of the respondent because of the
significance level:
Safety is not significant (0.40), brand image (0.147), design (0.148), quality (0.191),
 Age is a valid variable to explain the car owners’ preferences for the next purchase
(significance = 0.086).
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to their gender (see appendixes
B.2.2.19 to B.2.2.27):
None of the psychographic variables could be effectively linked to gender for the next
purchase by a car owner, statistical significances not being satisfactory:
40
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to their annual incomes (see
Eight variables could not be studied more since the significance is over the 10% rate:
Brand image (0.446), design (0.715), fuel efficiency (0.598), quality (0.36), technology
(0.868), affordability (0.808), comfort (0.83), Chinese brand (0.705).
 Only safety is meeting the 10% significance rate chosen by the authors (0.082). A
relation can thus be observed.

Geographic variables
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to their region of residence (see
There are still seven variables from which no relation can be drawn due to insufficient
statistical significance:
Safety (0.182), design (0.194), fuel efficiency (0.414), quality (0.502), technology (0.132),
affordability (0.929), comfort (0.464).
 The results from the survey indicate that there is a relation in between the region of
residence of a Chinese person and what how he would rate Brand Image and Chinese
Brand attributes for his/her next purchase. Brand image significance is 0.06 and
Chinese brand significance is 0.01.
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to their urbanization degree (see
Most of the variables do not meet the significance level of 10% and cannot be studied
meaningfully:
Safety (0.726), brand image (0.91), design (0.952), fuel efficiency (0.627), technology
 The urbanization degree of a respondent influences his/her preference level for quality
(significance = 0.052) when thinking about their next car.

customer behaviour
41
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to how often they replace their car
The frequency of replacement of a respondent’s car is not explaining any psychographic
variables:
Safety is not significant (0.363), and neither are brand image (0.158), design (0.35), fuel
efficiency (0.354), quality (0.535), technology (0.32), affordability (0.238), comfort (0.499),
and Chinese brand (0.114).
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to their level of experience (see
Safety (0.63), fuel efficiency (0.285), quality (0.282), technology (0.764), affordability
(0.118), comfort (0.553), and Chinese brand (0.591) cannot be related due to their non-
acceptable level of statistical significance.
 The level of experience of a driver who answered the survey is related to the
importance he grants to the brand image (significance = 0.008) and the design of their
next purchase (significance = 0.062).
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to the frequency they use their car
at (see appendixes B.3.3.19 to B.3.3.27):
The majority of the variables have a level of significance too high to be studied:
technology (0.337), comfort (0.1), Chinese brand (0.828).
 A relation in between the importance granted to affordability for the next purchase by
someone who has a car and the frequency to which the driver uses it can be built
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to their style of use: long trips (see
All but one variable have a level of significance too high to be studied:
Safety (0.647), brand image (0.276), fuel efficiency (0.594), quality (1), technology (0.776),
affordability (0.104), comfort (1), Chinese brand (0.87) are not passing the 10% significance
rate.
42
 One variable is surfacing as a preference that can be explained by the behaviour: long
trip style of use for the next purchase: design (significance = 0.098).
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to their style of use: short trips
Here are the variables having a level of significance too high to be studied:
technology (0.807), comfort (0.407), Chinese brand (0.725).
 A relation can be drawn in between a person using his/her car for short trips and
his/her preference for an affordable car (significance = 0.038).
Car owners’ preferences for their next car according to their loyalty towards car
attributes (see appendixes part B.3.7.):
Safety (significance = 0.83) having a statistical significance higher than the 10% fixed by the
others cannot be studied here. The other variables are in the same situation:
Brand image (0.385), design (0.414), fuel efficiency (0.975), quality (0.836), technology
4.4.5 Non-car owners’ preferences for their first purchase

Concerning respondents not owning yet a car, they will consider safety (4.8/5 average) and
quality (4.6/5 average) as the most relevant criteria when making their purchase decision.
Fuel efficiency (4.3/5 average), comfort (4.1/5 average), technology (4/5 average) and design
(3.9/5 average) would still be important but not as much as the safety and quality of the
vehicle they would chose. Affordability (3.8/5 average) and brand image (3.3/5 average)
would be of average concern and Chinese brand (2.4/5 average) would not be considered at
the time of purchase. (See appendix A4)
4.4.5.1 Non-car owners’ preferences for their first purchase explained by

Demographics
Non-car owners’ preferences for their next purchase explained with age (see appendixes
B.2.1.28 to B.2.1.36)
Most of the variables are not significant enough to be treated:
43
Safety (0.919), brand image (0.233), fuel efficiency (0.52), quality (0.215), technology
 The importance of design (significance = 0.056) for the next purchase by a non-car
owner, can be explained by the age of the respondent.
Non-car owners’ preferences for their next purchase explained with gender (see
appendixes B.2.2.28 to B.2.2.36)
The importance granted to the different possible attributes of a car by non-car owners cannot
be related to their gender. Indeed, safety is not significant enough (1), as are not the brand
image (0.452), the design (0.309), the fuel efficiency (0.709), the quality (0.783), the
technology (0.691), the affordability (0.324), the comfort (0.144) and the fact that a car is
Chinese (0.122).
Non-car owners’ preferences for their next purchase explained with annual incomes
(see appendixes B.2.3.28 to B.2.3.36)
The importance granted to the different possible attributes of a car by non-car owners cannot
be related to their annual incomes. Indeed, safety is not significant enough (0.626), and
neither are the brand image (0.168), the design (0.615), the fuel efficiency (0.664), the quality
(0.23), the technology (0.724), the affordability (0.427), the comfort (0.603), or the Chinese
branded car (0.599).

Geographic variables
Non-car owners’ preferences for their next purchase explained according to the
respondents’ region of residence (see appendixes B.2.4.28 to B.2.4.36)
 For their next purchase, a relation can be found according to which region Chinese
people live in and their preferences for brand image (significance = 0.02) design
(significance = 0.034), technology (significance = 0.016), and Chinese brand
Despite many variables being related with the region of residence, some cannot be explained
because of their significance level:
Safety (0.335), fuel efficiency (0.171), quality (0.944), affordability (0.804), comfort (0.207).
44
respondent’s degree of urbanization (see appendixes B.2.5.28 to B.2.5.36)
The relation with in between the degree of urbanization and the following preferences could
not be validated because of non-acceptable significance levels:
affordability (0.712), Chinese brand (0.469).
 Results show that there is a relation in between comfort (significance = 0.014) and
technology (significance=0.01) importance perception regarding the degree of
urbanisation of the non-car owners.

Customer behaviour
respondent’s level of experience (see appendixes B.3.2.28 to B.3.2.36):
The relation with in between the level of experience and the following preferences could not
be validated because of non-acceptable significance levels:
Safety (0.836), design (0.126), quality (0.566), technology (0.987), affordability (0.369),
comfort (0.586), Chinese brand (0.179).
 Nevertheless, the importance of brand image (significance = 0.013) and fuel
efficiency (significance = 0.07) for non-car owners is linked to their level of
experience.
4.5 Macro data for the dynamic aspect

The authors, in order to predict the dynamics of potential segments, chose to rely on macro
data used in previous researches and that theory suggests. The macro factors used are the
GDP per capita evolution in China, the age distribution, gender distribution, degree of
urbanization and region of residence trends. Those predictive elements will enable the
estimation of the size of the different segments found by the analysis of the empirical data
collected by the survey.
45
China GDP per capita from 1999 to 2020
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000 China
40,000 Expon. (China)
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21
Figure 5: China GDP per capita from 1999 to 2020
The data from Index mundi (2013-05-18) have been gathered until 2011 and the authors drew
an exponential trend line from the data available to predict the Chinese GDP per capita until
2020. The purchasing power of Chinese people is predictably rising exponentially for the
coming years. The age of Chinese people, the authors’ second prediction tool, is available
below on the Figure 6.
The population in age of driving, composed of the working age population and the elderly
population, is increasing, but also getting older. According to Booz & co. (2013-05-20), the
shift in this driving able population is happening between the population 25-44y.o and 45 and
above. The first category is going to decrease while the other one is going to increase.
Figure 6: Evolution of Chinese population’s age (Nomura, 2013-05-18)
46
As the Figure 7 suggests it, there are currently more men than women in China, but the
balance should stay the same until 2020.
Figure 7: Chinese gender repartition in 2010 and 2020 (U.S Census Bureau after
NationMaster (2013-05-20))
The urbanization rate is still on the way up in and by 2020, a switch should be seen in
between urban and rural populations.
47
Figure 8: Evolution of the degree of urbanisation in China (Stanford university, 2013-5-22)
Concerning the dynamic view on intern Chinese migrations, Central China is a major
departure place and many people living there are going to Eastern China. To some extent,
Western China is a region of destination, and North East China sees as much arrivals as
departures.
Figure 9: Inter-regional migrations (China data centre, 2013-05-20)
48
5. Analysis
In this part, the authors will deal with the empirical data relating it to the model of analysis in
order to make sense out of all the data collected.
5.1 Control Variables

The authors chose their first control variable as region of residence as the study is only
focused on the Chinese car market and the respondents are currently residing in China. The
majority of the respondents are from the east coasts of China and the rest three regions have
fairly distributed respondents.
The second control variable in the study is the age of the respondents. According to the
library of congress (2013-05-20) and DSAL (2013-05-20) the minimum age of working in
China is 16 for private jobs and 18 for working in public services. The minimum age for
getting a driver’s license is 18 (Inter Nations 2013-05-20). The authors therefor set the
minimum age of respondents from 16, choosing the minimum working age. As shown in the
diagram in the empirical chapter the authors were able to reach major part of the age groups,
this gives the authors a wide variety of age group to study. Though the 65 and older group
could not be reached, the authors believe this will not affect the study as the authors therefor,
simply excluded this age group while finding relations through simple linear regression
analysis.
The control variable in the study controls the respondents by age and region of residence in
China, thus strengthening the findings.
5.2 Hybrid Behavioural segmentation

The first part of the model is how the behaviour is explained by demographics and
geographic data. It is shown by the black circles in the Figure 61 below:
49
Figure 10: Behaviour explained by Macro data
Looking at the results, the macro data indeed influences the behaviour of people and hybrid
segmentation can be made in between D, G and B. The following patterns can be observed:
Chinese people living west travel less for short distances than the Chinese living Eastern.
The older the car user is, the more experienced they are concerning car purchases
Women are more loyal than men and tend to change their mind less than men from one
purchase to the next.
The higher incomes Chinese people have the less the respondents use their car.
5.3 Hybrid Psychographic segments

In this other part, product-specific psychographics are explained by both macro data from
demographics and geographic profiles, and by behaviours, relying on the time aspect: current
opinion or predictive opinion.
50
Figure 11: Psychographics explained by Geographic data, Demographics and Behaviours
Global perceptions of importance are merely explained by macro data. The results show that
the older the respondents are, the more they think that others do not care about design and
comfort when purchasing their car. The respondents think that the less a Chinese person is
urbanised, the more importance this person would grant to the fact that a car is under a
Chinese brand. To summarize, the product specific psychographics here are not going in a
positive way and people are expressing a decreasing importance of attributes consideration by
the market.
Concerning the preferences expressed by car owners, many more relations can be deduced
from their behaviour, geographic and demographic situation. As the age of the respondents
grows, the less they care about the design of their car. Affordability seems to be a more
feminine than masculine concern. The western a respondent lives the less importance he
grants to quality. The less urbanized the more the importance for Chinese brand is granted.
The respondents currently owning a car and using it often grant more importance to the fact
that a car was affordable when they purchased their car; they are also more concerned by the
51
quality of it. The more the respondents are having long trips, the less technology is
considered as important as attribute for his current vehicle. The more the respondents drive
for long trips, the less they have granted importance to affordability at the time they
purchased their car and when would prefer quality for short trips. The more often a
respondent replaces his/her car, the more he/her judges the brand image as an important
purchase factor.
Concerning the dynamic aspect included in the next purchase questions asked to car owners
the hybrid segmentation is giving a lot of relations: the older the respondent is, the more
importance he/she will grant to fuel efficiency for the next purchase. The higher income
he/she earns the more important safety is bound to be considered. The results from the survey
indicates that the western a respondent lives, the more he/she is going to take brand image
and brand image into consideration and the more urbanized, the more he/she would consider
quality as important. As a Chinese person is more and more experienced with car purchases,
he/she will bother less for brand image and design. The more he/she uses his/her car the more
important the more he/she will consider affordability. Concerning the type of use, long trips
are associated to an increased importance for design and short trips to an increased
importance of affordability.
The predictive market is also composed by the preferences of people who do not currently
own a car but plan to buy one in the future. The older someone who has no car is, the less
important design will be. The more Chinese people live in the West, the more they will grant
importance to the brand image, design, technology and Chinese brand. The more urbanized,
the more the non-car owner is going to judge technology and comfort as important for his/her
next purchase. People who do not currently have a car will tend to consider the brand image
as less important as they are experienced but would consider fuel efficiency as important.
5.4 Dynamic Hybrid Psychographic segments

If it is possible to put those hybrid psychographic segments in relation with available macro
data predictions, the authors should be able to show a dynamic aspect of the hybrid segments.
Chinese population is getting older, more urbanized, richer, and more concentrated in the
Eastern and Western parts of China, this is impacting the future importance of the product-
specific profiles found with the psychographic measurement above.
52
The profiles found can therefore be strengthened by those dynamics, their importance
growing up for the coming years.
6. Conclusion and discussion

Market segmentation has been very interesting area to study; especially as the focus was on
segmenting the emerging Chinese car market. China with its fast growing economy, and huge
population, made this study more interesting and challenging than if the authors focused on a
very predictable and well-known market.
With the help of hybrid segmentation; combining the macro and micro aspects of
segmentation, the authors were able to create behavioral and preferential profiles of the
Chinese car consumers. Only the relations with significant values, between the bases of
segmentation, were taken into account while all the relations with insignificant values were
discarded. The authors have been able to present the profiles according to its desirability.
In many cases, profiles identified by the study also anticipated the preferential demand of
potential car customers, who either have never bought a car or are planning to buy a car in the
near future. This helps having an insight of what the demand would look like in the near
future. The secondary data has also been used to find the way towards which the speech is
formulated: for example, as the Chinese population is getting older, the results are expressed
in this way and not towards a younger and younger Chinese population.
In terms of behaviour, Chinese people tend to have owned more and more cars but the rate of
usage gets lower. Western Chinese and Eastern Chinese differ in the fact that in the East
people use the car more for short trips and in the West for long trips.
In terms of preferences, here are the profiles found for each car attribute:
Safety:
Globally, safety is the most important criteria people consider and should stay the most
important. For their next purchase, car owners would consider it more important as they are
richer.
53
Quality:
Quality is the second most considered car attribute and is specially associated with current car
owners. The western car owners are from in China, the less they grant importance to quality.
The more often the use their car for short daily trips the more important they judge quality.
For car owners next purchase the more urbanised they are the more importance they will be
giving to quality.
Fuel efficiency:
Fuel efficiency is the third most considered car attribute and is a rising attribute for everyone
in China. Old car owners, experienced persons and non-car owners will consider this attribute
more important for their next car purchase.
Comfort:
Comfort is the fourth most considered car attribute and is associated with young urban
Chinese people. With age Chinese people think comfort is not a major public concern when
buying a car. For non-car owners next purchase the more they are urbanised the more comfort
is going to be important.
Technology:
Technology is the fifth most considered car attribute and seems attractive for western
urbanised people. Car owners using their cars mainly for long trips consider technology as
less important when driving a long time. For non-car owners’ next purchase the western they
live the more importance they give to technology and the more urbanised non-car owners are
the more importance they give to technology.
Design:
Design is the sixth most considered car attribute and its importance is globally decreasing as
it is related to the age of the Chinese people. Old Chinese individuals think people do not
consider design to be very important. They do think the same for their own car, so they
basically think that their judgement of the non-importance of design is shared by the market.
The more they are experienced the stronger this belief is for the next purchase.
For older non-car owners design is not going to be important for the coming purchase, and
design is not associated with long trips usage.
54
The western the Chinese people are situated the more they give importance to design.
Affordability:
Affordability is the seventh most considered car attribute and is supposed to grow for people
not using their car often in an urban environment. Women grant more importance to
affordability than men do when they have a car. The more often people use their car for short
daily trips the more importance they give to affordability, and the less they are using it the
less they will consider it for their next purchase.
Brand image:
Brand image is the eighth most considered car attribute and could be effective in Western
China for someone’s first car who intends to keep it. Chinese people who don’t change their
car often will grant less important to brand image. For the next purchase both car owners and
non-car owners from the west think that it is more important than in the east. The more
experienced people are the less important Brand Image will be for the non-car owners’ next
car.
Chinese brand:
Chinese brand is the least considered car attribute and is not globally important enough, but
would be effective for rural people of Western China. The more urbanised people are in
China, the less they are keen on Chinese brand when buying a car. And this belief is actually
observable in car owners’ preferences for their car. For both car owners’ and non-car owners’
next purchase, the western they live the more importance they give to Chinese brands.
7. Managerial implications, reflections, further research

7.1 Managerial implications
As the car market in China is literally booming, the preferences of car buyers change quickly,
and the market is really challenging to understand and anticipate.
The demand becoming higher, the Chinese car market is representing a crucial target for
manufacturers to make business on.
55
The profiles built are really precise and, depending on the positioning of the cars, the
manufacturer will be able to know how his business might evolve and might consider
marketing different types of cars if the demand is not showing any acceptable potential.
Since manufacturers build and market various types of cars, such as urban cars, SUVs or
sedan, the study can help them putting the highlight on special attributes of the type of car
according to the market preferences found.
The current demand is mainly oriented towards safety and quality as main attribute, and those
attributes are bound to stay a major preoccupation for Chinese people’s next car, and
constructors should adopt an attitude towards those attributes in order to reach the largest
current and potential targets. The Chinese people are also to use their car less often but the
float is still strongly growing.
Safety should absolutely be considered for luxury models.
Quality, technology and affordability should be emphasized, particularly for urban cars used
for short trips.
Fuel efficiency is a rising attribute for the next purchase and should be really considered for
any kind of behaviour.
Even though design is still important, it is going to be less and less important for Chinese
people, and reach the same levels as Brand image and Chinese brand, which are not major
concerns when buying a car, except in Western China.
From the profiles found, a typical car meeting the tastes of the demand can be imagined. This
ideal car would be built for short daily trips in an urban environment and prioritizing safety
and quality as major attributes. This car should also include a highlight on its fuel efficiency
since the future demand is going to consider it as important. The other aspects shall not be
neglected, but Chinese brand and Brand image seem not important to particularly emphasize.
Companies marketing cars on the market should have a car like this in their range. According
to trends, this type of car would be sold more and more.
56
The choice of positioning resulting after the segmentation is the car manufacturers’, and this
segmentation is helping them in the sense that, according to their strategy, they can have an
overview of what is realisable in China.
The managerial implications cited above can also help creating a specific strategy for the
Chinese market in order to reach a maximum of the demand. The segmentation process, if
made by the company itself, should follow the authors’ model in order to have the most
precise and valid profile possible. The preferences can be switched by the company’s core
competencies in order to have an insight of what it could achieve on the market with what it
mastered within the company. The profiles should nevertheless include demographic,
geographic, behavioural and psychographic data, as the model is built:
Figure 12: The hybrid segmentation model
7.2 Reflections
Working on the topic of car segmentation in China taught the authors a lot on segmentation
practices and gave them more experience in market research, this task eventually being a part
57
of their eminent career, after the master thesis. The study is thus a real plus and gives a
professional qualification.
The topic chosen also made them learn a lot about the car market in China.
Although the authors feel they could have had more answers from Chinese people, this is a
point that can be picked up for further research in order to obtain more validity from the
survey.
The study revealed itself very challenging and created strong links in the team carrying it out.
The team spirit has been submitted to a lot of pressure and the authors find a great
satisfaction in its resistance.
7.3 Limitations
Due to time restraints and in order to keep a precise focus, the authors did not take external
factors such as the influence of the Chinese government policies in the equation.
Also, the study is limited by the number of responses gathered, that could have been greater.
7.4 Future Research

As future research, authors should investigate points such as the influence of the Chinese
Government policies on the demand for cars, as it is assumed to be playing a major role and
could alter preferences.
58
59
References
Amine, L. S. and Smith, J. A. (2009), "Challenges to Modern Consumer Segmentation in a
Changing World: The Need for a Second Step", Multinational Business Review, Vol. -17,
Issue 3, pp. 71–100.
Anderson, D. Sweeney, D. and Williams, T. (2002), Statistics for business and economics 8e,
(pp 539-612). Ohio, South Western.
APCO, (2013-03-22) “Market Analysis Report: China’s Automotive Industry”. APCO
Worldwide, [Online]. Available at:
http://www.export.gov.il/uploadfiles/03_2012/chinasautomotiveindustry.pdf, Accessed:
2013-03-22.
Armstrong, G. and Kotler, P. (2011), Marketing: An Introduction, London, Pearson.
Autos Cars, (2013-03-22) “Automobile”. Autos Cars, [Online]. Available at:
http://autoscars.sexyi.am/index/automobile/?wiki-maping=[6], Accessed: 2013-03-22.
Beane, T.P. and Ennis, D.M. (1987), "Market Segmentation: A Review", European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. -21, Issue 5, pp. 20-42.
Bentley historical library, (2013-03-22) “Automotive History”. Bentley historical library
University of Michigan, [Online]. Available at:
http://bentley.umich.edu/research/guides/automotive/, Accessed: 2013-03-22.
Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2007), Business research methods, Oxford: Oxford university press.
Cannon, H. M. and Yaprak, A. (2011),"A dynamic framework for understanding cross-
national segmentation", International Marketing Review, Vol. -28, Issue 3, pp. 229-243.
China data center, (2013-05-20), “The Inter-Regional Migration in China”, China data center
University of Michigan, [Online]. Available at:
http://chinadatacenter.org/presentation/ChinaMigration.pdf Accessed: 2013-05-20.
Chin-Feng, L. (2002), “Segmenting customer brand preference: demographic or
psychographic”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. -11, Issue 5, pp. 249-268.
Cui, G. and Liu, Q. (2000), "Regional market segments of China: opportunities and barriers
in a big emerging market", Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. -39, Issue 4, pp.
652-669.
Douglas, S. P and Craig, C. S. (2010), "The role of context in assessing international
marketing opportunities", International Marketing Review, Vol. -28, Issue 2, pp. 150-162.
60
DSAL (2013-05-20), “Convention concerning Minimum Age for Admission to
Employment”, Driving license school of Louisiana, [Online]. Available at:
http://www.dsal.gov.mo/law/E138.htm Accessed: 2013-05-20.
Frank, R., Massy, W. and Wind, Y. (1972), Market Segmentation, Englewood Cliffs,
Prentice-Hall.
Gaston-Breton, C. and Martin, O. M., (2011), "International market selection and
segmentation: a two-stage model", International Marketing Review, Vol. -28, Issue. 3, pp.
267-290.
Grundy, T. (2006), “Rethinking and reinventing Michael Porter's five forces model”,
Strategic Change, Vol. -15, Issue 5, pp. 213-229.
Hassan, S.S., Craft, S. and Kortam, W. (2003),"Understanding the new bases for global
market segmentation", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. -20, Issue 5, pp. 446–462.
Holbrook, M. and Hirschman, E. (1982), “The Experiential Aspects of Consumption:
Consumer Fantasies, Feelings, and Fun”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. -9, Issue 2, pp.
132-140.
HSBC, (2013-03-22) “China: an ever-changing market”. HSBC global connection [Online],
Available at: http://globalconnections.hsbc.com/global/en/articles/china-ever-changing-
market, Accessed: 2013-03-22.
Indexmundi.com, (2013-05-18), “GDP – per capita (PPP) (US$)”, indexmundi.com, [Online].
Available at: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=ch&v=67, Accessed: 2013-05-18.
Inter Nations, (2013-05-20), “Traffic laws in China”, Driving in China, [Online]. Available
at: http://www.internations.org/china-expats/guide/driving-in-china-15632/traffic-laws-in-
china-2 Accessed: 2013-05-20.
Jiang, P. (2000), “Segment-based mass customization: an exploration of a new conceptual
marketing framework”, Internet Research, Vol-10, Issue 3, pp. 215-226.
Kotler, P. (1989), "From mass marketing to mass customization", Strategy & Leadership,
Vol. -17, Issue 5, pp.10–47.
Kotler, P. and Keller, K. (2009), Marketing Management, Upper Saddle River, Pearson
Prentice Hall.
Lancaster, G and Williams, I. (2002), "Consumer segmentation in the grey market relative to
rehabilitation products", Management Decision, Vol. -40, Issue 4, pp. 393-410.
Library of congress (2013-05-20), “Children's Rights: China”, Library of congress, [Online].
Available at: http://www.loc.gov/law/help/child-rights/china.php Accessed: 2013-05-20.
61
Library of congress (2013-03-22), “Everyday Mysteries”. Science Reference Services,
[Online]. Available at: http://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/mysteries/auto.html, Accessed: 2013-
03-22.
McKinsey (2013-03-22), “Upward Mobility: The Future of China’s Premium Car Market”.
McKinsey & Company, [Online]. Available at: http://www.mckinseychina.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/03/mckinsey-upward-mobility-the-future-of-chinas-auto-market.pdf,
Accessed: 2013-03-22.
NationMaster (2013-05-20), “Age distribution”, NationMaster [Online]. Available at:
http://www.nationmaster.com/country/ch/Age_distribution, Accessed: 2013-05-22.
Nomura (2013-05-18), Comments on China’s economic transition: Supply side,
Nomura Institute of Capital Markets Research [online].Available at:
http://www.nomurafoundation.or.jp/data/20121113_C_H_Kwan_Comment-PPT.pdf,
Accessed: 2013-05-18.
Pehrsson, A. (2006), “Business relatedness and performance: a study of managerial
perceptions”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol-27, Issue 3, pp. 265-282.
Quinn, L., Hines, T. and Bennison, D. (2007),"Making sense of market segmentation: a
fashion retailing case", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. -41, Issue 5, pp. 439–465.
Booz & co. (2013-05-20), “The eight overarching China automotive trends that are
revolutionizing the auto industry”, Booz & Company. [Online], Available at:
http://www.booz.com/media/file/The_Eight_Overarching_China_Automotive_Trends_en_pa
rt2.pdf, Accessed: 2013-05-22.
Steenkamp, J. B. E. M. (2001),"The role of national culture in international marketing
research", International Marketing Review, Vol-18, Issue 1, pp. 30–44.
Taehyun Kim, T. and Lee, H.Y. (2011), "External validity of market segmentation methods;
A study of buyers of prestige cosmetic brands", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45,
Issue 1/2, pp. 153-169.
The guardian (2013-03-22), “China and cars: a love story”. World news [Online]. Available
at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/14/china-worlds-biggest-new-car-market,
Accessed: 2013-03-22.
Wedel, M. A. and Kamakara, W.A.A. (2000), Market segmentation: conceptual and
methodological foundations, Massachusetts, Kluer Academic Publisher.
Weick, K. E. (1995), Sensemaking In Organizations, Thousand Oaks, Calif, Sage.
Weinberg, C. B. (1972),"The time sequence of events B a basis for market segmentation",
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. -6, Issue 1, pp. 60-63.
62
Wells, W.D. (1975), “Psychographics: A Critical Review”, Journal of Marketing Research,
Vol. -12, Issue 2, pp. 196-213.
West, D., Ford, J. and Ibrahim, E. (2006), Strategic Marketing: Creating Competitive
Advantage, Oxford, Oxford University Press
63
Appendix A
The Survey
Chinese Car Market Survey
Hello, we are two students living in Sweden and writing our master thesis. The purpose of this questionnaire is
to study the Chinese car market, and to determine its future in terms of preferences. We are going to ask you
basic information about yourself, your past experience with cars, what you would like now and in the future.
(您好，我们是两个住在瑞典的学生，在进行我们的硕士论文。这份问卷的目的，是为了研究中国汽车
市场，并尝试探讨以后市场的喜好。我们会问及到你的一些基本信息，你过去有关汽车的经验，和你对
现在和未来汽车需要或者想法。)
The survey takes about 5 minutes and is free of charge. The answers are anonymous.
(此调查卷大约需要5分钟。这个调查卷是以自愿和匿名的形式进行。)
If you have any question regarding our research, feel free to contact our tutor Anders Pehrsson
on anders.pehrsson@lnu.se or ourselves on as222za@student.lnu.se or is222eb@student.lnu.se.
(如果您对我们的研究有任何问题，请随时联系我们的导师安德斯Pehrsson anders.pehrsson@ lnu.se
或者我们 as222za@student.lnu.se或is222eb@student.lnu.se。)
Thank you in advance.
(致敬
感谢)
1. Where do you live? (您目前在中国的居住地属于哪个地区？)

o East coast (中国东海岸)
o Central China (中国中部)

o North East China (中国东北)
o Western China (中国西部)

2. What size is the city you live in? (您所生活的城市有多大？)
o Municipality of China (省级城市)
o Sub provincial level city (副省级城市)
o Sub prefecture level city (地级市)

o Town, village (镇，村)
3. How old are you? (您的年龄为？)

o 16-19
o 20-34
o 35-49
o 50—64
o Above 65(65岁及以上)
4. Gender: (您的性别为：)
64
o Male (男)
o Female (女)
5. Annual income (in Yuan)? (全年总收入（元）？)
o no incomes (没有收入)
o 10 000 to 30 000 (10 000至30000)
o 30 000 to 46 000 (30000至46 000)
o 46 000 to 87 000 (46 000至87000)
o 87 000 to 120 000 (87 000至120 000)
o 120 000 to 163 000 (120000 至 163000)
o above (163000以上)
YOUR OPINION (您个人的看法)
6. What factor do you think is the most important for most of the people? Please grade the following car
attributes from 1 (not important at all) to 5 (very important).
(对于大多数的人而言，你认为哪个因素是汽车最重要的？
请对汽车各个不同属性评分，从1-5分，（评分从低到高，1分为最不重要，5分为最重要）)
1 2 3 4 5
1 Safety (安全)
2 Brand image
(品牌形象/社会地位)
3 Design (设计)
4 Fuel
efficiency (燃油效率)
5 Quality (质量)
6 Technology (技术)
7
Affordability (负担能力)
8 Comfort (舒服性)
9 Chinese
Brand (中国品牌)
YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH CARS (您个人与汽车的经验)
7. How many cars have you bought? (你买过多少辆汽车？)

0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or more.
8. Do you have a car now? (你现在有汽车吗？)
Yes No
8.1.1. How often do you use your car?
65
o every day (每天)
o only on weekends (只在周末)
o less than once a week (每周少于一次)
8.1.2. You mainly use your car for : (您主要使用车的用途是：)
o long trips (长途旅行)
o short trips (短途旅行)

8.1.3. How often do you change your car? (你换新车的时间周期为多久？)
o Every year (每年)

o Every 2 years (每2年)
o in between 2 and 5 years (每2至5年)
o less than once every 5 years (每5年或者多于5年一次)
o less than once every 5 years (每5年或者多于5年一次)
8.1.4. If you have ever owned a car, to what degree were the following items important when
purchasing it? Please grade the following car attributes from 1 (not important at all) to 5 (very
important).
如果你曾经拥有一辆车，在购买的时候，根据不同项目对你个人的重要性不同，进行排列
和评分. 请对汽车各个不同项目评分，从1-
5分，（评分从低到高，1分为最不重要，5分为最重要).
1 2 3 4 5
1 Safety (安全)
2 Brand image
3 Design (设计)
4 Fuel
5 Quality (质量)
7
9 Chinese
8.1.4.1. Would you buy your next car for the same reason?
(你在购买你下一辆车的时候是会出于同样的原因吗？)
Yes No
66
8.1.4.1.1. If you would buy a different car, what attribute would you consider the most
important for the next purchase? Please grade the following car attributes from 1
(not important at all) to 5 (very important).
如果你曾经拥有一辆车，在购买的时候，根据不同项目对你个人的重要性不
同，进行排列和评分. 请对汽车各个不同项目评分，从1-
5分，（评分从低到高，1分为最不重要，5分为最重要)
1 2 3 4 5
1 Safety (安全)
2 Brand image
3 Design (设计)
4 Fuel
5 Quality (质量)
7
9 Chinese
8.2. If you do not own a car, do you plan to buy one in the future?
(如果你不拥有自己的汽车，你打算购买一台在未来？)
Yes NO
8.2.1. If you plan to buy a car, to what degree would the following items be the most important to you?
Please grade the following car attributes from 1 (not important at all) to 5 (very important).
如果你打算买一辆车，以下项目，请给予评分，评出他们在你购买的重要性占多少 . 请对汽车各个
不同项目评分，从1-5分，（评分从低到高，1分为最不重要，5分为最重要)
1 2 3 4 5
1 Safety (安全)
2 Brand image
3 Design (设计)
4 Fuel
5 Quality (质量)
67
7
9 Chinese
Survey emails
First email of the survey.
Dear Sir/Madam
亲爱的先生，女士
Hello, we are two students from Linnaeus university, Sweden,we are writing our master thesis. The purpose of
this questionnaire is to study the Chinese car market, and to determine its future in terms of preferences. We are
going to ask you basic information about yourself, your past experience with cars, what you would like now and
in the future.
(您好，我们是两个住在瑞典的学生，在进行我们的硕士论文。这份问卷的目的，是为了研究中国汽车
市场，并尝试探讨以后市场的喜好。我们会问及到你的一些基本信息，你过去有关汽车的经验，和你对
现在和未来汽车需要或者想法。)
The survey takes about 5 minutes and is free of charge.The answers are anonymous.
(此调查卷大约需要5分钟。这个调查卷是以自愿和匿名的形式进行。)
You can find our survey at this website: 您可以在这个网站上找到我们的调查问卷：

http://www.keysurvey.co.uk/votingmodule/s180/f/509482/9236/
If you have any question regarding our research, feel free to contact our tutor Anders Pehrsson
on anders.pehrsson@lnu.se or ourselves on as222za@student.lnu.se or is222eb@student.lnu.se.
(如果您对我们的研究有任何问题，请随时联系我们的导师安德斯Pehrsson anders.pehrsson@ lnu.se
Thank you in advance.
(致敬
感谢)
Adrien SAINT, Imran SYED
(阿德里安·SAINT，赛义德伊姆兰)
The second survey email after an interval of 4 to 5 days
亲爱的先生，女士
68
您好，我们是两个住在瑞典的学生，在进行我们的硕士论文。这份问卷的目的，是为了研究中国汽车市
场，并尝试探讨以后市场的喜好。我们会问及到你的一些基本信息，你过去有关汽车的经验，和你对现
在和未来汽车需要或者想法。
此调查卷大约需要5分钟。这个调查卷是以自愿和匿名的形式进行。
您可以在这个网站上找到我们的调查问卷：
(如果您对我们的研究有任何问题，请随时联系我们的导师安德斯Pehrsson anders.pehrsson@lnu.se
致敬
感谢
阿德里安•SAINT，赛义德伊姆兰
Dear Sir/Madam,
We are two marketing students from Linnaeus University, Sweden. We are at present writing our master thesis
about the car market segmentation in China. Therefore we would like to ask you few questions. The purpose of
this questionnaire is to study the Chinese car market, and to determine its future in terms of preferences. We are
going to ask you basic information about yourself, your past experience with cars, what you would like now and
in the future.
The survey takes about 5 minutes and is free of charge. The answers are anonymous. We would very much like
if you could kindly help us with our survey by answering the survey yourself and if could also please forward
this message to your respectable colleagues.
You can find our survey at this website:
If you have any question regarding our research, feel free to contact us at as222za@student.lnu.se. or
is222eb@student.lnu.se. You can also verify us with our tutor, professor Anders Pehrsson at
anders.pehrsson@lnu.se.
Thanking you in advance.

With Best Regards
Imran SYED &
Adrien SAINT
69
The third survey email (This email was later sent out four more times with an interval of 4 to 5 days)
Respectable sir/madam,
We are two marketing students from Linnaeus University, Sweden. We are at present writing our master thesis
about the car market segmentation in China. Therefore with your permission we would like to ask you few
questions. The purpose of this questionnaire is to study the Chinese car market, and to determine its future in
terms of preferences. We are going to ask some basic information about your experience with cars; what you
would like now and in the future.
The survey takes about 5 minutes and is free of charge. The answers are anonymous. We would very grateful if
you could kindly help us with our survey by answering the survey. Also if you could forward this survey to your
respectable colleagues.
You can find our survey at this website:

If you have any question regarding our research, feel free to contact us atas222za@student.lnu.se.
or is222eb@student.lnu.se. You can also verify us with our tutor, professor Anders Pehrsson
at anders.pehrsson@lnu.se.
Thanking you in advance.

With Best Regards.
Imran SYED &

Adrien Saint
--------------------------
可敬的先生/女士*,
我们是两个营销学生从瑞典林奈大学。目前,我们写我们的硕士论文关于汽车在中国市场分割。因此如
果你允许我们想问你几个问题。此问卷的目的是研究中国汽车市场,并确定其未来方面的偏好。我们要
问自己一些基本信息,你过去的经历与汽车;你想在现在和未来。
调查大约需要5分钟,是免费的。答案是匿名的。我们会很感激如果你可以请帮助我们与我们的调查回答
调查。而且如果你能把这个调查你的可敬的同事。
你可以找到我们的调查在这个网站用蓝色标示:
如果你有任何问题关于我们的研究,随时联系我们 as222za@student.lnu.se 或 is222eb@student.lnu.se.
70
你也可以验证我们导师,教授安德斯Pehrsson在 anders.pehrsson@lnu.se.
提前感谢你。
此致敬礼。
Imran SYED &
Adrien Saint
Descriptive statistics
A.1 Geographic data
A.1.1 Region of residence repartition of the sample
A.2.2 Urbanization of the sample
A.2 Demographic data

A.2.1 Gender repartition of the sample
71
A.2.2 Age repartition of the sample
A.2.3 Annual income repartition of the sample
A.3 Behavioural data

A.3.1. Car owners repartition
72
A.3.2. Potential from non-car owners
A.3.3. Experience of respondents
A.3.4 Frequency of use
A.3.5. Style of use
73
A.3.6. Loyalty to attribute
A.3.7 Replacement rate
A.4 Psychographic data : table of average attributes importances
Statistiques descriptives
N Minimum Maximum Moyenne Ecart type
6. Perception of Global
89 1.00 5.00 4.6854 .76270
Importance of Safety
89 1.00 5.00 3.3820 1.07138
Importance of Brand image
89 1.00 5.00 3.7865 .89788
Importance of Design
74
Importance of Fuel 89 1.00 5.00 4.1236 .92712
efficiency
89 1.00 5.00 4.6067 .71697
Importance of Quality
89 1.00 5.00 4.0449 .82448
Importance of Technology
89 1.00 5.00 3.6517 .97818
Importance of Affordability
89 1.00 5.00 4.0225 .90425
Importance of Comfort
Importance of Chinese 89 1.00 5.00 2.1461 1.05044
Brand
8.1.4 Importance of Safety
32 2.00 5.00 4.6875 .64446
for car owners
8.1.4 Importance of Brand
32 1.00 5.00 3.3438 .90195
image for car owners
8.1.4 Importance of Design
32 1.00 5.00 3.6563 .93703
for car owners
8.1.4 Importance of Fuel
32 2.00 5.00 4.0937 .85607
Efficiency for car owners
8.1.4 Importance of Quality
32 1.00 5.00 4.5938 .83702
for car owners
8.1.4 Importance of
32 1.00 5.00 3.8125 1.06066
Technology for car owners
8.1.4 Importance of
32 1.00 5.00 3.5000 1.27000
Affordability for car owners
8.1.4 Importance of
32 1.00 5.00 3.9063 1.05828
Comfort for car owners
8.1.4 Importance of
Chinese Brand for car 30 1.00 5.00 2.4333 1.19434
owners
8.1.4.1.1 Importance of
Safety for the next purchase 32 2.00 5.00 4.6875 .64446
by car owners
Brand Image for the next 32 1.00 5.00 3.5625 .91361
purchase by car owners
75
Design for the next 31 1.00 5.00 3.8387 .86011
Fuel Efficiency for the next 32 1.00 5.00 4.0313 .93272
Quality for the next 32 2.00 5.00 4.5312 .84183
Technology for the next 32 1.00 5.00 4.1250 .87067
Affordability for the next 32 1.00 5.00 3.7500 1.19137
Comfort for the next 31 1.00 5.00 4.1290 .95715
Chinese Brand for the next 32 1.00 5.00 2.5938 1.24069
8.2.1 Importance of Safety
for non car owners for their 83 1.00 5.00 4.7831 .64483
next purchase
8.2.1 Importance of Brand
Image for non car owners 83 1.00 5.00 3.3253 1.11649
for their next purchase
8.2.1 Importance of Design
next purchase
8.2.1 Importance of Fuel
Efficiency for non car
83 2.00 5.00 4.3133 .76394
owners for their next
purchase
8.2.1 Importance of Quality
next purchase
76
8.2.1 Importance of
Technology for non car
83 1.00 5.00 4.0000 .91064
purchase
8.2.1 Importance of
Affordability for non car
82 1.00 5.00 3.8049 1.02366
purchase
8.2.1 Importance of
Comfort for non car owners 80 1.00 5.00 4.1375 .97752
for their next purchase
8.2.1 Importance of
Chinese Car for non car
82 1.00 5.00 2.4146 1.11057
purchase
N valide (listwise) 21
Appendix B
Linear regression analysis and linear curve estimates
B.1. Customer behaviour explained by Geographic and Demographic data

B.1.1. Region of residence
B.1.1.1. Number of cars owned (Experience)

Model Summary
R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the
Estimate
.243 .059 .028 .751
The independent variable is 1. Region of Residence.
ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 1.061 1 1.061 1.880 .181
Residual 16.939 30 .565
Total 18.000 31
B.1.1.2. Frequency of Use
77
Model Summary
Estimate
.247 .061 .030 .650
ANOVA
Regression .824 1 .824 1.949 .173
Residual 12.676 30 .423
Total 13.500 31
B.1.1.3. Style of use: Long trips

Model Summary
Estimate
.108 .012 -.021 .424
ANOVA
Regression .063 1 .063 .351 .558
Residual 5.406 30 .180
Total 5.469 31
B.1.1.4. Style of Use: Short trips

Model Summary
Estimate
.302 .091 .061 .326
ANOVA
Regression .318 1 .318 3.001 .093
Residual 3.182 30 .106
Total 3.500 31
78
B.1.1.5. Car replacement rate
Model Summary
Estimate
.069 .005 -.028 .717
ANOVA
Regression .073 1 .073 .142 .709
Residual 15.427 30 .514
Total 15.500 31
B.1.1.6. Buying the next car for the same reason (Loyalty attributes)
Model Summary
Estimate
.100 .010 -.023 .445
ANOVA
Regression .060 1 .060 .304 .586
Residual 5.940 30 .198
Total 6.000 31
79
B.1.2. Degree of urbanisation.

Model Summary
Estimate
.050 .003 -.031 .774
The independent variable is 2. Degree of Urbanisation.
ANOVA
Regression .046 1 .046 .076 .784
Residual 17.954 30 .598
Total 18.000 31

Model Summary
Estimate
.192 .037 .005 .658
ANOVA
Regression .497 1 .497 1.147 .293
Residual 13.003 30 .433
Total 13.500 31

Model Summary
Estimate
.007 .000 -.033 .427
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .001 .970
80
Residual 5.468 30 .182
Total 5.469 31

Model Summary
Estimate
.057 .003 -.030 .341
ANOVA
Regression .011 1 .011 .098 .756
Residual 3.489 30 .116
Total 3.500 31

Model Summary
Estimate
.038 .001 -.032 .718
ANOVA
Regression .022 1 .022 .043 .836
Residual 15.478 30 .516
Total 15.500 31
Model Summary
Estimate
.052 .003 -.031 .447
ANOVA
81
Regression .016 1 .016 .082 .776
Residual 5.984 30 .199
Total 6.000 31
B.1.3. Behaviour by age

Model Summary
Estimate
.461 .213 .186 .687
The independent variable is 3. Age.
ANOVA
Regression 3.828 1 3.828 8.103 .008
Residual 14.172 30 .472
Total 18.000 31
Model Summary
82
Estimate
.110 .012 -.021 .667
ANOVA
Regression .162 1 .162 .365 .550
Residual 13.338 30 .445
Total 13.500 31
Model Summary
Estimate
.018 .000 -.033 .427
ANOVA
Regression .002 1 .002 .010 .920
Residual 5.467 30 .182
Total 5.469 31
B.1.3.4.Style of Use: Short trips
Model Summary
Estimate
.092 .009 -.025 .340
ANOVA
Regression .030 1 .030 .258 .615
Residual 3.470 30 .116
Total 3.500 31
Model Summary
Estimate
83
.015 .000 -.033 .719
ANOVA
Regression .003 1 .003 .006 .937
Residual 15.497 30 .517
Total 15.500 31
B.1.3.6. Buying the next car for the same reason (loyalty attributes)
Model Summary
Estimate
.141 .020 -.013 .443
ANOVA
Regression .119 1 .119 .608 .442
Residual 5.881 30 .196
Total 6.000 31
B.1.4. Behaviour by Gender

Model Summary
Estimate
.066 .004 -.029 .773
The independent variable is 4. Gender.
ANOVA
Regression .078 1 .078 .130 .721
Residual 17.922 30 .597
Total 18.000 31
Model Summary
84
Estimate
.013 .000 -.033 .671
ANOVA
Regression .002 1 .002 .005 .945
Residual 13.498 30 .450
Total 13.500 31
Model Summary
Estimate
.224 .050 .018 .416
ANOVA
Regression .274 1 .274 1.582 .218
Residual 5.195 30 .173
Total 5.469 31
Model Summary
Estimate
.075 .006 -.028 .341
ANOVA
Regression .019 1 .019 .168 .685
Residual 3.481 30 .116
Total 3.500 31
Model Summary
Estimate
85
.295 .087 .057 .687
ANOVA
Regression 1.353 1 1.353 2.869 .101
Residual 14.147 30 .472
Total 15.500 31
B.1.4.7. Buying the next car for the same reason (loyalty attributes)
Model Summary
Estimate
.494 .244 .219 .389
ANOVA
Regression 1.463 1 1.463 9.676 .004
Residual 4.537 30 .151
Total 6.000 31
Coefficients
Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
4. Gender .450 .145 .494 3.111 .004
(Constant) .645 .206 3.127 .004
86
B.1.5. Behaviour according to annual income

Model Summary
Estimate
.235 .055 .024 .753
The independent variable is 5. Annual income (in Yuan).
ANOVA
Regression .997 1 .997 1.759 .195
Residual 17.003 30 .567
Total 18.000 31
Model Summary
Estimate
.366 .134 .105 .624
ANOVA
Regression 1.807 1 1.807 4.635 .039
87
Residual 11.693 30 .390
Total 13.500 31

Model Summary
Estimate
.193 .037 .005 .419
ANOVA
Regression .204 1 .204 1.160 .290
Residual 5.265 30 .176
Total 5.469 31
Model Summary
Estimate
.267 .071 .040 .329
ANOVA
88
Regression .249 1 .249 2.300 .140
Residual 3.251 30 .108
Total 3.500 31
Model Summary
Estimate
.166 .028 -.005 .709
ANOVA
Regression .426 1 .426 .848 .364
Residual 15.074 30 .502
Total 15.500 31
Model Summary
Estimate
.157 .025 -.008 .442
ANOVA
Regression .147 1 .147 .756 .391
Residual 5.853 30 .195
Total 6.000 31
B.2. Psychographic data by Demographic and Geographic

B.2.1. Psychographs by age
B.2.1.1. Perception of Global Importance of Safety

Model Summary
Estimate
.205 .042 -.008 .580
89
ANOVA
Regression .280 1 .280 .833 .373
Residual 6.387 19 .336
Total 6.667 20
B.2.1.2. Perception of Global Importance of Brand image
Model Summary
Estimate
.132 .017 -.034 1.041
ANOVA
Regression .366 1 .366 .338 .568
Residual 20.587 19 1.084
Total 20.952 20
B.2.1.3. Perception of Global Importance of Design
Model Summary
Estimate
.575 .330 .295 .803
ANOVA
Regression 6.036 1 6.036 9.362 .006
Residual 12.250 19 .645
Total 18.286 20
90
B.2.1.4. Perception of Global Importance of Fuel efficiency
Model Summary
Estimate
.076 .006 -.046 .792
ANOVA
Regression .070 1 .070 .111 .742
Residual 11.930 19 .628
Total 12.000 20
B.2.1.5. Perception of Global Importance of Quality
Model Summary
Estimate
.243 .059 .010 .727
ANOVA
Regression .630 1 .630 1.193 .288
Residual 10.037 19 .528
Total 10.667 20
91
B.2.1.6. Perception of Global Importance of Technology
Model Summary
Estimate
.049 .002 -.050 .886
ANOVA
Regression .036 1 .036 .045 .833
Residual 14.917 19 .785
Total 14.952 20
B.2.1.7. Perception of Global Importance of Affordability
Model Summary
Estimate
.112 .013 -.039 1.227
ANOVA
Regression .366 1 .366 .243 .628
Residual 28.587 19 1.505
Total 28.952 20
B.2.1.8. Perception of Global Importance of Comfort
Model Summary
Estimate
.529 .280 .242 .779
ANOVA
Regression 4.480 1 4.480 7.389 .014
Residual 11.520 19 .606
Total 16.000 20
92
B.2.1.9. Perception of Global Importance of Chinese Brand
Model Summary
Estimate
.087 .008 -.045 1.186
ANOVA
Regression .206 1 .206 .146 .707
Residual 26.747 19 1.408
Total 26.952 20
B.2.1.10. Importance of Safety for car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.021 .000 -.052 .413
ANOVA
Regression .001 1 .001 .008 .928
Residual 3.237 19 .170
Total 3.238 20
93
B.2.1.11. Importance of Brand image for car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.345 .119 .073 .825
ANOVA
Regression 1.750 1 1.750 2.574 .125
Residual 12.917 19 .680
Total 14.667 20
B.2.1.12. Importance of Design for car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.388 .151 .106 .968
ANOVA
Regression 3.156 1 3.156 3.369 .082
Residual 17.797 19 .937
Total 20.952 20
94
B.2.1.13. Importance of Fuel Efficiency for car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.275 .076 .027 .758
ANOVA
Regression .893 1 .893 1.554 .228
Residual 10.917 19 .575
Total 11.810 20
B.2.1.14. Importance of Quality for car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.126 .016 -.036 .410
ANOVA
Regression .051 1 .051 .307 .586
Residual 3.187 19 .168
Total 3.238 20
95
B.2.1.15. Importance of Technology for car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.050 .002 -.050 1.039
ANOVA
Regression .051 1 .051 .048 .830
Residual 20.520 19 1.080
Total 20.571 20
B.2.1.16. Importance of Affordability for car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.249 .062 .012 1.317
ANOVA
Regression 2.173 1 2.173 1.252 .277
Residual 32.970 19 1.735
Total 35.143 20
B.2.1.17. Importance of Comfort for car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.296 .088 .039 .980
ANOVA
Regression 1.750 1 1.750 1.822 .193
Residual 18.250 19 .961
Total 20.000 20
B.2.1.18. Importance of Chinese Brand for car owners
96
Model Summary
Estimate
.261 .068 .019 1.156
ANOVA
Regression 1.851 1 1.851 1.386 .254
Residual 25.387 19 1.336
Total 27.238 20
B.2.1.19. Importance of Safety for the next purchase by car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.194 .037 -.013 .439
ANOVA
Regression .143 1 .143 .740 .400
Residual 3.667 19 .193
Total 3.810 20
B.2.1.20. Importance of Brand Image for the next purchase by car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.328 .107 .060 .900
ANOVA
Regression 1.851 1 1.851 2.286 .147
Residual 15.387 19 .810
Total 17.238 20
B.2.1.21. Importance of Design for the next purchase by car owners

Model Summary
97
Estimate
.327 .107 .060 .927
ANOVA
Regression 1.956 1 1.956 2.275 .148
Residual 16.330 19 .859
Total 18.286 20
B.2.1.22. Importance of Fuel Efficiency for the next purchase by car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.383 .147 .102 .710
ANOVA
Regression 1.651 1 1.651 3.273 .086
Residual 9.587 19 .505
Total 11.238 20
98
B.2.1.23. Importance of Quality for the next purchase by car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.297 .088 .040 .780
ANOVA
Regression 1.120 1 1.120 1.843 .191
Residual 11.547 19 .608
Total 12.667 20
B.2.1.24. Importance of Technology for the next purchase by car owners

Model Summary
Estimate
.048 .002 -.050 .718
ANOVA
Regression .023 1 .023 .044 .835
Residual 9.787 19 .515
Total 9.810 20
B.2.1.25. Importance of Affordability for the next purchase by car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.153 .023 -.028 1.288
ANOVA
Regression .756 1 .756 .455 .508
Residual 31.530 19 1.659
Total 32.286 20
B.2.1.26. Importance of Comfort for the next purchase by car owners
99
Model Summary
Estimate
.162 .026 -.025 .739
ANOVA
Regression .280 1 .280 .512 .483
Residual 10.387 19 .547
Total 10.667 20
B.2.1.27. Importance of Chinese Brand for the next purchase by car owners
Model Summary
Estimate
.069 .005 -.048 1.250
ANOVA
Regression .143 1 .143 .091 .766
Residual 29.667 19 1.561
Total 29.810 20
B.2.1.28. Importance of Safety for non-car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Estimate
.024 .001 -.052 .368
ANOVA
Regression .001 1 .001 .011 .919
Residual 2.570 19 .135
Total 2.571 20
B.2.1.29. Importance of Brand Image for non-car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
100
Estimate
.272 .074 .025 .983
ANOVA
Regression 1.463 1 1.463 1.515 .233
Residual 18.347 19 .966
Total 19.810 20
B.2.1.29. Importance of Design for non-car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Estimate
.423 .179 .135 .688
ANOVA
Regression 1.956 1 1.956 4.130 .056
Residual 8.997 19 .474
Total 10.952 20
B.2.1.30. Importance of Fuel Efficiency for non-car owners for their next purchase
101
Model Summary
Estimate
.149 .022 -.029 .807
ANOVA
Regression .280 1 .280 .429 .520
Residual 12.387 19 .652
Total 12.667 20
B.2.1.32. Importance of Quality for non-car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Estimate
.282 .080 .031 .530
ANOVA
Regression .463 1 .463 1.645 .215
Residual 5.347 19 .281
Total 5.810 20
B.2.1.33. Importance of Technology for non-car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Estimate
.248 .062 .012 .745
ANOVA
Regression .691 1 .691 1.246 .278
Residual 10.547 19 .555
Total 11.238 20
B.2.1.34. Importance of Affordability for non-car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
102
Estimate
.270 .073 .024 1.206
ANOVA
Regression 2.173 1 2.173 1.494 .237
Residual 27.637 19 1.455
Total 29.810 20
B.2.1.35. Importance of Comfort for non-car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Estimate
.364 .133 .087 .998
ANOVA
Regression 2.893 1 2.893 2.906 .105
Residual 18.917 19 .996
Total 21.810 20
B.2.1.36. Importance of Chinese Car for non-car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Estimate
.294 .087 .039 1.070
ANOVA
Regression 2.063 1 2.063 1.802 .195
Residual 21.747 19 1.145
Total 23.810 20
B.2.2. Psychographs by gender.
103
Model Summary
R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the
Square Estimate
.239 .057 .008 .575
ANOVA
Regression .381 1 .381 1.152 .297
Residual 6.286 19 .331
Total 6.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.337 .114 .067 .989
ANOVA
Regression 2.381 1 2.381 2.436 .135
Residual 18.571 19 .977
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.217 .047 -.003 .958
ANOVA
Regression .857 1 .857 .934 .346
Residual 17.429 19 .917
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
104
Square Estimate
.134 .018 -.034 .788
ANOVA
Regression .214 1 .214 .345 .564
Residual 11.786 19 .620
Total 12.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.047 .002 -.050 .748
ANOVA
Regression .024 1 .024 .043 .839
Residual 10.643 19 .560
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.080 .006 -.046 .884
ANOVA
Regression .095 1 .095 .122 .731
Residual 14.857 19 .782
Total 14.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
105
.287 .082 .034 1.183
ANOVA
Regression 2.381 1 2.381 1.703 .208
Residual 26.571 19 1.398
Total 28.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.231 .054 .004 .893
ANOVA
Regression .857 1 .857 1.075 .313
Residual 15.143 19 .797
Total 16.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.030 .001 -.052 1.191
ANOVA
Regression .024 1 .024 .017 .898
Residual 26.929 19 1.417
Total 26.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.171 .029 -.022 .407
106
ANOVA
Regression .095 1 .095 .576 .457
Residual 3.143 19 .165
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.040 .002 -.051 .878
ANOVA
Regression .024 1 .024 .031 .862
Residual 14.643 19 .771
Total 14.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.067 .005 -.048 1.048
ANOVA
Regression .095 1 .095 .087 .772
Residual 20.857 19 1.098
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.314 .099 .051 .748
ANOVA
107
Regression 1.167 1 1.167 2.083 .165
Residual 10.643 19 .560
Total 11.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.086 .007 -.045 .411
ANOVA
Regression .024 1 .024 .141 .712
Residual 3.214 19 .169
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.204 .042 -.009 1.019
ANOVA
Regression .857 1 .857 .826 .375
Residual 19.714 19 1.038
Total 20.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.390 .152 .108 1.252
ANOVA
Regression 5.357 1 5.357 3.417 .080
Residual 29.786 19 1.568
108
Total 35.143 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.311 .096 .049 .975
ANOVA
Regression 1.929 1 1.929 2.028 .171
Residual 18.071 19 .951
Total 20.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.118 .014 -.038 1.189
ANOVA
Regression .381 1 .381 .270 .610
109
Residual 26.857 19 1.414
Total 27.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.079 .006 -.046 .446
ANOVA
Regression .024 1 .024 .119 .733
Residual 3.786 19 .199
Total 3.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.037 .001 -.051 .952
ANOVA
Regression .024 1 .024 .026 .873
Residual 17.214 19 .906
Total 17.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.108 .012 -.040 .975
ANOVA
Regression .214 1 .214 .225 .640
Residual 18.071 19 .951
Total 18.286 20
110
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.230 .053 .003 .748
ANOVA
Regression .595 1 .595 1.063 .316
Residual 10.643 19 .560
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.173 .030 -.021 .804
ANOVA
Regression .381 1 .381 .589 .452
Residual 12.286 19 .647
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.099 .010 -.042 .715
ANOVA
Regression .095 1 .095 .186 .671
Residual 9.714 19 .511
Total 9.810 20
111
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.244 .060 .010 1.264
ANOVA
Regression 1.929 1 1.929 1.207 .286
Residual 30.357 19 1.598
Total 32.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.094 .009 -.043 .746
ANOVA
Regression .095 1 .095 .171 .684
Residual 10.571 19 .556
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.311 .097 .049 1.191
ANOVA
Regression 2.881 1 2.881 2.033 .170
Residual 26.929 19 1.417
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
112
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .368
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 2.571 19 .135
Total 2.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.173 .030 -.021 1.006
ANOVA
Regression .595 1 .595 .589 .452
Residual 19.214 19 1.011
Total 19.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.233 .054 .005 .738
ANOVA
Regression .595 1 .595 1.092 .309
Residual 10.357 19 .545
Total 10.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
113
.087 .008 -.045 .813
ANOVA
Regression .095 1 .095 .144 .709
Residual 12.571 19 .662
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.064 .004 -.048 .552
ANOVA
Regression .024 1 .024 .078 .783
Residual 5.786 19 .305
Total 5.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.092 .008 -.044 .766
ANOVA
Regression .095 1 .095 .162 .691
Residual 11.143 19 .586
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.226 .051 .001 1.220
114
ANOVA
Regression 1.524 1 1.524 1.024 .324
Residual 28.286 19 1.489
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.330 .109 .062 1.011
ANOVA
Regression 2.381 1 2.381 2.328 .144
Residual 19.429 19 1.023
Total 21.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.348 .121 .075 1.050
ANOVA
Regression 2.881 1 2.881 2.615 .122
Residual 20.929 19 1.102
Total 23.810 20
B.2.3. Psychographics with Annual income (Yuan)

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.101 .010 -.042 .589
115
ANOVA
Regression .068 1 .068 .195 .664
Residual 6.599 19 .347
Total 6.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.120 .014 -.038 1.043
ANOVA
Regression .301 1 .301 .277 .605
Residual 20.652 19 1.087
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.029 .001 -.052 .981
ANOVA
Regression .016 1 .016 .016 .900
Residual 18.270 19 .962
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .795
ANOVA
116
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 12.000 19 .632
Total 12.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.080 .006 -.046 .747
ANOVA
Regression .068 1 .068 .121 .731
Residual 10.599 19 .558
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.150 .023 -.029 .877
ANOVA
Regression .338 1 .338 .439 .516
Residual 14.615 19 .769
Total 14.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.029 .001 -.052 1.234
ANOVA
Regression .025 1 .025 .016 .899
Residual 28.927 19 1.522
117
Total 28.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.098 .010 -.043 .913
ANOVA
Regression .152 1 .152 .183 .674
Residual 15.848 19 .834
Total 16.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.007 .000 -.053 1.191
ANOVA
Regression .001 1 .001 .001 .975
Residual 26.951 19 1.418
Total 26.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.261 .068 .019 .399
ANOVA
Regression .220 1 .220 1.388 .253
Residual 3.018 19 .159
Total 3.238 20
118
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.272 .074 .025 .846
ANOVA
Regression 1.084 1 1.084 1.516 .233
Residual 13.583 19 .715
Total 14.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.008 .000 -.053 1.050
ANOVA
Regression .001 1 .001 .001 .972
Residual 20.951 19 1.103
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.064 .004 -.048 .787
ANOVA
Regression .048 1 .048 .077 .784
Residual 11.762 19 .619
Total 11.810 20
Model Summary
119
Square Estimate
.261 .068 .019 .399
ANOVA
Regression .220 1 .220 1.388 .253
Residual 3.018 19 .159
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.105 .011 -.041 1.035
ANOVA
Regression .225 1 .225 .210 .652
Residual 20.347 19 1.071
Total 20.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.158 .025 -.026 1.343
ANOVA
Regression .873 1 .873 .484 .495
Residual 34.270 19 1.804
Total 35.143 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
120
.196 .039 -.012 1.006
ANOVA
Regression .772 1 .772 .763 .393
Residual 19.228 19 1.012
Total 20.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.010 .000 -.053 1.197
ANOVA
Regression .003 1 .003 .002 .966
Residual 27.235 19 1.433
Total 27.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.388 .151 .106 .413
ANOVA
Regression .574 1 .574 3.371 .082
Residual 3.235 19 .170
Total 3.810 20
121
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.176 .031 -.020 .938
ANOVA
Regression .533 1 .533 .606 .446
Residual 16.706 19 .879
Total 17.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.085 .007 -.045 .977
ANOVA
Regression .131 1 .131 .138 .715
Residual 18.154 19 .955
Total 18.286 20
122
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.122 .015 -.037 .763
ANOVA
Regression .167 1 .167 .287 .598
Residual 11.071 19 .583
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.210 .044 -.006 .798
ANOVA
Regression .560 1 .560 .879 .360
Residual 12.107 19 .637
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.039 .001 -.051 .718
ANOVA
Regression .015 1 .015 .028 .868
Residual 9.795 19 .516
Total 9.810 20
123
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.056 .003 -.049 1.301
ANOVA
Regression .103 1 .103 .061 .808
Residual 32.183 19 1.694
Total 32.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.050 .002 -.050 .748
ANOVA
Regression .026 1 .026 .047 .830
Residual 10.640 19 .560
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.088 .008 -.045 1.248
ANOVA
Regression .229 1 .229 .147 .705
Residual 29.580 19 1.557
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
124
Square Estimate
.113 .013 -.039 .366
ANOVA
Regression .033 1 .033 .246 .626
Residual 2.539 19 .134
Total 2.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.312 .098 .050 .970
ANOVA
Regression 1.932 1 1.932 2.053 .168
Residual 17.878 19 .941
Total 19.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.117 .014 -.038 .754
ANOVA
Regression .149 1 .149 .262 .615
Residual 10.804 19 .569
Total 10.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
125
.101 .010 -.042 .812
ANOVA
Regression .128 1 .128 .194 .664
Residual 12.539 19 .660
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.274 .075 .026 .532
ANOVA
Regression .436 1 .436 1.540 .230
Residual 5.374 19 .283
Total 5.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.082 .007 -.046 .766
ANOVA
Regression .075 1 .075 .128 .724
Residual 11.163 19 .588
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.183 .034 -.017 1.231
126
ANOVA
Regression .999 1 .999 .659 .427
Residual 28.811 19 1.516
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.120 .015 -.037 1.064
ANOVA
Regression .316 1 .316 .280 .603
Residual 21.493 19 1.131
Total 21.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.122 .015 -.037 1.111
ANOVA
Regression .354 1 .354 .287 .599
Residual 23.456 19 1.235
Total 23.810 20
B.2.4. Psychographics by region of residence.

Model Summary
Square Estimate
127
.214 .046 -.005 .579
ANOVA
Regression .304 1 .304 .909 .352
Residual 6.362 19 .335
Total 6.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.155 .024 -.027 1.037
ANOVA
Regression .503 1 .503 .467 .502
Residual 20.449 19 1.076
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.295 .087 .039 .937
ANOVA
Regression 1.590 1 1.590 1.810 .194
Residual 16.696 19 .879
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.239 .057 .007 .772
128
ANOVA
Regression .685 1 .685 1.150 .297
Residual 11.315 19 .596
Total 12.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.253 .064 .015 .725
ANOVA
Regression .685 1 .685 1.303 .268
Residual 9.982 19 .525
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.173 .030 -.021 .874
ANOVA
Regression .449 1 .449 .588 .453
Residual 14.504 19 .763
Total 14.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.022 .000 -.052 1.234
ANOVA
129
Regression .014 1 .014 .009 .925
Residual 28.938 19 1.523
Total 28.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.138 .019 -.033 .909
ANOVA
Regression .304 1 .304 .368 .551
Residual 15.696 19 .826
Total 16.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.137 .019 -.033 1.180
ANOVA
Regression .503 1 .503 .361 .555
Residual 26.449 19 1.392
Total 26.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.263 .069 .020 .398
ANOVA
Regression .224 1 .224 1.409 .250
Residual 3.014 19 .159
130
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.216 .047 -.003 .858
ANOVA
Regression .685 1 .685 .931 .347
Residual 13.982 19 .736
Total 14.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.327 .107 .060 .992
ANOVA
Regression 2.242 1 2.242 2.277 .148
Residual 18.710 19 .985
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.149 .022 -.029 .780
ANOVA
Regression .262 1 .262 .432 .519
Residual 11.547 19 .608
Total 11.810 20
131
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.504 .254 .214 .357
ANOVA
Regression .821 1 .821 6.458 .020
Residual 2.417 19 .127
Total 3.238 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.261 .068 .019 1.005
ANOVA
Regression 1.398 1 1.398 1.385 .254
Residual 19.174 19 1.009
Total 20.571 20
132
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.100 .010 -.042 1.353
ANOVA
Regression .349 1 .349 .191 .667
Residual 34.793 19 1.831
Total 35.143 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.247 .061 .011 .994
ANOVA
Regression 1.217 1 1.217 1.231 .281
Residual 18.783 19 .989
Total 20.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.196 .039 -.012 1.174
ANOVA
Regression 1.050 1 1.050 .762 .394
Residual 26.188 19 1.378
Total 27.238 20
133
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.303 .092 .044 .427
ANOVA
Regression .349 1 .349 1.918 .182
Residual 3.460 19 .182
Total 3.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.418 .174 .131 .865
ANOVA
Regression 3.006 1 3.006 4.013 .060
Residual 14.232 19 .749
Total 17.238 20
134
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.295 .087 .039 .937
ANOVA
Regression 1.590 1 1.590 1.810 .194
Residual 16.696 19 .879
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.188 .035 -.015 .755
ANOVA
Regression .398 1 .398 .697 .414
Residual 10.841 19 .571
Total 11.238 20
135
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.155 .024 -.027 .807
ANOVA
Regression .304 1 .304 .468 .502
Residual 12.362 19 .651
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.340 .115 .069 .676
ANOVA
Regression 1.132 1 1.132 2.479 .132
Residual 8.678 19 .457
Total 9.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.021 .000 -.052 1.303
ANOVA
Regression .014 1 .014 .008 .929
Residual 32.272 19 1.699
Total 32.286 20
136
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.169 .029 -.023 .739
ANOVA
Regression .304 1 .304 .558 .464
Residual 10.362 19 .545
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.549 .301 .264 1.047
ANOVA
Regression 8.969 1 8.969 8.177 .010
Residual 20.841 19 1.097
Total 29.810 20
137
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.221 .049 -.001 .359
ANOVA
Regression .126 1 .126 .977 .335
Residual 2.446 19 .129
Total 2.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.505 .255 .215 .882
ANOVA
Regression 5.045 1 5.045 6.492 .020
Residual 14.764 19 .777
Total 19.810 20
138
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.464 .216 .174 .672
ANOVA
Regression 2.362 1 2.362 5.224 .034
Residual 8.591 19 .452
Total 10.952 20
139
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.310 .096 .049 .776
ANOVA
Regression 1.217 1 1.217 2.020 .171
Residual 11.449 19 .603
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.016 .000 -.052 .553
ANOVA
Regression .002 1 .002 .005 .944
Residual 5.808 19 .306
Total 5.810 20
140
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.517 .268 .229 .658
ANOVA
Regression 3.006 1 3.006 6.939 .016
Residual 8.232 19 .433
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.058 .003 -.049 1.250
ANOVA
Regression .099 1 .099 .064 .804
Residual 29.710 19 1.564
141
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.287 .082 .034 1.026
ANOVA
Regression 1.795 1 1.795 1.704 .207
Residual 20.014 19 1.053
Total 21.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.557 .311 .274 .930
ANOVA
Regression 7.393 1 7.393 8.556 .009
Residual 16.417 19 .864
Total 23.810 20
142
B.2.5. psychographics by degree of urbanisation
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.269 .073 .024 .570
ANOVA
Regression .484 1 .484 1.488 .237
Residual 6.183 19 .325
Total 6.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.063 .004 -.048 1.048
ANOVA
Regression .083 1 .083 .076 .786
143
Residual 20.869 19 1.098
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.356 .126 .080 .917
ANOVA
Regression 2.313 1 2.313 2.751 .114
Residual 15.973 19 .841
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.181 .033 -.018 .782
ANOVA
Regression .392 1 .392 .642 .433
Residual 11.608 19 .611
Total 12.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.341 .116 .070 .704
ANOVA
Regression 1.239 1 1.239 2.498 .131
Residual 9.427 19 .496
Total 10.667 20
144
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.326 .107 .060 .839
ANOVA
Regression 1.593 1 1.593 2.266 .149
Residual 13.359 19 .703
Total 14.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.024 .001 -.052 1.234
ANOVA
Regression .017 1 .017 .011 .918
Residual 28.936 19 1.523
Total 28.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.365 .133 .088 .854
ANOVA
Regression 2.135 1 2.135 2.925 .103
Residual 13.865 19 .730
Total 16.000 20
145
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.417 .174 .131 1.082
ANOVA
Regression 4.695 1 4.695 4.008 .060
Residual 22.257 19 1.171
Total 26.952 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.022 .000 -.052 .413
ANOVA
Regression .002 1 .002 .009 .924
Residual 3.237 19 .170
Total 3.238 20
146
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.182 .033 -.018 .864
ANOVA
Regression .484 1 .484 .649 .431
Residual 14.183 19 .746
Total 14.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.109 .012 -.040 1.044
ANOVA
Regression .247 1 .247 .227 .639
Residual 20.705 19 1.090
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.228 .052 .002 .768
ANOVA
Regression .617 1 .617 1.047 .319
Residual 11.193 19 .589
Total 11.810 20
Model Summary
147
Square Estimate
.094 .009 -.043 .411
ANOVA
Regression .029 1 .029 .169 .686
Residual 3.210 19 .169
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.191 .036 -.014 1.021
ANOVA
Regression .748 1 .748 .717 .408
Residual 19.824 19 1.043
Total 20.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.091 .008 -.044 1.354
ANOVA
Regression .288 1 .288 .157 .696
Residual 34.855 19 1.834
Total 35.143 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
148
.093 .009 -.043 1.021
ANOVA
Regression .174 1 .174 .167 .687
Residual 19.826 19 1.043
Total 20.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.379 .144 .099 1.108
ANOVA
Regression 3.912 1 3.912 3.187 .090
Residual 23.326 19 1.228
Total 27.238 20

Model Summary
149
Square Estimate
.081 .007 -.046 .446
ANOVA
Regression .025 1 .025 .127 .726
Residual 3.784 19 .199
Total 3.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.026 .001 -.052 .952
ANOVA
Regression .012 1 .012 .013 .910
Residual 17.226 19 .907
Total 17.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.014 .000 -.052 .981
ANOVA
Regression .004 1 .004 .004 .952
Residual 18.282 19 .962
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
150
.113 .013 -.039 .764
ANOVA
Regression .143 1 .143 .244 .627
Residual 11.095 19 .584
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.430 .185 .142 .737
ANOVA
Regression 2.343 1 2.343 4.312 .052
Residual 10.324 19 .543
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.184 .034 -.017 .706
ANOVA
Regression .332 1 .332 .666 .424
Residual 9.477 19 .499
Total 9.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.084 .007 -.045 1.299
151
ANOVA
Regression .228 1 .228 .135 .717
Residual 32.058 19 1.687
Total 32.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.107 .011 -.041 .745
ANOVA
Regression .121 1 .121 .218 .646
Residual 10.546 19 .555
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.111 .012 -.040 1.245
ANOVA
Regression .368 1 .368 .237 .632
Residual 29.442 19 1.550
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.149 .022 -.029 .364
ANOVA
152
Regression .057 1 .057 .430 .520
Residual 2.515 19 .132
Total 2.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.105 .011 -.041 1.015
ANOVA
Regression .218 1 .218 .212 .651
Residual 19.591 19 1.031
Total 19.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.186 .035 -.016 .746
ANOVA
Regression .380 1 .380 .682 .419
Residual 10.573 19 .556
Total 10.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.274 .075 .026 .785
ANOVA
Regression .949 1 .949 1.538 .230
Residual 11.718 19 .617
153
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.280 .079 .030 .531
ANOVA
Regression .457 1 .457 1.622 .218
Residual 5.353 19 .282
Total 5.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.549 .301 .264 .643
ANOVA
Regression 3.381 1 3.381 8.177 .010
Residual 7.857 19 .414
Total 11.238 20
154
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.086 .007 -.045 1.248
ANOVA
Regression .218 1 .218 .140 .712
Residual 29.591 19 1.557
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.526 .276 .238 .911
ANOVA
Regression 6.027 1 6.027 7.256 .014
Residual 15.782 19 .831
155
Total 21.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.167 .028 -.023 1.104
ANOVA
Regression .664 1 .664 .545 .469
Residual 23.145 19 1.218
Total 23.810 20
B.3. Customer psychographics by behaviours
B.3.1. Psychographics by car replacement rate

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.316 .100 .053 .562
156
The independent variable is 8.1.3 Car replacement rate.
ANOVA
Regression .667 1 .667 2.111 .163
Residual 6.000 19 .316
Total 6.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.491 .241 .201 .915
ANOVA
Regression 5.042 1 5.042 6.021 .024
Residual 15.911 19 .837
Total 20.952 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
157
.072 .005 -.047 .979
ANOVA
Regression .094 1 .094 .098 .758
Residual 18.192 19 .957
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.354 .125 .079 .743
ANOVA
Regression 1.500 1 1.500 2.714 .116
Residual 10.500 19 .553
Total 12.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.156 .024 -.027 .740
ANOVA
Regression .260 1 .260 .475 .499
Residual 10.406 19 .548
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.185 .034 -.017 .872
158
ANOVA
Regression .510 1 .510 .672 .423
Residual 14.442 19 .760
Total 14.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.095 .009 -.043 1.229
ANOVA
Regression .260 1 .260 .172 .683
Residual 28.692 19 1.510
Total 28.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.153 .023 -.028 .907
ANOVA
Regression .375 1 .375 .456 .508
Residual 15.625 19 .822
Total 16.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.157 .025 -.027 1.176
ANOVA
159
Regression .667 1 .667 .482 .496
Residual 26.286 19 1.383
Total 26.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.227 .051 .002 .402
ANOVA
Regression .167 1 .167 1.031 .323
Residual 3.071 19 .162
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.453 .205 .163 .783
ANOVA
Regression 3.010 1 3.010 4.907 .039
Residual 11.656 19 .613
Total 14.667 20
160
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.178 .032 -.019 1.033
ANOVA
Regression .667 1 .667 .624 .439
Residual 20.286 19 1.068
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.030 .001 -.052 .788
ANOVA
Regression .010 1 .010 .017 .898
Residual 11.799 19 .621
Total 11.810 20
161
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.057 .003 -.049 .412
ANOVA
Regression .010 1 .010 .061 .807
Residual 3.228 19 .170
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.270 .073 .024 1.002
ANOVA
Regression 1.500 1 1.500 1.494 .236
Residual 19.071 19 1.004
Total 20.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.258 .067 .018 1.314
ANOVA
Regression 2.344 1 2.344 1.358 .258
Residual 32.799 19 1.726
Total 35.143 20
162
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.205 .042 -.008 1.004
ANOVA
Regression .844 1 .844 .837 .372
Residual 19.156 19 1.008
Total 20.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.196 .038 -.012 1.174
ANOVA
Regression 1.042 1 1.042 .756 .396
Residual 26.196 19 1.379
Total 27.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.209 .044 -.007 .438
ANOVA
Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression .167 1 .167 .869 .363
Residual 3.643 19 .192
Total 3.810 20
Model Summary
163
Square Estimate
.320 .102 .055 .903
ANOVA
Regression 1.760 1 1.760 2.161 .158
Residual 15.478 19 .815
Total 17.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.215 .046 -.004 .958
ANOVA
Regression .844 1 .844 .919 .350
Residual 17.442 19 .918
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.213 .045 -.005 .751
ANOVA
Regression .510 1 .510 .904 .354
Residual 10.728 19 .565
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
164
.143 .021 -.031 .808
ANOVA
Regression .260 1 .260 .399 .535
Residual 12.406 19 .653
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.228 .052 .002 .700
ANOVA
Regression .510 1 .510 1.043 .320
Residual 9.299 19 .489
Total 9.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.269 .073 .024 1.255
ANOVA
Regression 2.344 1 2.344 1.487 .238
Residual 29.942 19 1.576
Total 32.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.156 .024 -.027 .740
165
ANOVA
Regression .260 1 .260 .475 .499
Residual 10.406 19 .548
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.355 .126 .080 1.171
ANOVA
Regression 3.760 1 3.760 2.743 .114
Residual 26.049 19 1.371
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.191 .036 -.014 .361
ANOVA
Regression .094 1 .094 .719 .407
Residual 2.478 19 .130
Total 2.571 20
B.3.1.29. Importance of Brand Image for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.321 .103 .056 .967
ANOVA
166
Regression 2.042 1 2.042 2.183 .156
Residual 17.768 19 .935
Total 19.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.247 .061 .011 .736
ANOVA
Regression .667 1 .667 1.231 .281
Residual 10.286 19 .541
Total 10.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.315 .100 .052 .775
ANOVA
Regression 1.260 1 1.260 2.100 .164
Residual 11.406 19 .600
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.042 .002 -.051 .552
ANOVA
Regression .010 1 .010 .034 .855
Residual 5.799 19 .305
167
Total 5.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.152 .023 -.028 .760
ANOVA
Regression .260 1 .260 .451 .510
Residual 10.978 19 .578
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.262 .068 .019 1.209
ANOVA
Regression 2.042 1 2.042 1.397 .252
Residual 27.768 19 1.461
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.087 .008 -.045 1.067
ANOVA
Regression .167 1 .167 .146 .706
Residual 21.643 19 1.139
Total 21.810 20
168
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.460 .212 .170 .994
ANOVA
Regression 5.042 1 5.042 5.104 .036
Residual 18.768 19 .988
Total 23.810 20
B.3.2. Psychographics by experience

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.243 .059 .010 .575
The independent variable is 7. Number of cars owned
(Experience).
ANOVA
169
Regression .394 1 .394 1.194 .288
Residual 6.272 19 .330
Total 6.667 20
The independent variable is 7. Number of cars owned (Experience).
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.171 .029 -.022 1.035
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .611 1 .611 .571 .459
Residual 20.341 19 1.071
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.351 .123 .077 .919
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 2.248 1 2.248 2.663 .119
Residual 16.038 19 .844
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.078 .006 -.046 .792
(Experience).
ANOVA
170
Regression .072 1 .072 .115 .738
Residual 11.928 19 .628
Total 12.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.055 .003 -.049 .748
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .032 1 .032 .058 .813
Residual 10.634 19 .560
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.156 .024 -.027 .876
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .363 1 .363 .472 .500
Residual 14.590 19 .768
Total 14.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.305 .093 .045 1.176
(Experience).
171
ANOVA
Regression 2.690 1 2.690 1.946 .179
Residual 26.262 19 1.382
Total 28.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.135 .018 -.034 .909
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .290 1 .290 .350 .561
Residual 15.710 19 .827
Total 16.000 20
Coefficients
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
7. Number of cars owned
-.145 .245 -.135 -.592 .561
(Experience)
(Constant) 4.324 .582 7.424 .000

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.212 .045 -.005 1.164
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 1.214 1 1.214 .897 .356
Residual 25.738 19 1.355
172
Total 26.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.007 .000 -.053 .413
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .001 .976
Residual 3.238 19 .170
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.468 .219 .178 .776
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 3.218 1 3.218 5.341 .032
Residual 11.448 19 .603
Total 14.667 20
173
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.476 .226 .186 .924
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 4.745 1 4.745 5.563 .029
Residual 16.207 19 .853
Total 20.952 20
174
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.377 .142 .097 .730
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 1.675 1 1.675 3.140 .092
Residual 10.134 19 .533
Total 11.810 20
175
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.292 .085 .037 .395
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .276 1 .276 1.771 .199
Residual 2.962 19 .156
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.195 .038 -.013 1.021
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .782 1 .782 .751 .397
176
Residual 19.790 19 1.042
Total 20.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.052 .003 -.050 1.358
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .095 1 .095 .051 .823
Residual 35.048 19 1.845
Total 35.143 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.602 .362 .328 .819
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 7.241 1 7.241 10.784 .004
Residual 12.759 19 .672
Total 20.000 20
177
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.071 .005 -.047 1.194
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .138 1 .138 .097 .759
Residual 27.100 19 1.426
Total 27.238 20
Coefficients
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
7. Number of cars owned
-.100 .321 -.071 -.311 .759
(Experience)
(Constant) 2.700 .765 3.529 .002

Model Summary
178
Square Estimate
.112 .012 -.040 .445
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .047 1 .047 .240 .630
Residual 3.762 19 .198
Total 3.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.559 .312 .276 .790
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 5.379 1 5.379 8.619 .008
Residual 11.859 19 .624
Total 17.238 20
179
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.414 .171 .127 .893
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 3.127 1 3.127 3.920 .062
Residual 15.159 19 .798
Total 18.286 20
180
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.245 .060 .010 .746
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .673 1 .673 1.209 .285
Residual 10.566 19 .556
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.050 .003 -.050 .815
(Experience).
ANOVA
181
Regression .032 1 .032 .048 .828
Residual 12.634 19 .665
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.070 .005 -.048 .717
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .047 1 .047 .092 .764
Residual 9.762 19 .514
Total 9.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.352 .124 .078 1.220
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 3.996 1 3.996 2.684 .118
Residual 28.290 19 1.489
Total 32.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.137 .019 -.033 .742
(Experience).
ANOVA
182
Regression .201 1 .201 .365 .553
Residual 10.466 19 .551
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.124 .015 -.036 1.243
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .461 1 .461 .299 .591
Residual 29.348 19 1.545
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.048 .002 -.050 .367
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .006 1 .006 .044 .836
Residual 2.566 19 .135
Total 2.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.533 .284 .246 .864
(Experience).
183
ANOVA
Regression 5.620 1 5.620 7.525 .013
Residual 14.190 19 .747
Total 19.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.345 .119 .072 .713
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 1.301 1 1.301 2.560 .126
Residual 9.652 19 .508
Total 10.952 20
Model Summary
184
Square Estimate
.403 .163 .119 .747
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 2.060 1 2.060 3.690 .070
Residual 10.607 19 .558
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.133 .018 -.034 .548
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .103 1 .103 .342 .566
Residual 5.707 19 .300
Total 5.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.004 .000 -.053 .769
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 .987
Residual 11.238 19 .591
Total 11.238 20
185
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.207 .043 -.008 1.226
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 1.272 1 1.272 .847 .369
Residual 28.538 19 1.502
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.126 .016 -.036 1.063
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression .347 1 .347 .308 .586
Residual 21.462 19 1.130
Total 21.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.305 .093 .045 1.066
(Experience).
ANOVA
Regression 2.210 1 2.210 1.944 .179
Residual 21.600 19 1.137
Total 23.810 20
186
B.3.3. Psychographics with frequency of use
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.187 .035 -.016 .582
The independent variable is 8.1.1 Frequency of Use.
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .689 .417
Residual 6.433 19 .339
Total 6.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.030 .001 -.052 1.050
ANOVA
Regression .019 1 .019 .017 .897
Residual 20.933 19 1.102
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.032 .001 -.052 .981
ANOVA
Regression .019 1 .019 .020 .890
Residual 18.267 19 .961
Total 18.286 20
187
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.139 .019 -.032 .787
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .377 .547
Residual 11.767 19 .619
Total 12.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .749
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 10.667 19 .561
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.089 .008 -.044 .884
ANOVA
Regression .119 1 .119 .152 .701
Residual 14.833 19 .781
Total 14.952 20
Model Summary
188
Square Estimate
.475 .225 .184 1.087
ANOVA
Regression 6.519 1 6.519 5.521 .030
Residual 22.433 19 1.181
Total 28.952 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.121 .015 -.037 .911
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .281 .602
Residual 15.767 19 .830
Total 16.000 20
189
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.027 .001 -.052 1.191
ANOVA
Regression .019 1 .019 .013 .909
Residual 26.933 19 1.418
Total 26.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.038 .001 -.051 .413
ANOVA
Regression .005 1 .005 .028 .869
Residual 3.233 19 .170
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.126 .016 -.036 .872
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .307 .586
Residual 14.433 19 .760
Total 14.667 20
Model Summary
190
Square Estimate
.030 .001 -.052 1.050
ANOVA
Regression .019 1 .019 .017 .897
Residual 20.933 19 1.102
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.201 .040 -.010 .772
ANOVA
Regression .476 1 .476 .798 .383
Residual 11.333 19 .596
Total 11.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.499 .249 .209 .358
ANOVA
Regression .805 1 .805 6.284 .021
Residual 2.433 19 .128
Total 3.238 20
191
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.228 .052 .002 1.013
ANOVA
Regression 1.071 1 1.071 1.044 .320
Residual 19.500 19 1.026
Total 20.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.372 .139 .093 1.262
ANOVA
Regression 4.876 1 4.876 3.061 .096
Residual 30.267 19 1.593
192
Total 35.143 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.108 .012 -.040 1.020
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .224 .641
Residual 19.767 19 1.040
Total 20.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.383 .147 .102 1.106
ANOVA
Regression 4.005 1 4.005 3.275 .086
193
Residual 23.233 19 1.223
Total 27.238 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.106 .011 -.041 .445
ANOVA
Regression .043 1 .043 .216 .647
Residual 3.767 19 .198
Total 3.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.100 .010 -.042 .948
ANOVA
194
Regression .171 1 .171 .191 .667
Residual 17.067 19 .898
Total 17.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.145 .021 -.030 .971
ANOVA
Regression .386 1 .386 .409 .530
Residual 17.900 19 .942
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.021 .000 -.052 .769
ANOVA
Regression .005 1 .005 .008 .929
Residual 11.233 19 .591
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.136 .018 -.033 .809
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .357 .557
195
Residual 12.433 19 .654
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.220 .049 -.002 .701
ANOVA
Regression .476 1 .476 .969 .337
Residual 9.333 19 .491
Total 9.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.534 .286 .248 1.102
ANOVA
Regression 9.219 1 9.219 7.594 .013
Residual 23.067 19 1.214
Total 32.286 20
196
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .749
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 10.667 19 .561
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.051 .003 -.050 1.251
ANOVA
Regression .076 1 .076 .049 .828
Residual 29.733 19 1.565
197
Total 29.810 20
B.3.3.28. Importance of Safety for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.043 .002 -.051 .368
ANOVA
Regression .005 1 .005 .035 .853
Residual 2.567 19 .135
Total 2.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.155 .024 -.027 1.009
ANOVA
Regression .476 1 .476 .468 .502
Residual 19.333 19 1.018
Total 19.810 20
B.3.3.30. Importance of Design for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.042 .002 -.051 .759
ANOVA
Regression .019 1 .019 .033 .858
Residual 10.933 19 .575
Total 10.952 20
198
B.3.3.31. Importance of Fuel Efficiency for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.136 .018 -.033 .809
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .357 .557
Residual 12.433 19 .654
Total 12.667 20
B.3.3.32 Importance of Quality for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.315 .099 .052 .525
ANOVA
Regression .576 1 .576 2.092 .164
Residual 5.233 19 .275
Total 5.810 20
B.3.3.33. Importance of Technology for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.165 .027 -.024 .759
ANOVA
Regression .305 1 .305 .530 .476
Residual 10.933 19 .575
Total 11.238 20
B.3.3.34. Importance of Affordability for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
199
Square Estimate
.404 .164 .120 1.146
ANOVA
Regression 4.876 1 4.876 3.716 .069
Residual 24.933 19 1.312
Total 29.810 20
B.3.3.35. Importance of Comfort for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.163 .026 -.025 1.057
ANOVA
Regression .576 1 .576 .516 .481
Residual 21.233 19 1.118
Total 21.810 20
200
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.057 .003 -.049 1.118
ANOVA
Regression .076 1 .076 .061 .808
Residual 23.733 19 1.249
Total 23.810 20
B.3.4. Psychographics by non-car owners who plan to have a car in the future.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.131 .017 -.041 .594
The independent variable is 8.2 Potential of demand for
people currently not owning a car.
ANOVA
Regression .105 1 .105 .298 .592
Residual 6.000 17 .353
Total 6.105 18
The independent variable is 8.2 Potential of demand for people currently not owning a
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.084 .007 -.051 1.092
ANOVA
Regression .143 1 .143 .120 .733
201
Residual 20.278 17 1.193
Total 20.421 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.165 .027 -.030 1.018
ANOVA
Regression .494 1 .494 .477 .499
Residual 17.611 17 1.036
Total 18.105 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.294 .087 .033 .767
ANOVA
Regression .947 1 .947 1.611 .222
Residual 10.000 17 .588
Total 10.947 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.117 .014 -.044 .778
202
ANOVA
Regression .143 1 .143 .237 .633
Residual 10.278 17 .605
Total 10.421 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.275 .075 .021 .873
ANOVA
Regression 1.056 1 1.056 1.386 .255
Residual 12.944 17 .761
Total 14.000 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.071 .005 -.053 1.290
ANOVA
Regression .143 1 .143 .086 .773
Residual 28.278 17 1.663
Total 28.421 18
car.
203
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.252 .063 .008 .907
ANOVA
Regression .947 1 .947 1.150 .298
Residual 14.000 17 .824
Total 14.947 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.267 .071 .016 1.138
ANOVA
Regression 1.684 1 1.684 1.301 .270
Residual 22.000 17 1.294
Total 23.684 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.102 .010 -.048 .383
ANOVA
Regression .026 1 .026 .179 .678
Residual 2.500 17 .147
204
Total 2.526 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.086 .007 -.051 .907
ANOVA
Regression .105 1 .105 .128 .725
Residual 14.000 17 .824
Total 14.105 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.131 .017 -.041 1.092
ANOVA
Regression .354 1 .354 .297 .593
Residual 20.278 17 1.193
Total 20.632 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.372 .139 .088 .752
205
ANOVA
Regression 1.547 1 1.547 2.736 .116
Residual 9.611 17 .565
Total 11.158 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.122 .015 -.043 .428
ANOVA
Regression .047 1 .047 .256 .620
Residual 3.111 17 .183
Total 3.158 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.207 .043 -.014 1.056
ANOVA
Regression .845 1 .845 .758 .396
Residual 18.944 17 1.114
Total 19.789 18
car.
Model Summary
206
Square Estimate
.074 .005 -.053 1.423
ANOVA
Regression .187 1 .187 .092 .765
Residual 34.444 17 2.026
Total 34.632 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.224 .050 -.006 1.029
ANOVA
Regression .947 1 .947 .895 .357
Residual 18.000 17 1.059
Total 18.947 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.131 .017 -.041 1.188
ANOVA
Regression .421 1 .421 .298 .592
Residual 24.000 17 1.412
Total 24.421 18
207
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.122 .015 -.043 .428
ANOVA
Regression .047 1 .047 .256 .620
Residual 3.111 17 .183
Total 3.158 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.132 .017 -.040 .984
ANOVA
Regression .292 1 .292 .302 .590
Residual 16.444 17 .967
Total 16.737 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.165 .027 -.030 1.018
ANOVA
208
Regression .494 1 .494 .477 .499
Residual 17.611 17 1.036
Total 18.105 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.367 .134 .084 .732
ANOVA
Regression 1.415 1 1.415 2.641 .123
Residual 9.111 17 .536
Total 10.526 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.107 .012 -.047 .850
ANOVA
Regression .143 1 .143 .198 .662
Residual 12.278 17 .722
Total 12.421 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
209
.475 .225 .180 .608
ANOVA
Regression 1.827 1 1.827 4.949 .040
Residual 6.278 17 .369
Total 8.105 18
car.

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.134 .018 -.040 1.353
ANOVA
Regression .573 1 .573 .313 .583
Residual 31.111 17 1.830
Total 31.684 18
210
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.425 .181 .133 .698
ANOVA
Regression 1.827 1 1.827 3.753 .070
Residual 8.278 17 .487
Total 10.105 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.030 .001 -.058 1.295
211
ANOVA
Regression .026 1 .026 .016 .902
Residual 28.500 17 1.676
Total 28.526 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.081 .007 -.052 .323
ANOVA
Regression .012 1 .012 .112 .742
Residual 1.778 17 .105
Total 1.789 18
car.
B.3.4.29 Importance of Brand Image for non-car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.185 .034 -.022 1.043
ANOVA
Regression .658 1 .658 .605 .448
Residual 18.500 17 1.088
Total 19.158 18
car.
212
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.327 .107 .054 .758
ANOVA
Regression 1.170 1 1.170 2.033 .172
Residual 9.778 17 .575
Total 10.947 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.389 .151 .101 .778
ANOVA
Regression 1.827 1 1.827 3.023 .100
Residual 10.278 17 .605
Total 12.105 18
car.
213
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.113 .013 -.045 .575
ANOVA
Regression .073 1 .073 .221 .644
Residual 5.611 17 .330
Total 5.684 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.417 .174 .125 .686
ANOVA
214
Regression 1.684 1 1.684 3.579 .076
Residual 8.000 17 .471
Total 9.684 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.150 .023 -.035 1.295
ANOVA
Regression .658 1 .658 .392 .539
Residual 28.500 17 1.676
Total 29.158 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.270 .073 .019 1.074
ANOVA
Regression 1.547 1 1.547 1.341 .263
Residual 19.611 17 1.154
Total 21.158 18
car.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
215
.034 .001 -.058 1.150
ANOVA
Regression .026 1 .026 .020 .890
Residual 22.500 17 1.324
Total 22.526 18
car.
B.3.5. psychographics by style of use; long trips

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.187 .035 -.016 .582
The independent variable is 8.1.2 Style of use: Long trips.
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .689 .417
Residual 6.433 19 .339
Total 6.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.347 .120 .074 .985
ANOVA
Regression 2.519 1 2.519 2.596 .124
Residual 18.433 19 .970
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
216
Square Estimate
.258 .067 .018 .948
ANOVA
Regression 1.219 1 1.219 1.357 .258
Residual 17.067 19 .898
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.279 .078 .029 .763
ANOVA
Regression .933 1 .933 1.602 .221
Residual 11.067 19 .582
Total 12.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.148 .022 -.030 .741
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .425 .522
Residual 10.433 19 .549
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
217
.089 .008 -.044 .884
ANOVA
Regression .119 1 .119 .152 .701
Residual 14.833 19 .781
Total 14.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.295 .087 .039 1.180
ANOVA
Regression 2.519 1 2.519 1.811 .194
Residual 26.433 19 1.391
Total 28.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.121 .015 -.037 .911
ANOVA
Regression .233 1 .233 .281 .602
Residual 15.767 19 .830
Total 16.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.120 .014 -.038 1.182
218
ANOVA
Regression .386 1 .386 .276 .606
Residual 26.567 19 1.398
Total 26.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.038 .001 -.051 .413
ANOVA
Regression .005 1 .005 .028 .869
Residual 3.233 19 .170
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.252 .064 .014 .850
ANOVA
Regression .933 1 .933 1.291 .270
Residual 13.733 19 .723
Total 14.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.286 .082 .034 1.006
ANOVA
219
Regression 1.719 1 1.719 1.698 .208
Residual 19.233 19 1.012
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.060 .004 -.049 .787
ANOVA
Regression .043 1 .043 .069 .795
Residual 11.767 19 .619
Total 11.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.230 .053 .003 .402
ANOVA
Regression .171 1 .171 1.062 .316
Residual 3.067 19 .161
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.548 .300 .263 .871
ANOVA
Regression 6.171 1 6.171 8.143 .010
Residual 14.400 19 .758
220
Total 20.571 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.535 .287 .249 1.149
ANOVA
Regression 10.076 1 10.076 7.638 .012
Residual 25.067 19 1.319
Total 35.143 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.324 .105 .058 .971
ANOVA
221
Regression 2.100 1 2.100 2.229 .152
Residual 17.900 19 .942
Total 20.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.106 .011 -.041 1.191
ANOVA
Regression .305 1 .305 .215 .648
Residual 26.933 19 1.418
Total 27.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.106 .011 -.041 .445
ANOVA
Regression .043 1 .043 .216 .647
Residual 3.767 19 .198
Total 3.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.249 .062 .013 .922
ANOVA
Regression 1.071 1 1.071 1.259 .276
Residual 16.167 19 .851
222
Total 17.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.371 .138 .092 .911
ANOVA
Regression 2.519 1 2.519 3.036 .098
Residual 15.767 19 .830
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.124 .015 -.037 .763
ANOVA
223
Regression .171 1 .171 .294 .594
Residual 11.067 19 .582
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .816
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 12.667 19 .667
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.066 .004 -.048 .717
ANOVA
Regression .043 1 .043 .083 .776
Residual 9.767 19 .514
Total 9.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.364 .133 .087 1.214
ANOVA
Regression 4.286 1 4.286 2.908 .104
Residual 28.000 19 1.474
224
Total 32.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .749
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 10.667 19 .561
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.038 .001 -.051 1.252
ANOVA
Regression .043 1 .043 .027 .870
Residual 29.767 19 1.567
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.043 .002 -.051 .368
ANOVA
Regression .005 1 .005 .035 .853
Residual 2.567 19 .135
Total 2.571 20
225
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.388 .150 .106 .941
ANOVA
Regression 2.976 1 2.976 3.359 .083
Residual 16.833 19 .886
Total 19.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.334 .111 .065 .716
ANOVA
Regression 1.219 1 1.219 2.380 .139
Residual 9.733 19 .512
226
Total 10.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .816
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 12.667 19 .667
Total 12.667 20
B.3.5.32. Importance of Quality for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.115 .013 -.039 .549
ANOVA
Regression .076 1 .076 .252 .621
Residual 5.733 19 .302
Total 5.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.165 .027 -.024 .759
ANOVA
Regression .305 1 .305 .530 .476
Residual 10.933 19 .575
Total 11.238 20
227
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.404 .164 .120 1.146
ANOVA
Regression 4.876 1 4.876 3.716 .069
Residual 24.933 19 1.312
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.059 .003 -.049 1.070
ANOVA
Regression .076 1 .076 .067 .799
Residual 21.733 19 1.144
228
Total 21.810 20
B.3.5.36. Importance of Chinese Car for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.042 .002 -.051 1.118
ANOVA
Regression .043 1 .043 .034 .855
Residual 23.767 19 1.251
Total 23.810 20
B.3.6. Psychographics by style of use; short trips

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .592
The independent variable is 8.1.2 Style of Use: Short trips.
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 6.667 19 .351
Total 6.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.019 .000 -.052 1.050
ANOVA
Regression .008 1 .008 .007 .933
Residual 20.944 19 1.102
229
Total 20.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.021 .000 -.052 .981
ANOVA
Regression .008 1 .008 .008 .929
Residual 18.278 19 .962
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.360 .130 .084 .741
ANOVA
Regression 1.556 1 1.556 2.830 .109
Residual 10.444 19 .550
Total 12.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .749
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 10.667 19 .561
Total 10.667 20
230
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.138 .019 -.033 .879
ANOVA
Regression .286 1 .286 .370 .550
Residual 14.667 19 .772
Total 14.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.480 .231 .190 1.083
ANOVA
Regression 6.675 1 6.675 5.693 .028
Residual 22.278 19 1.173
Total 28.952 20
231
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.156 .024 -.027 .906
ANOVA
Regression .389 1 .389 .473 .500
Residual 15.611 19 .822
Total 16.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.137 .019 -.033 1.180
ANOVA
Regression .508 1 .508 .365 .553
Residual 26.444 19 1.392
232
Total 26.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.149 .022 -.029 .408
ANOVA
Regression .071 1 .071 .429 .521
Residual 3.167 19 .167
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.163 .027 -.025 .867
ANOVA
Regression .389 1 .389 .518 .481
Residual 14.278 19 .751
Total 14.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.156 .024 -.027 1.037
ANOVA
Regression .508 1 .508 .472 .500
Residual 20.444 19 1.076
Total 20.952 20
233
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.052 .003 -.050 .787
ANOVA
Regression .032 1 .032 .051 .823
Residual 11.778 19 .620
Total 11.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.495 .245 .205 .359
ANOVA
Regression .794 1 .794 6.169 .022
Residual 2.444 19 .129
Total 3.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.216 .047 -.003 1.016
ANOVA
Regression .960 1 .960 .930 .347
Residual 19.611 19 1.032
Total 20.571 20
Model Summary
234
Square Estimate
.346 .119 .073 1.276
ANOVA
Regression 4.198 1 4.198 2.578 .125
Residual 30.944 19 1.629
Total 35.143 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.139 .019 -.032 1.016
ANOVA
Regression .389 1 .389 .377 .547
Residual 19.611 19 1.032
Total 20.000 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.188 .035 -.016 1.176
ANOVA
Regression .960 1 .960 .694 .415
Residual 26.278 19 1.383
Total 27.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
235
.091 .008 -.044 .446
ANOVA
Regression .032 1 .032 .160 .694
Residual 3.778 19 .199
Total 3.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.215 .046 -.004 .930
ANOVA
Regression .794 1 .794 .917 .350
Residual 16.444 19 .865
Total 17.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.021 .000 -.052 .981
ANOVA
Regression .008 1 .008 .008 .929
Residual 18.278 19 .962
Total 18.286 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.266 .071 .022 .741
236
ANOVA
Regression .794 1 .794 1.444 .244
Residual 10.444 19 .550
Total 11.238 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.175 .031 -.020 .804
ANOVA
Regression .389 1 .389 .602 .447
Residual 12.278 19 .646
Total 12.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.057 .003 -.049 .717
ANOVA
Regression .032 1 .032 .062 .807
Residual 9.778 19 .515
Total 9.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.455 .207 .165 1.161
ANOVA
237
Regression 6.675 1 6.675 4.952 .038
Residual 25.611 19 1.348
Total 32.286 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.191 .036 -.014 .735
ANOVA
Regression .389 1 .389 .719 .407
Residual 10.278 19 .541
Total 10.667 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.082 .007 -.046 1.248
238
ANOVA
Regression .198 1 .198 .127 .725
Residual 29.611 19 1.558
Total 29.810 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.222 .049 -.001 .359
ANOVA
Regression .127 1 .127 .987 .333
Residual 2.444 19 .129
Total 2.571 20
Model Summary
R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the Estimate
Square
.100 .010 -.042 1.016
ANOVA
Regression .198 1 .198 .192 .666
Residual 19.611 19 1.032
Total 19.810 20
B.3.6.30. Importance of Design for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.027 .001 -.052 .759
ANOVA
239
Regression .008 1 .008 .014 .908
Residual 10.944 19 .576
Total 10.952 20
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.175 .031 -.020 .804
ANOVA
Regression .389 1 .389 .602 .447
Residual 12.278 19 .646
Total 12.667 20
B.3.6.32. Importance of Quality for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.333 .111 .064 .521
ANOVA
Regression .643 1 .643 2.364 .141
Residual 5.167 19 .272
Total 5.810 20
B.3.6.33. Importance of Technology for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.106 .011 -.041 .765
ANOVA
Regression .127 1 .127 .217 .647
Residual 11.111 19 .585
240
Total 11.238 20
B.3.6.34. Importance of Affordability for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the Estimate
Square
.490 .240 .200 1.092
ANOVA
Regression 7.143 1 7.143 5.987 .024
Residual 22.667 19 1.193
Total 29.810 20
B.3.6.35. Importance of Comfort for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.172 .029 -.022 1.055
ANOVA
Regression .643 1 .643 .577 .457
Residual 21.167 19 1.114
Total 21.810 20
B.3.6.36. Importance of Chinese Car for non car owners for their next purchase
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.091 .008 -.044 1.115
ANOVA
Regression .198 1 .198 .160 .694
Residual 23.611 19 1.243
Total 23.810 20
241
B.3.7. Car owners preferences for the next purchase by loyalty.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.132 .017 -.034 .587
The independent variable is 8.1.4.1 Would you buy your next
car for the same reason? .
ANOVA
Regression .117 1 .117 .338 .568
Residual 6.550 19 .345
Total 6.667 20
The independent variable is 8.1.4.1 Would you buy your next car for the same reason?
.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.011 .000 -.053 1.050
ANOVA
Regression .002 1 .002 .002 .963
Residual 20.950 19 1.103
Total 20.952 20
.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.068 .005 -.048 .979
ANOVA
242
Regression .086 1 .086 .089 .768
Residual 18.200 19 .958
Total 18.286 20
.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.000 .000 -.053 .795
ANOVA
Regression .000 1 .000 .000 1.000
Residual 12.000 19 .632
Total 12.000 20
.
Square Estimate
.105 .011 -.041 .745
ANOVA
Regression .117 1 .117 .210 .652
Residual 10.550 19 .555
Total 10.667 20
.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.101 .010 -.042 .883
243
ANOVA
Regression .152 1 .152 .196 .663
Residual 14.800 19 .779
Total 14.952 20

Model Summary
Square Estimate
.086 .007 -.045 1.230
ANOVA
Regression .215 1 .215 .142 .710
Residual 28.738 19 1.513
Total 28.952 20
.
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.128 .016 -.035 .910
ANOVA
Regression .262 1 .262 .317 .580
Residual 15.738 19 .828
Total 16.000 20
.
244
Model Summary
Square Estimate
.108 .012 -.040 1.184
ANOVA
Regression .315 1 .315 .225 .641
Residual 26.638 19 1.402
Total 26.952 20
245
Linnaeus University – a firm focus on quality and competence
On 1 January 2010 Växjö University and the University of Kalmar merged to form Linnaeus University. This
new university is the product of a will to improve the quality, enhance the appeal and boost the development potential of
teaching and research, at the same time as it plays a prominent role in working closely together with local society.
Linnaeus University offers an attractive knowledge environment characterised by high quality and
a competitive portfolio of skills.
Linnaeus University is a modern, international university with the emphasis on the desire for knowledge, creative
thinking and practical innovations. For us, the focus is on proximity to our students, but also on the world around us and
the future ahead.
Linnæus University
SE-391 82 Kalmar/SE-351 95 Växjö 246
Telephone +46 772-28 80 00

CHina Car Segmentation PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CHina Car Segmentation PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Segmentation of the car

Authors: Adrien SAINT

Växjö, May 25th, 2013

Imran Syed Adrien Saint

Keywords: China, market segmentation, cars, hybrid

1.1.1 The growing Chinese car market

1.1.3 Changes in Chinese market segments

1.3 Research questions

1.6 Outline of the thesis

2.1 Market segmentation

Accessibility; Segments must be accessible to the managers to some degree. It can be

2.2 Bases for Market Segmentation

2.2.1 Geographic segmentation

2.2.2 Demographic segmentation

2.2.4 Behavioural segmentation

Behavioural segmentation, segments consumers based on knowledge of the product, attitude,

2.3 Macro Segmentation

2.5 Hybrid segmentation: the mix of micro and macro segmentations

2.6 Dynamic segmentation: the predictive implication of segmentation

Figure 1: The Analysis Model for dynamic segmentation

3.2 Population and sample

3.2.1 Data collection method

3.2.2 Questionnaire Design

Questions Theoretical Concept Motivation

4. Gender: Beane and Ennis (1987) ; Demographic Tool to segment the

8. Do you have a car Micro and This question is more of

8.2 If you do not Behavioural This question prepares to

3.4 Data analysis method

3.6 Reliability and Replicability

4.1 Geographic data:

4.2 Demographic data:

4.3 Behavioural data:

4.3.1 Customer behaviour explained by Geographic data

Figure 2: Customer behaviour explained by Geographic data

Customer behaviour explained by region of residence (See appendix part B.1.1):

4.3.2 Customer behaviour explained by Demographics:

Figure 3: Customer behaviour explained by Demographics

Consumer behaviour explained by age (see appendix part B.1.3.):

4.4 Psychographic data:

Respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences by age of the respondents (see appendixes

Respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences by gender of the respondent (see appendix

Respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences by annual incomes (see appendixes B.2.3.1

Respondents’ opinion on others’ preferences by degree of Urbanisation (see appendixes

4.4.3 Car owners’ current preferences

4.4.3.2 Car owners’ current preferences explained by geographic variables

4.4.3.3 Car owners’ current preferences explained by behaviours

4.4.4 Car owners’ preferences for their next purchase

4.4.4.1 Car owners’ preferences for their next purchase explained by

4.4.4.2 Car owners’ preferences for their next purchase explained by

4.4.4.3 Car owners’ preferences for their next purchase explained by

4.4.5 Non-car owners’ preferences for their first purchase

4.4.5.1 Non-car owners’ preferences for their first purchase explained by

4.4.5.2 Non-car owners’ preferences for their first purchase explained by

4.4.5.2 Non-car owners’ preferences for their first purchase explained by

4.5 Macro data for the dynamic aspect

Figure 5: China GDP per capita from 1999 to 2020

Figure 6: Evolution of Chinese population’s age (Nomura, 2013-05-18)

Figure 9: Inter-regional migrations (China data centre, 2013-05-20)

5.1 Control Variables

5.2 Hybrid Behavioural segmentation

5.3 Hybrid Psychographic segments

5.4 Dynamic Hybrid Psychographic segments

6. Conclusion and discussion