The unexplored power of buzz in the video game industry

(1)

HALMSTAD

UNIVERSITY

Master of Science in Business and Economics, 240 credits

The unexplored power of buzz in the video game industry

Social science, 30 credits

Halmstad 2020-05-30

Oskar Hammarsten, Sofie Hägerbrand

(2)

Acknowledgement

We want to express a huge thank you to our supervisor Navid Ghannad for providing knowledge, guidance and support during the length of the process. We would also like to thank our opponent groups for the useful feedback given during the seminars.

Further, we are very grateful to all our interview respondents. Without them, this study would not have been possible. They have all contributed with valuable insight, opinions and experiences useful to our research.

Lastly, we would like to give a big thank you to each other for all the time and commitment put into this work. We have continuously helped to push each other into making a thesis that we are proud of.

(3)

Method: A deductive approach was adopted and in order to fulfil the purpose of the study, a qualitative study (i.e. a case study) was deemed suitable. Interviews were held with five companies within the video game industry. Also, observations were made of how the companies work with their promotion and creation of buzz during the pre-release period.

Theoretical framework: The theoretical framework consists of theories regarding the buzz phenomenon and CBBE. These were combined in order to examine the potential role buzz plays in the context of CBBE.

Findings: Buzz is shown to play a big role in the video game industry but is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain. It is also found that buzz can have a “life of its own” and become unmanageable through speculations. Speculations can lead to higher expectations and pseudo-promises¹, making buzz even more difficult to manage. Regarding CBBE, buzz plays a role in all aspects. However, it is shown to play a different role in the CBBE of video game companies depending on how high the brand loyalty is within that company. The study also results in a conceptual model, illustrating buzz and what role it plays in the CBBE of video game companies both pre-release and post-release.

1 Promises not made by companies but interpreted as such by consumers.

For further discussion, see section 5.2.2

(6)

(7)

1. Background

The global video game industry is today bigger than both the film and music industry and display continued growth (Marchand & Hennig-Thurau, 2013). Total revenue of the industry in 2019 amount to $152.1 billion and growing 9.6% each year (Newzoo, 2019). Today, there are approximately 2.5 billion people across the world that play video games on a regular basis. Also, the average age of people that play games is increasing, today being 31 years old in the EU (Newzoo, 2019). These statistics indicate that the video game media is becoming increasingly mainstream. Marchand & Hennig-Thurau (2013) note that the growth of the video game market has led to a substantial broadening of the consumer group.

The continued positive evolution of the gaming industry result in a growing number of companies wanting to capitalize on it, which in turn imply more competition. In Sweden, the number of video game companies has increased with an average of 18% each year between 2013 to 2018 (Dataspelsbranschen, 2019). The growing number of competing video game companies in combination with more games being released should make it increasingly challenging for companies to penetrate the market with new products. There are many companies fighting for customers attention, making the marketing efforts vital in order to gain- and retain market share.

At the same time, the effectiveness of traditional advertising is decreasing due to ad clutter and avoidance (Nyilasy, 2007). To combat this, marketers have turned to other alternatives in order to reach customers (Mohr, 2007). For instance, viral marketing developed as a way to spread messages by utilizing the capabilities of the internet and the communication between consumers (Richardson & Domingos, 2002). For video game companies, it is important to create early interest and anticipation among consumers during the pre-release period. The importance of this is further elevated if there are big investments behind a game (Marchand & Hennig-Thurau, 2013).

When investigating the phenomenon of consumer interest and anticipation regarding an upcoming product, two terms appear; buzz and hype. Although seemingly similar, there is a distinct difference between the words, which should be discussed. According to the Cambridge Dictionary (2020a), hype is defined as “a situation in which something is advertised and discussed in newspapers, on television, etc. a lot in order to attract everyone's interest”. This definition implies that hype is a phenomenon where something is promoted extensively in order to spark public interest. The term buzz however, is defined in a broader sense as “interest or excited talk about a new product, an event, or a person” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2020b). In order to keep the scope of the study as broad as possible and to have consistency in regard to theory application, the term buzz is chosen as the main focus to be studied.

Buzz is identified by several scholars as a crucial success factor for the consumer adoption of new products (e.g. Karniouchina, 2011; Kim & Hanssens, 2017). Further, buzz is particularly important for products with decaying lifecycles, such as entertainment, media and fashion (Houston, Kupfer, Hennig-Thurau & Spann, 2018). This is also indicated by (Karniouchina, 2011), which note that there are clear signs that buzz within the movie industry has major influence on box office sales.

(8)

The pre-ordering of games means that companies are able to convince customers to pay in advance for a product that is not yet finished. This essentially means monetization on a promise. A clear example of the value of pre-orders is the launch of the game Grand Theft Auto V, where the pre- order amount reached roughly 7 million copies before release. For a $60 game, this equates to

$420 million in revenue² (Cnet, 2014; VGChartz, 2013). Put in perspective, the total cost of production and marketing of the game was $265 million (International Business Times, 2013).

An example denoting both the potential and risk of buzz is the game Watch Dogs, an action- adventure game published by Ubisoft. The development of the game began in 2009 and was first announcement at the Ubisoft press conference at the Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) in 2012 (IGN, 2016). The game got a lot of attention in video game press, in various online communities and received numerous award nominations like “most anticipated game 2013” (Polygon, 2013).

Thus, the two years leading up to the release of Watch Dogs in May 2014, resulted in a build-up of interest and excitement, i.e. buzz, about the game.

The launch of Watch Dogs was a commercial success for Ubisoft. Pre-order sales amounted to more than 800 thousand and reaching nearly four million units sold in the first week, breaking the sales record for a new intellectual property (IP) in the UK (Variety, 2014; Gamespot, 2014). Even though the game was considered a commercial success, the reception by players was not as positive. Today, the game has an average score of 5.5/10 (Metacritic, 2020a). Many consumers did not consider the game to have lived up to expectations and that they had not received what Ubisoft promised to deliver. To further illustrate the effects this had, from the perspective of critics and consumers, the following section will present some of the reviews Watch Dogs got on the site Metacritic.

The video game critic site GameCritics (2014) wrote in their review of the game that “nothing could have realistically lived up to the immense level of hype that Ubisoft stirred up for this game”.

Further, some consumers touch on the same aspect in their reviews: “[Ubisoft] created a massive hype for a game that is....ok at best” and “[Watch Dogs] did not live up to the hype”. Also, “VERY few of the promised features are actually available.”. Some consumers state in their reviews the consequences of their disappointment, e.g. “make us wait so long for a game that doesn't work?

[…] Never buying another Ubisoft title ever! That's a promise”. Also, “I'm never buying a Ubisoft game on launch again and I hope others do the same. We shouldn't let this one slide.” and “I will never pay a dime to Ubisoft in advance and will never [pre-order] a game from them!”. (Metacritic, 2020a)

Moving to the next instalment in the series, Watch Dogs 2 received a “mixed or average” score on Metacritic, 7,1/10 for the PC platform (Metacritic, 2020b). One critic review note that “in the end, Watch Dogs 2 feels like an improvement over the previous game in the series” (Vgames). Also, consumer reviews mention that “This is a vast improvement over the first game” and “Ubisoft is getting back on its track and I love it”. Some consumers compare the second game to the first one and share their view of both the franchise and the developer, e.g. “I must admit .. i am surprised

(9)

how good watch dogs 2 is compared to the first game .. it's clear [Ubisoft] learned allot” and

“Wow, this game really surprised me. The first one was mediocre and [under delivered]. The second one redeems the series [...]”. One consumer elaborates this notion further by writing: “A pleasant surprise! Wasn't thinking of buying this Watch Dogs, because how cheated I felt with the first one, but I don't regret buying it! [...] my faith for Ubisoft is starting to restore”. (Metacritic, 2020b)

The disappointment indicated by the consumer reviews of the first game could be one reason for the dramatically lower sales of the sequel, Watch Dogs 2. The sequel did not reach the estimated pre-order amount set by Ubisoft and only sold roughly one fourth the amount of the predecessor during the first week (GameRant, 2016; VGChartz, 2016). This, in spite of Watch Dogs 2 receiving better reviews at launch (Metacritic, 2020b). This is also indicated in the reviews for the second game, where consumers mention that their expectations were lower due to the first Watch Dogs.

Marketing is a way of making promises. Levitt (1981, p. 96) describes it as the following: “When prospective customers can’t experience the product in advance, they are asked to buy what are essentially promises – promises of satisfaction. Even tangible, testable, feelable, smellable products are, before they are bought, just promises.” Since promises can be perceived differently by consumers than what the marketer had intended, and vary depending on whom the promises have influenced, it is not uncommon that these individuals are bound to be disappointed due to their unrealistic expectations (Grönroos, 2009). It is important to regulate these expectations since there is a risk of them damaging the company’s brand equity when consumers’ expectations are not met by the reality. This is a consequence of people having a tendency to see the future through a lens of optimism (University of Georgia, 2007).

Keeping promises are often mentioned as an important part of having loyal and recurring customers. This has to do with its positive effect on customers association with the brand.

CBBE can be described as: “...what the customers have seen, read, heard, learned, thought and felt about the brand over time” (Kotler & Keller, 2016, p.324). It is, in other words, how the customers feel and associate when interacting with a brand and these feelings affect how they react and respond to it (Kotler & Keller, 2016). High customer-based brand equity can be the defining factor when a consumer is choosing between two similar objects (Roozy, Arastoo & Vazifehdust, 2014).

Hence high CBBE is very important in a competitive environment such as the video game industry.

Perceived quality or associations connected to the brand are two examples of attributes that influence how a customer responds to a company’s brand (Aaker, 1991). A high CBBE leads to loyal customers which is of great value for companies. It leads to more sales, being able to retain a higher price and can generate positive word-of-mouth spread (Allaway, Huddleston, Whipple &

Ellinger, 2011).

(10)

1.1. Problem discussion

As mentioned previously, the video game industry is becoming more mainstream (Marchand &

Hennig-Thurau, 2013). As demand for video games increase, classical economic theory state that supply should increase as well. This means more video game companies being established and more games being released each year (Dataspelsbranschen, 2019). The heightened level of competition makes marketing within the video game industry important. Without the right marketing strategy and promotional efforts, new game releases risk being unnoticed, resulting in insufficient sales (Summerfield, June 2014).

There is a lot of research done about CBBE and how, or how not to manage and create it (Atligan, Akinci, Aksoy & Kaynak, 2009). However, there is no research done combining CBBE with the concept of buzz. As described in the cases of Watch Dogs and Grand Theft Auto, the build-up of buzz can be of great value when launching a new game. This value is procured from the potential to increase the number of pre-orders (Variety, 2014; Gamespot, 2014). However, buzz also comes with some risk. With a lot of expectations and excitement, there is more room for disappointment (Grönroos, 2009). One reason why the sequel to Watch Dogs performed below expectations in terms of pre-orders could be that players felt let down and did not trust the brand and the promises made as much as before. Buzz should therefore be examined, since it is indicated to have the potential to impact brand equity.

In the present literature, there is a lack of coverage and understanding regarding the buzz phenomenon. One of the most recent studies explore pre-release consumer buzz (PRCB) and argue that it should be seen as a distinct marketing construct which is in need for further exploration (Houston et. al., 2018). There have been some publications of trade books covering buzz marketing (e.g. Kirby & Marsden, 2006), however, the subject is still relatively unexplored within academic research (Mohr, 2007). Also, most research on buzz has focused on the movie industry. The research has examined if buzz increase sales (e.g. Karniouchina, 2011), can be used as a tool to forecast sales (e.g. Xiong & Bharadwaj, 2014) as well as in the context of product differentiation (Mohr, 2007). Consequently, there is a lack of coverage in the literature about buzz in the video game industry and in particular with a focus on the connection between buzz and CBBE.

In the present study, the focus will be on the connection between buzz and the brand equity of video game companies. Specifically, consumer-based brand equity is chosen as a theoretical foundation. This choice is motivated with the perception of buzz being mainly a consumer-side phenomenon and CBBE focusing on how consumers create the value of brand equity of companies (Atligan et al., 2009). Since the literature covering the buzz phenomenon is limited, there is no focus on either pre- or post-release buzz, i.e. buzz that occur before or after the release of a product.

This choice aims to broaden the scope and thus facilitates the understanding of the buzz phenomenon. Ultimately, the aim of the study is to gain a better understanding about buzz from the perspective of companies. Also, to investigate the role buzz has on CBBE of video game

(11)

1.2. Purpose

The purpose of this study is to gain a better understanding about buzz and examine what role it plays in customer-based brand equity for companies within the video game industry.

1.3. Limitations

In this study, a brand, in the context of video game industry, can be defined either as a video game company (i.e. a developer or publisher), a video game (IP) or a game franchise/series. For the sake of keeping a broad scope, no distinction will be made of the different brands. Even though e.g. a video game series can be considered a brand extension, the connection with the buzz phenomenon should be similar as with a game company brand. The focus is on the role buzz play in the video game industry and in the context of CBBE.

Due to the buzz phenomenon being in its early stages of exploration, the theoretical foundation of the subject is mainly formed using research of how buzz works in other industries, foremost the movie industry. However, since both movies and video games can be categorized as entertainment products, the theoretical findings should be applicable to the video game industry as well.

(12)

2. Theoretical framework

2.1. Buzz

As described previously, buzz can be defined as “interest or excited talk about a new product, an event, or a person” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2020b). The word buzz is often used in the context of popular culture to describe that something (e.g. an upcoming video game) is talked about extensively. That there is a lot of consumer interest, excitement and anticipation. In recent years, the buzz phenomenon has been indicated to be valuable within marketing. For instance, consumer buzz has been found to be instrumental as a driver for new product adoption (Houston et. al., 2018).

In order to gain a better understanding of the buzz phenomenon, a clear definition is necessary.

One issue surrounding this subject is the lack of consensus in the literature. Some papers either only use buzz as a catchphrase or it gets mixed up with the related concept word of mouth (WOM) (e.g. Liu, 2006). Although some initial papers contribute to its conceptualization, there is still a lack of a generally accepted definition. Also, a deeper understanding of the phenomenon is needed in order to guide future research (Houston et. al., 2018). In the next section, some various definitions surrounding buzz is presented.

Carl (2006) describe buzz as “contagious talk about a brand, service, product, or idea”. This broad definition highlights the contagiousness, or diffusion, inherent in buzz. That buzz can spread in a network or a population. Thomas Jr (2004) define buzz marketing as the “amplification of initial marketing efforts by third parties through their passive or active influence” (p.1). Also, Houston et. al. (2018) provide a definition of pre-release consumer buzz (PRCB) as the “aggregation of observable expressions of anticipation by consumers for a forthcoming new product” (p. 1). This anticipation indicates that buzz is forward looking. The view of buzz as a predominantly pre- release phenomenon is also shared by (Xiong & Bharadwaj, 2014), that explains it as frequent consumer-generated blog- and forum posts about products before release. The aforementioned consumer behaviours thus indicate interest in a forthcoming product.

In regard to the characteristics of buzz, the visibility and observability are important aspects of the phenomenon. The ability to observe the level of buzz for an upcoming product offers consumers

“social proof” regarding the attractiveness of the product (Griskevicius, Goldstein, Mortensen, Sundie, Cialdini & Kenrick 2009). This aspect essentially makes buzz surrounding a product generate even more buzz, since some consumers will be interested in the product as a result of the attention it receives. Referring to it as an ‘‘anticipation-cascade’’ (p. 262), where consumers get interested in something mainly due to the level of buzz (Hennig-Thurau, Marchand & Hiller, 2012).

The visibility of buzz is well illustrated in the study by Craig, Greene, & Versaci (2015). Here, the measuring of buzz includes the percentage of users on the website Fandango who voted “can’t

(13)

(Craig et.al. 2015). Websites such as Fandango, IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes are online communities for e.g. movies and TV shows, which provide consumers with the possibility to observe if other consumers have interest and purchase intentions. This by e.g. providing a popularity index for upcoming titles. There is also an option for community members to rate upcoming movies based on available information like the budget, star cast and trailers. This rating indicates consumers’ overall expectations of a movie before release. Divakaran et.al., (2017) introduces the notion of affective expectations, as consumers predict future emotional experience or the enjoyment value of future consumption.

Thomas Jr (2004) mentions the importance of exceeding expectations in order to get satisfied consumers. This means delivering more value than what consumers expect to receive. Also, delivering exceptional value is considered the best way to enhance buzz. By surprising consumers with more value than anticipated, consumer satisfaction will increase as well as lead to higher retention rate, improved loyalty and higher levels of buzz. In order to achieve exceptional value, it is also argued that consumers should be integrated in the development of new products. Thomas Jr. (2004) further note that dissatisfied consumers are both a more powerful and motivated force than satisfied ones. However, most companies do not see irate consumers as an opportunity, but as a problem. If consumers complaints are addressed properly, initially dissatisfied consumers can be converted into loyal patrons. This can e.g. be done by listening to feedback, solve the problem, thank the consumer for voicing concerns and reward them for complaining.

Besides the aspects mentioned in the preceding section, Thomas Jr, (2004), link buzz with word of mouth (WOM) and viral marketing. However, it is also argued that viral marketing, which was a term popularized prior to the dot.com boom, has since been retired. Even though WOM and buzz have some similarities, the two should not be treated synonymously. First, WOM is mainly founded in communication between consumers, whereas buzz is a multi-dimensional construct.

Buzz encompasses not only communication but other consumer behaviours as well (Houston et.

al., 2018). Second, the focus of WOM is on consumer experiences with a product and the sharing of these experiences with others. To the contrary, buzz is mainly a pre-release phenomenon, which is based on the anticipation for something that is not yet available to be experienced by consumers (Houston et. al., 2018).

2.1.1. Pre-release consumer buzz (PRCB)

Pre-release consumer buzz (PRCB) is buzz that occur before the release of a new product. A notable distinction from other related behaviours like word of mouth (WOM) or consumer recommendations, since these are based on consumers experience with a product (Houston et. al., 2018). There are three aspects that makes PRCB unique from other constructs.

First, different information is available before, versus after a products release. The only information available to consumers prior to release is communication from- and promotion by the company behind it (e.g. a movie trailer or advertising) as well as distributor promotion actions.

Also, speculation regarding product quality from secondary sources like other consumers, social

(14)

networks and media. From this information, a perception of product quality can be derived. PRCB is therefore largely based on speculation, hopes and expectations from consumers, instead of experience-based quality information (WOM) or personal experience with a product. The intensity of media coverage can also act as an indicator of public interest for an upcoming product. A lot of interest from other consumers and media sources create signals of social salience, which can enhance the overall buzz. (Houston et. al., 2018)

Second, prior to the release of a product, consumer behaviours are based solely on anticipation.

The anticipatory aspect, meaning an individual’s state of excitement for something that is going to happen in the near future (Cambridge Dictionary, 2020c), is a critical part of the PRCB construct (Houston et. al., 2018). The anticipation by potential adopters result in unique behaviours (e.g.

appraisals, emotions and decisions) which is different from post-release behaviours which stem from experience with a product. Anticipation for an upcoming product motivates consumers to engage in behaviours (e.g. information search) that provide temporary satisfaction during the pre- release period. (Houston et. al., 2018)

Third, consumer behaviours before versus after the release of a product result in a differing diffusion process. In connection to the diffusion of innovations model by Bass, (1969), PRCB influence mainly the innovators and early adopters of a new product. Thomas Jr (2004) also link the buzz phenomenon to the theory of the adoption cycle of innovations. This theory is based on the notion that new products tend to follow a similar adoption cycle - with innovators and early adopters, early- and late majority as well as laggards. When innovators encounter new products, they pass on information about it to others, e.g. through social networks. PRCB mainly influence consumers purchase intentions prior to, or closely after release. Once the product is released, post- release consumer buzz behaviours and word of mouth becomes more influential. In connection to the diffusion model, these post-release behaviours instead influence the later adopters. (Houston et. al., 2018).

(15)

Houston et. al. (2018): Conceptual uniqueness of PRCB. (p. 341)

The model of the conceptual uniqueness of the PRCB construct, suggested by Houston et. al.

(2018), conveys the differences in consumer behaviours, motives and emotions as well as the impact of various aspects in the pre- versus post-release stage.

2.1.2. Post-release buzz

Pre- and post-release buzz share some underlying consumer behaviours, yet there are some important differences between the two. Houston et. al. (2018) argue that the main differences between the pre- and post-release phase is that (1) different information is available to consumers, (2) different mental processes occur and (3), consumers’ behaviours have different effects on other consumers. Pre-release consumer buzz is based on anticipation, excitement and an expectation about product quality. In the pre-release phase consumers have no way to experience a product themselves. Thus, there is no way for consumer to share evaluations about product quality to other consumers. Marchand & Hennig-Thurau (2013) note that this leads to an information asymmetry between producer and consumer. It is only post-release that consumers are able to engage in experience-based word of mouth regarding product quality. The consumer behaviours found in PRCB (communication, search and participation) can still occur after release. However, consumers engage in these behaviours with different underlying motivations before versus after release.

(Houston et. al., 2018)

(16)

2.1.3. Positive implications of buzz

The occurrence of buzz is claimed by many to be a critical factor for the success of new products (Houston et. al., 2018). However, Mohr (2007) state that most marketers do not realise the potential of buzz and that it is therefore often overlooked. In this section, the benefits of the buzz phenomenon are reviewed in order to build a greater understanding of its importance in different contexts.

Since buzz is essentially consumers talking about, and in some cases promoting products, buzz can cut marketing costs (Mohr, 2007). It has been concluded in many studies on the concept of word of mouth, that this kind of communication is often more effective than traditional advertising when promoting products (Richardson & Domingos, 2002). Information about a product is often perceived as more trustworthy if it comes from a personal connection, rather than from a company (Keller & Fay, 2012). Since consumer buzz is essentially free, compared to traditional advertising, buzz can be used to reduce the financial risk of projects. Relying on an advertising campaign means a bigger investment and financial risk, since the campaign may or may not lead to beneficial results. The cost effective aspect of buzz can be especially beneficial for smaller companies with limited financial power (Mohr, 2007).

Further, several studies on buzz has explored its positive effects on revenue for e.g. new movie releases. The results in the study by Karniouchina (2011) indicate that buzz within the movie industry has a significant impact on box office revenue both at time of- and after release. The study also concludes that the influence of movie star participation in movies can increase opening week box office ticket sales and act to boost overall buzz about the movie. Kim & Hanssens (2017) highlight the value of being able to predict release week revenue. This, by looking at consumer interest for an upcoming product prior to release, i.e. pre-release buzz. Initial sales for experience products (e.g. games and movies) is vital for success. Generally, most of the revenue from experiential products is gained at- and shortly after release (Liu, 2006). Also, many experimental products have short life cycles. This subsequently makes pre-release marketing for these products of critical importance (Kim & Hanssens, 2017). By gathering intel about the level of buzz prior to release, managers can adjust their marketing strategy accordingly. The ability to proactively adjust e.g. the amount of communication, the content, or the target group based on buzz can be of great value to managers (Kim & Hanssens, 2017). Also, as for the case of movies, a prediction of the opening week sales using buzz measuring provides managers with the possibility to adjust the amount of screenings, locations and can open up discussions of revenue share with cinemas Divakaran, Palmer, Søndergaard & Matkovskyy (2017).

Even if a product is not received well by consumers, the launch can in some cases still be considered a success. For instance, a movie that is buzzed about a lot could generate substantially higher revenues because of it, mitigating the adverse effects on future revenue due to negative post-release WOM (Karniouchina, 2011). This can be further illustrated by the previously

(17)

Lastly, buzz is founded in anticipation for something. An excitement to be able to experience something in the future. This forward-looking cognitive process could potentially affect the actual experience of the product. Chun, Diehl & MacInnis (2017) find in their study that customers

“savouring” a future experience leads to improved perceived enjoyment of the actual experience.

Also, that the subsequent remembered enjoyment of the experience is heightened. Savouring is defined as “a cognitive process involving awareness of current pleasure from a target-specific, future consumption experience” (Ibid, p. 97). The study thus indicates that buzz (if it involves or induces savouring) for an upcoming product, might positively affect the perceived enjoyment of the product once it is experienced by a consumer (Chun et.al., 2017).

2.1.4. Negative implications of buzz

In spite of the many positive effects often associated with buzz, it should not be viewed as a one- sided coin. Karniouchina (2011) note that despite buzz being a critical driver for box office sales, some industry sources believe that high levels of buzz can be harmful. If there is a lot of buzz surrounding a product, there is also a lot of expectations attached to it. The subject of consumer expectations is explored by Grönroos (2009) which link expectations to company promises. It is argued that keeping promises is vital in order to avoid consumer disappointment and to reach high retention rates. If expectations are not met, consumers might feel let down. For instance, in the study by Karniouchina (2011), the author find that buzz prior to the release of a movie can have a future negative impact on revenue in the case that the movie is not received well by the audience.

Also, Houston et. al. (2018) note that “if negative feedback enters the market after product release, strong buzz might speed product death” (p. 356). As much as buzz can be a powerful force driving sales, it can also have the opposite effect (Craig et.al., 2015).

According to the literature covering buzz, the phenomenon is coupled with high levels of consumer expectations (Elberse & Eliashberg, 2003; Houston et. al., 2018; Divakaran et.al., 2017). These expectations are based on e.g. primary information like trailers and direct communication from the developers as well as secondary information from media sources, critic reviews and speculation from other consumers. Such information regarding an upcoming product helps consumers make predictions about product quality and hence result in certain cognitive expectations. Consumer expectations can also be affected by the social salience aspect of buzz. Studies on buzz mention e.g. the anticipation cascade (Hennig-Thurau et.al., 2012), the bandwagon effect (Elberse &

Eliashberg, 2003; Xiong & Bharadwaj, 2014) and the aspect of social proof (Griskevicius et.al., 2009). These aspects, indicating the contagiousness and social salience of buzz, could impact consumers development of affective expectations regarding an upcoming product. Affective expectations explore how consumers predict future emotional experiences and the enjoyment value attached to these experiences (Divakaran et.al., 2017). Consumers disconfirmation of these expectations can lead to either satisfaction or dissatisfaction. If a consumer has high expectations about an upcoming product and the expectations are met (confirmed), the consumer will likely feel satisfied. Also, if the product exceeds expectation it will lead to positive disconfirmation and if expectations are not met the result will be negative disconfirmation which will lead to dissatisfaction (Liao & Cheng, 2014).

(18)

Joshi & Hanssens (2009) examine the effects of high expectation levels for upcoming movies on post-launch stock price changes and investor relations with the studio behind it. The findings conclude that “overhyping” movies with limited market potential results in negative stock price changes post-launch due to exaggerated expectations that are not met. Also, investors might over time lose confidence in the studio or the management, if overhyping occur frequently (Joshi &

Hanssens, 2009).

In addition to the risk of letting consumers down, there is also a risk that too much buzz makes some consumers turn their back to the buzzed about product. If something is buzzed and talked about excessively, some consumers might feel overwhelmed. Houston et. al. (2018) found in their qualitative study that “overly-positive excitement” (p.356) could decrease interest by some consumers, ultimately dampening sales. This indicates that there might be a turning point where the buzz is too much, resulting in adverse effects.

2.1.5. Measuring and utilizing buzz

The level of buzz for a product can be measured using different methodology. Before this can be done, it is important to understand what elements are inherent in the buzz phenomenon. Through a literature review of research covering buzz, Houston et. al. (2018) collected common elements in order to lay a foundation for a clear conceptualization of the phenomenon. Also, a qualitative study of consumers with interest in different product categories was conducted. This was done in order to broaden the understanding of the buzz phenomenon through consumer input.

The pre-release consumer buzz construct is divided into three types of behaviours. These are anticipatory communication, search and participation in experiential activities. The three behaviours are examined through two dimensions: amount and pervasiveness. Amount refers to the volume of a specific behaviour, e.g. the number of online searches for an upcoming movie, as a measurement of search behaviour. The pervasiveness dimension is defined as the degree to which PRCB behaviours spread in a population, rather than being confined to a group of niche enthusiasts. The pervasiveness of buzz behaviours it therefore expanding the construct to include not only the amount of buzz but also its spread. This enables the observation of both the amount of buzz for e.g. a new movie and how much of it is occurring in the ”general population” versus being confined to a niche group (Houston et. al., 2018). Other authors have identified similar behaviours associated with the buzz phenomenon. For instance, Divakaran et.al., (2017) describe pre-release buzz within online communities as “awareness, word-of-mouth, expectations, and adoption intention” (p.1). Other observed behaviours are number of trailer views and trailer comments (Craig et.al., 2015) and blog and forum postings (Xiong & Bharadwaj, 2014).

(19)

The communicative behaviour was indicated by several respondents in the study by (Houston et.

al., 2018). This behaviour included communicating with acquaintances face-to-face and other consumers over the internet. The communication can take place in forums, in comment sections and on social media. The search activity behaviour is made apparent by consumers searching for information regarding an upcoming product. Also, some respondents in the study was reported taking note of the number of searches by other consumers. This, to gain insight into the amount of buzz regarding an upcoming product. The search behaviour also includes visiting different ranking websites, which provide statistics of the volume of searches on different products. In addition to communication and search activity, the respondents included participation in experiential activities when describing PRCB. This behaviour is comprised of e.g. watching earlier movies in a series before a sequel is released or trailers, like/dislike videos, playing quiz games and attending social events for an upcoming product. Hence, buzz is a multi-behavioural phenomenon, not only comprised of anticipatory communication. (Houston et. al., 2018)

In order to measure the amount of buzz, researchers and managers should observe the above- mentioned behaviours. Kim & Hanssens (2017) use the volume of blog and forum posts as well as the search volume for upcoming products in order to measure buzz. In the study by Liu (2006), the author relies on the volume of word of mouth (i.e. communication). Many studies conducted on buzz only observe one, or a few aspects. In order to increase accuracy of the measurement, Houston et. al. (2018) include three elements (communication, search and participation). Also, an attempt to measure the pervasiveness (i.e. spread between populations) is presented. For instance, the search behaviour can be measured by collecting data from search engines like Google and the participatory behaviour by number of product page likes on social networks like Facebook. These measurements can be used as an indicator of broad behaviours, i.e. behaviours that occur in the general population. In order to measure behaviours in niche groups, Houston et. al. (2018) propose to observe e.g. the volume of posts on product-group specific forums, as a measurement of communication. Comparing the level of broad and niche consumer buzz behaviours makes it possible to distinguish if the buzz is widespread, or merely confined to a small group of enthusiasts.

(20)

2.2. Customer-based brand equity (CBBE)

A lot of research has been done on both brand equity and customer-based brand equity (CBBE) (Atligan et al., 2009). The first model that became of high importance was Aaker’s (1991) model, involving the following five dimensions that captures brand equity; brand awareness, brand associations, brand loyalty, perceived quality and other proprietary brand assets. Two years later, Keller (1993) created another model, which instead focuses on the consumer perspective connected to brand equity and how their response to a brand is a consequence of their brand knowledge. This is where the concept of customer-based brand equity was created (Atligan et al., 2009; Chen, 2001).

Peoples reaction when interacting with a brand is caused by their emotions i.e. how they feel about it. These feelings evoked in customers, caused by the brand, are called brand equity (Kotler &

Keller, 2016). According to Aaker (1993) the concept of brand equity is different brand properties that can both increase and decrease the value of a product for the consumer. Customer-based brand equity differs from brand equity since it emphasizes that it is created through the perspective of the consumer (Shafi & Madhavaiah, 2014). According to Keller (1993) it can be defined as the following: “the differential effect of brand knowledge on consumer response to the marketing of the brand. That is, consumer-based brand equity involves consumers reactions to an element of the marketing mix for the brand in comparison with their reactions to the same marketing mix elements attributed to a fictitiously named or unnamed version of the product or service” (Keller, 1993).

Thus, when a consumer is being presented with two different choices of products or services with the same features and offerings, it is the CBBE that differs the reaction (Roozy, Arastoo &

Vazifehdust, 2014). It is therefore only consumers that can create the value of brand equity (Atligan et al., 2009).

Although CBBE is created by the consumer, it will not exist without any effort from the company (Keller, 1993). For marketers or managers, one reason for studying the concept can be motivated from a perspective of strategy and market productivity. The motivation for studying it has been high since many markets are coloured by higher costs and increased competition. This means that understanding their customers’ behaviours is a great advantage for companies when creating their marketing strategy. According to Keller (1993) one of the most valuable assets when wanting to improve market productivity is what knowledge has been created in the consumers’ mind about the brand. Not knowing what value has been created or not knowing how to utilize this value leads to difficulties formulating the marketing strategy. It is therefore crucial to measure brand equity through the minds of the consumers and not companies, hence it becomes CBBE. Traditional brand equity is mostly measured through a financial perspective such as sales or return on profit (Hanaysha, Abdghani & Abdullah, 2015).

It is of great value for a company to have high levels of CBBE. This is an advantage since it leads to higher consumer preferences and therefore more purchase intentions. (Cobb-Walgren et al., 1995). Another advantage is the enablement of having a higher price and thereby larger margins

(21)

It can also lead to lower costs due to the lesser need for expensive marketing strategies. It is e.g.

more likely that customers who have a positive relationship with a company will reach out and seek for distribution channels for a specific product or service, hence, this is a part of the marketing strategy that companies need to spend less focus on. In other words, CBBE will lead to a more effective marketing communication (Keller, 1993).

The perspective of CBBE can also be very valuable for managers since it gives another dimension to measure the company’s performance other than from a financial perspective (Atligan, et al., 2009). Having control over how high or low the company’s brand equity is will help decide and predict growth strategies. Lastly, managers can benefit from tailoring their marketing strategies in accordance to the dimensions of CBBE since it builds loyal and revisiting customers (Atligan, et al., 2009). To summarize, high levels of CBBE will have a large range of positive effects on pricing, distribution, growth and promotion (Keller, 1993).

The dimensions of customer-based brand equity mentioned in this thesis is based on the literature review made by Shafi and Madhavaiah (2014). They have made a framework based on the two models made by Aaker (1991) and Keller (1993).

2.2.1. Brand awareness

Brand awareness is to recognize the brand when being exposed to different elements of it under different conditions. The elements can for example be the name or logo (Keller, 1993). Awareness has been argued to be the most important aspect of brand equity since it has an effect on all the other parts of the concept (associations, loyalty and perceived quality)(Chen, 2001).

Brand awareness can be divided into different levels (Keller, 1993). Recognition, which is the first and most basic level means that the consumers can acknowledge prior exposure to one or more elements of the brand. This acknowledgement will only come to mind when given an indicator or reminder of one of the elements. If a consumer can remember a brand when not being exposed to it at that moment, the next level of brand awareness has been reached. Recall means that the brand is remembered and thought of by the consumer when given the product category it acts in (Keller, 1993). For example, if a consumer is asked about what brands they know within the video game industry, those companies mentioned have reached this level of brand awareness with that specific consumer. The third level, top-of mind, is reached by a company when a consumer, when being asked the same question, mentions that specific company first. The next level is brand dominance where the consumer only recalls one brand in a specific segment. The last two levels require a lot of knowledge in the consumer about the brand. Brand knowledge, the second to last level, means that the consumer knows what the brand stands for. The last level is brand opinion which means that the consumer has an opinion about the brand (Aaker, 1996).

It is of high importance for companies to have as many consumers as possible reaching some level of brand awareness regarding their brand when being in a decision-making process concerning purchases (Shafi & Madhavaiah, 2014). When consumers are in the decision-making process, they will retrieve the products that they have awareness of. If a brand is not a part of this set of brands,

(22)

it is unlikely that the consumer will choose their products for purchase. Only a few brands can reach the consideration set in that process, thus a limited amount of brand awareness can have significant impact (Shafi & Madhavaiah, 2014). Reaching as little as the first level of brand awareness can sometimes be the defining factor since customers tend to choose a brand that is familiar to them. This situation, however, requires that there is some brand awareness of the other brands in the consideration set as well (Keller, 1993).

To summarize, the brand awareness is a consequence of prior experience and exposure to elements of the brand. As these two evolve and happen more often or have a stronger impact, the level of brand awareness deepens as the memory linked to that brand becomes stronger.

2.2.2. Brand association

The awareness and experiences linked to the brand creates memories in the consumer that is connected to the brand (Aaker, 1991). At this stage, once the memories start to occur, the consumer is creating brand associations. It is not possible to create brand associations before there is awareness (Shafi & Madhavaiah, 2014). According to Aaker (1991), brand associations are described as “anything linked in memory to a brand” i.e., these associations can be different beliefs or thoughts regarding the brand. According to (Keller, 1993), these brand associations are what creates the perception of the brand and thereby the company’s brand image. This means that previous memories linked to the brand can have large consequences as to how the consumer feel or think about the brand. Further, having existing associations helps information connected to that association to be absorbed by the consumer (Supphellen, 2000). There are three different dimensions to brand associations; strength, uniqueness and favourability. In order to have high levels of brand equity, the consumers associations must evoke some level of all three dimensions (Shafi & Madhavaiah, 2014).

Strength

The strength of the associations is dependent on two different variables; quantity and quality (Keller, 1993). Quantity refers to how much a person thinks about the brand and are exposed to it, quality refers to what the person thinks and feels about the information received. The real strength occurs when combining these two factors. A lot of information must be presented in order to reach memory and also how it correlates with the already existing brand associations and brand image.

When being exposed to information in line with the current associations, it strengthens them and makes it truer, hence the perceived quality increases. In addition, the more consumers are being exposed to (quantity) and are actively elaborating about the information (quality), the stronger the associations connected to the brand will be (Keller, 1993). According to Loftus and Loftus (1980) the memory is long-lasting. Hence, when information has been gathered in the memory and the association has become powerful and valid, it takes a very long time for that association to diminish. This means that those associations can be more difficult to change once created.

(23)

Uniqueness

Keller (1993) explains that if a consumer is having associations to a specific brand that are unique compared to the associations of a competitor, a competitive advantage can be created. Brand positioning is a well-known concept where companies try to find a unique selling points to differentiate themselves from their competitors. This differentiation gives consumers a reason to buy exclusively from that specific company.

The chance of a brand having associations only relevant to themselves is however very unlikely, unless they work in a segment where they are the only provider (Keller, 1993). Nonetheless, these shared associations can be important and have positive consequences as it helps establish a membership of a specific segment and are thereby raising the chance of being chosen by consumers. This connection to a specific segment of products or services can also result in that consumers associations to a specific segment is reflected on their associations with the brand. This will have consequences on their consumer response and purchase behaviour later on.

Keller (1993) further explains that these associations to a specific category can have a negative effect on the brand associations since it is making it more difficult for consumers to recall a specific brand within that segment. If the brand associations within a segment are similar, there will be an interference in consumer memory, creating difficulties evaluating different brands, i.e., they are all the same for the consumer. This can be overcome however, according to Keller (1991b), by using ad retrieval cues which are explained as the following: “...distinctive ad execution information that is present when a consumer actually makes a brand evaluation (e.g., at the point of purchase)”.

Favourability

A consumer's favourability regarding its association with a brand is defined by how well the brand satisfies the consumers’ specific needs (Shafi & Madhavaiah, 2014). If this satisfaction is high, there will be a positive association regarding the brand, thus making the brand more favourable to the consumer. This can also be described as the desirability of the perceived attributes connected to the brand (Benoit-Moreau & Parguel, 2011). The consumer will have different attributes rated differently depending on how much they are in line with the qualities the consumer values the most. If a company satisfies the most wanted attributes, the consumer will have more favourable associations with that brand.

2.2.3. Brand loyalty

According to Aaker (1991), the concept of brand loyalty can be described as: “The attachment that a customer has to a brand”. However, this attachment can be both cognitive and behavioural (Shafi

& Madhavaiah, 2014). Cognitive loyalty is when the consumers has intentions to purchase products from the brand as a first choice. Behavioural loyalty is instead the actual repeated purchases that the consumer does, linked to the products of a brand.

(24)

According to Ahmed, Rizwan, Ahmad, and Haq (2014), it is important that consumers have trust in the brand in order to have brand loyalty. This can be created by keeping promises since it builds stronger connections between consumers and the brand. Grönroos (2009) explain this further by saying that companies must fulfil the expectations made through given promises. In addition, Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2001) mention that consumers must feel that the company is working in consumers best interest and acts on their shared values and goals. Trust is enhanced with feelings of honesty and reliability.

The importance of brand loyalty has often been spoken about in previous marketing literature due to its many upsides (Aaker, 1996). When consumers are loyal to the brand, they are more willing to produce positive word-of-mouth in terms of recommendations. They are also less likely to choose a competitor. In addition to this, loyal customers tend to be willing to pay a premium price for the brands products/services (Aaker, 1996). For example, if a consumer is approached with two similar products with a different price range there is a large chance of him/her choosing the more expensive one if he/she has a loyalty towards that brand. In other words, they do not let the price decide which product to choose, but instead the brand is more important (Aaker, 1996).

2.2.4. Perceived quality

Perceived quality is very abstract since it can differ from the actual quality (Shafi & Madhavaiah, 2014). The perceived quality tends to be affected by consumers overall attitude towards the brand.

Perceived quality can be divided into two groups; Intrinsic attributes and extrinsic attributes. The first one is about the physical aspects such as form and appearance. The latter is the non-physical part such as the brand name or product information.

Perceived quality is an important aspect within CBBE (Syzmanski & Henard, 2001). When a customer has a positive quality perception, there is simultaneously a positive effect on the purchase intention for that consumer. This is also correlated with more brand usage, long term performance of a company and the ability to keep a higher price (Aaker,1996).

When wanting to understand this aspect of brand equity the questions to consumers must be set in a context (Aaker, 1996). It is not possible to have a perception about quality if there is nothing to compare it to. Therefore, consumers must have other brands to compare a specific product or service with. Hence, researchers or managers must mention other brands when measuring this concept. The knowledge such research will lead to includes knowing if a specific brand is the best in a segment, better than a specific competitor, the worst or worse than a specific competitor (Aaker 1996).

(25)

2.2.5. Building customer-based brand equity

Building high levels of CBBE requires the brand to create associations within its consumers that are strong, favourable and unique (Keller, 1993). This can be done either by focusing on the brands logo or name, or by focusing on beneficial marketing activities. Without any marketing activities, there is little chance of creating brand awareness, which is the first step in establishing CBBE.

Alba and Hutchinson (1987) emphasizes this by explaining that awareness is mainly created through experiences. It is therefore important to put much focus on marketing activities. However, consumer activities like word-of-mouth can also be of great influence since it also creates an experience connected to the brand.

As explained earlier, the first stage of CBBE is the brand awareness and this will become stronger as the amount of interactions with the brand increases (Keller, 1993). Therefore, managers should put a lot of effort and focus in recurrent advertisement when creating CBBE for new consumers.

Within this first stage, quality is always of high importance since well-thought out advertisement can contain means that benefits creating brand associations, thus hurrying up the process of moving from awareness to associations. It is also important, in every marketing activity, that the brand is easily understood to be the creator and messenger (Keller, 1993). If a consumer is being presented with different options without knowing who the messenger is, the chances of that same consumer choosing the same option twice decreases. This is dependent on that there is no awareness or associations linked to it. Having been told about the product or service by another consumer is positive in this aspect, since the brand will always be defined.

Having managed the first two stages of CBBE, there is now a possibility of building loyal customers (Atligan et al., 2009). From the perspective of a company, brand loyalty can be built through satisfied consumers. However, perceived satisfaction can be different for each individual and is thus measured by asking consumers if they would buy from the brand in the future, or if they would recommend the product/service to others. Brand loyalty can also be created through the sense of being part of a community (Atligan et al., 2009). If consumers feel an identification with the community of a brand, they are more likely to be actively engaged with the brand. The community can for instance consist of friends or acquaintances.

2.2.6. Managing CBBE

Keller (1993) is suggesting different approaches and guidelines in order to manage the CBBE once it is established. Since brand equity can not be measured or explained by only one variable, it is key for managers or marketers to have a broad view when making decisions regarding marketing activities. These marketing activities have a great influence on the different aspects of CBBE, such as brand associations or (in the best case) the brand loyalty. In addition to having a broad view, companies must also adopt a longer perspective, taking into consideration the changes happening with the marketing activities now, and adapting future activities to it.

(26)

Secondly, it is important to know what associations or quality the company wants to represent (Keller, 1993). While laying out this framework the focus must be on what the needs and wants are for the consumer since the company’s product or service will have a higher chance of being purchased, if the associations are in-line with what the consumers want. While deciding on the brand image, another aspect that needs to be considered is if the company should connect the brand with secondary associations (Keller, 1993). Secondary associations can be a specific person or place that might strengthen or change consumers associations with the brand. In this case, the decision of secondary associations should be based on the framework outlined regarding what associations the company wants to be connected to. Since the human brain tends to remember or strengthen its memories towards happenings that are in line with what is already perceived about a specific object, it is of high importance to have a concrete and consistent image. Using these secondary associations can thus help create strong, favourable and unique associations.

Thirdly, managers should evaluate and later leverage different approaches in reaching out to consumers, since the CBBE in a consumer strengthens when being exposed to a brand several times (Keller, 1993). According to Keller (1993), it is not important where the interaction between consumer and company brand is happening. The importance is whether the interaction is creating strong, favourable and unique associations or not, since it is the key to creating brand loyalty. This requires, most of all, a congruent message throughout the different means of reaching out. Moving further, he emphasizes the importance of measuring the different concepts of CBBE by asking consumers about awareness, associations, loyalty or perceived quality since CBBE is created differently within every person being exposed to the brand. Having research conducted at several different points in time makes it easier to find changes within the most common associations.

Thereafter, adapting changes to have the associations correlate more with what is intended by the company. It also helps understanding what marketing activities creates the different aspects of brand associations.

Since associations often are an unconscious manner, it is important for managers not only to scratch the surface, but to focus and ask questions that reveal more in-depth associations (Supphellen, 2000). The associations that are easily detected are often more well-known by the company already. Therefore, it can be argued that qualitative studies are of higher importance than quantitative, since there is a higher chance and ability to find the unconscious associations. In addition, emotions are often difficult to express, thus consumers have a tendency to express their associations in words as “I like this brand” (Supphellen, 2000). Listing a set of emotions for the consumer will make it easier for them to choose and describe those associated with the brand.

Once finding these hidden associations there should be a follow up study that is quantitative in order to validate the result and thereafter act on it.

(27)

2.3. Combining the theory of buzz with CBBE

In this chapter the two theories will be combined in order to provide a framework of what role buzz might play in companies CBBE from a theoretical perspective. Each part of CBBE will be discussed separately regarding what role buzz might play in each one.

2.3.1. Brand awareness

One definition of buzz is “contagious talk about a brand, service, product, or idea” (Carl, 2006) and since brand awareness is built on consumers exposure and experiences linked to the brand, buzz might have an impact on consumers brand awareness. This is indicated due to the probability of buzz increasing consumers exposure and experiences with the brand (Keller, 1993; Alba and Hutchinson, 1987). Buzz could also prove to be impactful, since it includes the behaviour of participation in experiential activities (Houston et. al., 2018). Keller (1993) mentions how information exchanged by consumers about a product causes experiences linked to the brand, thus creating brand awareness. This, however, is dependent on that there is a clear connection between what is buzzed about and the brand.

2.3.2. Brand associations

To have high levels of CBBE, there must consist strong, favourable and unique associations within the consumer concerning the brand in question. As strong associations exist due to consumers being exposed to the brand at several times (quantity) and them perceiving the information to be of high quality, another assumed link between the two theories may occur. Since information given to a consumer by a consumer is argued to be more effective and perceivably more trustworthy than if originated from the company (Keller & Fay, 2012), it might have an effect on the perceived quality of the information, thus creating stronger associations. In addition, since higher buzz is caused by higher volumes of e.g. communication, it can be argued that buzz increases the consumers overall exposure to the brand. This might have an effect on both associations and awareness regarding the brand (Keller, 1993). Moving further, Griskevicius et.al. (2009) mentions

“social proof” and argues that something is perceived as more trustworthy if the opinion or message is shared by a lot of people. It is therefore indicated that buzz, which increases communication and brand exposure, will act as social proof and play a role in brand associations.

2.3.3. Perceived quality

Pre-release consumer buzz could play a role in the perceived quality of a product or brand before release. There are mainly two ways buzz could influence perceived quality. It could make it easier for consumers to form a perception about quality due to an increased amount of available information about an upcoming product. Also, buzz could influence the actual quality perception based on what is being said about a product. With the absence of a quality perception due to lack of experience with a product, consumers who are interested in it will engage in search activity in order to bridge this gap (Houston et. al., 2018).

(28)

According to Aaker (1996), perceived quality can e.g. be based on the appearance or product information. In the pre-release phase, this type of information can be provided by companies or speculated about by consumers (Houston et. al., 2018). Pre-release buzz is also linked with increased media coverage (Holbrook & Addis, 2008; Elberse & Eliashberg, 2003). These three aspects increase the amount of available information regarding an upcoming product and could facilitate the formation of consumers quality perceptions. Moving further, Houston et. al. (2018) argue that signals about quality provided by companies, and speculations about quality by consumers and media has high impact in the pre-release phase since no “true” quality information is available. Further, buzz surrounding a brand could potentially act as social proof (Griskevicius et.al., 2009), where consumers trust the opinions of others and thus make assumptions about the quality of a brand - or extensions of it. Buzz might therefore play a role in the quality perception, enabling both positive and negative consequences.

2.3.4. Brand loyalty

Buzz has its foundation in the anticipation and excitement for an upcoming product (Houston et.

al., 2018). It is also a phenomenon characterized by a high degree of interpersonal communication (comments, blog- and forum posts) (Xiong & Bharadwaj, 2014). The central aspect of communication might also create a sense of community among consumers. This community, where a lot of consumers share interest and excitement for an upcoming product, might influence brand loyalty positively. This, since consumers who feel identification with the community of a brand is found to be more likely to actively engage and gain a stronger connection with the brand (Atligan et al., 2009). This aspect is also covered by Thomas Jr (2004), who state that “customer communities creates buzz”. This is based on the notion that communities foster e.g. information sharing and offer a medium where people with similar interest can meet, discuss and share ideas and thoughts. It is further argued that customer communities build loyalty (Thomas Jr, 2004).

Brand loyalty is mainly built from consumer satisfaction (Atligan et al., 2009). From this perspective, brand loyalty can only be created post-release since satisfaction is created after actual experience with the product. Thus, buzz should mainly play a role in brand loyalty post-release.

This can further be explained by the concept of brand trust which increases if companies keep their promises and creates a sense of reliability. Buzz is found to increase consumer expectations of an upcoming product (Elberse & Eliashberg, 2003; Houston et. al., 2018; Divakaran et.al., 2017).

These higher expectations as a result of buzz could lead to consumer dissatisfaction if expectations are not met, thus potentially harming brand trust.

2.3.5. Theoretical framework

Based on a comparison of the theories presented, there are indications that buzz could play a role in the brand equity of video game companies. Pre-release buzz is mainly indicated to play a role in brand awareness, brand associations and perceived quality. Brand loyalty, however, is indicated

The unexplored power of buzz in the video game industry

UNIVERSITY

Master of Science in Business and Economics, 240 credits

The unexplored power of buzz in the video game industry

Social science, 30 credits

Halmstad 2020-05-30

Oskar Hammarsten, Sofie Hägerbrand

Table of contents