Ocean Park Brand Equity
To Evaluate the Brand Equity of Ocean Park Table of Contents Title1 Acknowledgement4 Abstract5 Chapter 1 Introduction6 1. 1Industry Background7 1. 2Statement of issue8 1. 3Purpose of the study9 Chapter 2 Literature Review10 2. 1Loyalty Measures10 2. 1. 1Price Premium11 2. 2Preceived Quality/Loyalty Measures11 2. 3Association/Differentiation Measures12 2. 4Awareness Measures12 2. 5Market Behavior Measures13 2. 5. 1Market Share13 2. 5. 2Price and Distribution Indices13 Chapter 3 Methodology15 3. 1 Sample Design15 3. 2 Questionnaire Design15 3. 3 Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS)16 3. 3. 1Reverse Scoring17 . 3. 2Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Analysis17 3. 3. 3Mean and Standard Deviation18 3. 3. 4Crosstab Test19 3. 4 Focus Group19 3. 5 Data Analysis19 Chapter 4 Results21 4. 1 Sample and Decriptive Statistics21 4. 2 Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Analysis21 4. 3 Mean and Standard Deviation22 4. 4 Crosstab Test23 4. 5 Loyalty24 4. 5. 1Price Premium24 4. 5. 2Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Analysis24 4. 6 Preceived Quality/Leadership25 4. 6. 1Preceived Quality25 4. 6. 2Leadership25 4. 7 Association/Differentiation26 4. 7. 1Preceived Value26 4. 7. 2Personality27 4. 7. 3Organization27 4. 7. 4Differentiation28 4. 8 Awareness28 4. 8. Brand Awareness28 4. 9 Focus Group29 4. 10 Market Behavior33 4. 10. 1. Market Share33 4. 10. 2Price Distribution Indices34 Chapter 5 Analysis36 5. 1 Mean Analysis36 5. 2 Crosstab Test Analysis36 5. 2. 1Loyalty37 5. 2. 2Preceived Quality/Leadership38 5. 2. 3Associations/Differentiation38 5. 2. 4Awareness39 5. 2. 5Market Behavior40 Chapter 6 Discussion42 6. 1 Questionnaire Setting42 6. 2 Information Collection42 6. 3 SPSS – Data Entry and Output43 6. 4 Result Analysis44 Chapter 7 Conclusions and Recommendations45 7. 1 Conclusions45 7. 2 Recommendations46 7. 2. 1Questionnaire Setting46 7. 2. 2Information Collection46 7. 2. SPSS – Data Entry and Output47 7. 2. 4Result analysis47 7. 2. 4Methodologies47 Reference49 Appendixes52 ACKNOWLEDGMENT I am genuinely tank to Mr. Nicholas Tam for supporting me all the time and spending many hours on my final year project. This was totally appreciated that he provided many professional and useful advices and recommendations to me. Otherwise, I would also like to thanks Mr. C. N. Lo as my second marker and give me suggestion to improve my project. ABSTRACT Ocean Park Hong Kong is a home-grown treasure. It is also one of the most popular amusement parks in the world, providing educational, conservation and entertainment.
Ocean Park Hong Kong has brought joy to local and overseas visitors throughout her 30-year history. She lets everyone in Hong Kong has a special and memorable experiences. In these 30 years, it experienced many impacts that are occurred by outside and inside of the organization. They also recorded a deficit for a certain years. But it was carried out the revolutions continually. Afterwards, the business is still running. Recently, some information indicated that the ranking of the most popular amusement park of the world, which is the Ocean Park Hong Kong higher than Hong Kong Disneyland.
Finally, through survey, focus group interview and brands performance measures, to conclude that the brand equity of Ocean Park was better. Better leadership, better quality, builds up customer loyalty. CHAPTER I – INTRODUCTION Ocean Park is one of the theme parks in Hong Kong. “Marine” is the majority theme of the park. It is located at the Southern District of Hong Kong, and it was opened on 10 January 1977. It was constructed at a land granted by the government, and then the funding of construction is granted by the Hong Kong Jockey Club (HKJC), and it also operated by HKJC.
In January 1979, Ocean Park introduced a Killer Whale for the visitors. It becomes a one of the selling points of the park. In the inception stage, there is not enough amusement rides for the public. But, there was expanded their scale of the park, and increased much more amusement rides into the park. The operating capital of Ocean Park was depends on the revenue from tickets and donation from HKJC in earlier stage. It also has a significant deficit for a long time because the price is set on the low side. In 1 July 1987, the “Ocean Park Ordinance” is constituted by the government.
HKJC will granted that they are established the trust with $200M funding. In this time, Ocean Park becomes a non-profit making organization and needs to self-finance. The park changed their business to commercial-oriented, and increasing its ticket price. Thus, the park enhanced its financial conditions to be positive. In 1998, the park recorded deficit again caused by some factors, such as East Asian Financial Crisis. Although it received 2 pandas from China, it still could not increase the visitor’s attraction of the park. The park also closed the water attractions and the Middle Kingdom.
And then, it introduced more amusement rises for visitors especially for the teenagers such as the Abyss Turbo Drop and the Mine Train. In Fiscal Year 2004/2005, there are more than 4 million visitors during a year. This is renewing the record since the park is opened. It is caused that PRC government implemented the “Individual Visit Scheme” under CEPA. Ocean Park revealed its redevelopment plan in 2005, which will upgrades the quality and availability of features at the park. This is response the impacts from the opening of Disneyland. Ocean Park is also held a groundbreaking ceremony for its redevelopment project in November of 2006.
According to the Attraction Attendance 2008 releases by Economics Research Associates (ERA) and Themed Entertainment Association (TEA) on 16 April, Ocean Park is the world’s number 15 theme park, Asia’s 5th theme park (Judith Rubin, 2009). (Appendix 1b) 1. Industry Background The tourism industry is one of the four key industries in the Hong Kong economy. There were two types of tourism which were inbound tourism and outbound. For inbound tourism, there were 5 groups of sub-industries which included retail trade, hotels and boarding houses, Restaurants, Cross-boundary passenger transport services and others.
The value added of tourism in 2006 and 2007 were HK$45,300 Million and HK$52,300 Million. There was increased around 14% from 2006 to 2007. And the employment in this industry in 2006 and 2007 was 176,300 and 193,800. There was increased around more than 8% from 2006 to 2007 (Census and Statistics Department, HKSAR, 2009). (Appendix 9) In order to support the poor economic condition, Hong Kong government was provided some supporting projects to the tourism industry such as “the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA)” and “Individual Visit Scheme”. These projects both were cooperated with PRC.
Ocean Park is one of the participators in the amusement park market. Its major competitor is Hong Kong Disneyland. Before Disneyland involved its business in Hong Kong, Ocean Park was the only one participator in this market during the other amusement parks were closed their business such as Lai Chi Kok Amusement Park. On the other hand, the amusement park from neighbor country should also be the major competitors for Ocean Park such as Happy Valley from Shenzhen, PRC. As a famous landmark of Hong Kong, Ocean Park was a successful company in this industry.
In accordance with the Attraction Attendance 2008, the 2008 attendance was equal to 5. 03 Million. It was a leading brand of the amusement park market (Judith Rubin, 2009) (Appendix 1b). In conclusion, Ocean Park should be capturing the opportunity derived from increasing attendance and the supporting from government, and focus its competence for facing the threat generated by intensive competition from the neighbor country. 2. Statement of issue In past certain years, Ocean Park faced impacts in different period of time, for example, East Asian Financial Crisis, SARS, and external environment.
For the financial issue, Ocean Park was faced the financial distress on past certain years especially for the East Asian financial crisis. Besides, for the external environmental issue, Ocean Park should also be faced to the new entrants of Hong Kong amusement park market that was Disneyland. Ocean Park was a domestic famous brand in Hong Kong. On the other hand, Disneyland was an international famous brand. The overall size of organization of Ocean Park should be smaller than Disneyland. 3. Purpose of the study Propose of this study is to understand customer’s brand equity of Ocean Park.
A result of questionnaire survey is to ascertain the sources (Brand Equity Ten) of brand equity of Ocean Park. Base on the findings of the survey, propose that the critical success factor of the theme park. CHAPTER II – LITERATURE REVIEW The Brand Equity Ten will be applying in this study, which is an effective method to evaluate brand equity. Ten sets of measures grouped into five categories, are shown in Table 1. The first four categories are to measure customer perceptions of the brand. The four categories of brand equity are including loyalty, perceived quality, associations, and awareness.
The last category is to collect information from the market based information rather than directly from customers (D. Aaker, 1996). 1. Loyalty Measures Since it is now widely recognized that it is much less costly and much more profitable to keep existing customers than to win new ones, customer retention become an important goal for most organizations. In principle it’s simple: you just have to keep your existing customer (N. Hill, J. Alexander, 2006). The Hong Kong amusement park industry was created a monopoly loyalty during there was only two participators in the market, such as Ocean Park and Disneyland.
The loyalty of these two amusement parks might be generated by devotion of its customers, for instance, the customer would be sought some adventure experiences at Ocean park during there was provided many thrill rides. Besides, if the customer would be found some story of fairy tales, they would go to Disneyland, it is because customer can be met many famous characters like Mickey Mouse. 1. Price Premium “A basic indicator of loyalty is the amount a customer will pay for the brand in comparison with another brand (or set of comparison brands) offering similar benefits”(D.
Aaker, 1996) For the admission fees of both Ocean Park and Disneyland, there was a large difference between parks. For instance, in the adult’s general admission fees, Ocean Park was HK$208, and Disneyland was HK$350. Therefore, the price premium should be HK$142. 1. Perceived Quality/Leadership Measures “Perceived quality is often the key positioning dimension for corporate brands (such as Toshiba or Ford) and other brands that range over product classes (such as Weight Watchers, Kraft, and store brands such as Safeway Select).
Because these brands span product classes, they are less likely to be driven by functional benefits, and perceived quality is likely to play a larger role. (D. Aaker, 2009) For Ocean Park, it provided different amusement facilities to visitors. Besides, Disneyland provided the story of fairy tales to visitors. Visitors could earn the different experiences during they are visiting these two parks. They would use the last experience to evaluate the perceived quality of the parks. “Leading brands are perceived to be relevant, unique and compelling.
They inspire customer loyalty and enable organizations to charge price premiums. They increase bargaining power with business partners, make it easier to hire and retain talented employees and provide organizations with clear strategic direction and platforms for future growth. ”(B. VanAuken, 2007) Both Ocean Park and Disneyland were performed their services at a unique and compelling ways. For example, Ocean Park provides a lot of amusement facilities for visitors; some facilities were very unique in Hong Kong such as Giant Panda Habitat.
On the other hand, Disneyland arranges many owned international famous characters that visitors may take some photos with them. 2. Associations/ Differentiation Measures “The key associations/differentiation component of brand equity usually involves image dimensions that are unique to a product class or to a brand. The challenge, then, is to generate general measures that will work across product classes. ” (D. Aaker, 1996) Since Ocean Park was opened, it was established a personal image for visitors that it was provided some messages like ocean protection and education, exciting experience.
Visitors had no doubtful that the meaning of Ocean Park, and they was knew that it was not an amusement park only. Also, Disneyland was generated a dreaming place for visitors to enjoy a childlike and entertaining tour for their each visit. But it was not provided other functional characters to the public such as educational activities. 3. Awareness Measures “Brand awareness measures the accessibility of the brand in memory. Brand awareness can measured through brand recall or brand recognition. Brand recall reflects the ability of consumers to retrieve the brand from memory when given the product category. (P. Chandon, 2003) Both Ocean Park and Disneyland were achieved to brand awareness. For Ocean Park, visitors may be bethought its owned characters when they were went to it such as Dolphin, Giant Panda, thrill rides and etc. On the other hand, also, Disneyland was gained the high level of international attention. Visitors were recall its owned characters like Winnie the Pooh, Stitch, and they can be got this memory outside it such as TV and other side-products of its owned characters. The dimension of differentiation in the association category is a summary of brand associations (D.
Aaker, 1996). 4. Market Behavior Measures 1. Market Share “The performance of a brand as measured by market share (and/or sales) often provides a valid and sensitive reflection of the brand’s standing with customers. When the brand has a relative advantage in the minds of customers, its market share should increase or at least not decrease. ” (D. Aaker, 1996) The performance of an amusement park can be measured by some elements such as its functions, service level, customer relationship management and etc.
It can be grew its admission income during the higher service performance that it can be performed. 2. Price and Distribution Indices “Market share can be a particularly deceptive brand equity measure when it increases as a result of reduced prices or price promotions. Thus, it is important to measure the relative market price at which the brand is being sold. ” (D. Aaker, 1996). “Market share or sales data are also extremely sensitive to distribution coverage. Sales may be dramatically affected when a brand gains or loses a major market or expands into another geographic region.
A measure of distribution coverage is thus a second logical companion measure to market share. ” (D. Aaker, 1996). As an amusement park, the market price data was equal to the admission income of a year, because this was majority source for capturing its operating resources. Besides, it indicated that the admission income might be affected by the change in attendance directly. On the other hand, the price and distribution indices should be reflected the market share that can be evaluated by admission attendance during a year.
This may be found out the true picture of the growth of admission attendance rather than depends on admission income. CHAPTER III – METHODOLOGY 1. Sample Design Data will be collected by using a questionnaire. It is use to measure customer perceptions of the brand along with the four categories (D. Aaker, 1996). The questionnaire is use to survey those people who are visited Hong Kong Ocean Park and Hong Kong Disneyland before. It is to ensure that the data from respondents are effective and reliable.
The questionnaire will be distributed to them through e-mail, and the respondents are classmates, teachers, familiars, friends, and colleagues. 100 samples were collected through this survey. 2. Questionnaire Design First, questionnaire is used to measure the four categories, which are Loyalty Measures (price premium and satisfaction/loyalty), Perceived Quality/Leadership Measures (perceived quality, and leadership), Associations/Differentiation Measures (perceived value, brand personality, organizational associations, and differentiation), and Awareness Measures (brand awareness).
Second, setting demographic factors, respondents were required to answer their personal information, including gender, age, monthly income, occupation and education. It is in order to compare the general information with the 25 items, and find out the critical success factor of Ocean Park. Nine dimensions including 25 items, plus 5 items of general information, there are totally 30 questions. Third, this study will compare with Disneyland because it is the mainly competitor in Hong Kong. The questionnaire format is Part A is Ocean Park, Part B is Disneyland, and Part C is the general information. 5-point Likert Scale” is usually used in questionnaires, and is the most widely used scale in survey research. ”. There were used 5 choices of answer question for respondents to answer their questionnaire except general information. It was included “Strongly Disagree”, “Disagree”, “Neutral”, “Agree” and “Strongly agree”. (Answers. com, 2009) Fourth, set “Missing Data”. It is to reduce or ignore the answer of unclear, ambiguous or answer more than one choice, etc. The questionnaire format could refer to Appendix 7. 3.
Statistical Package for the Social Science(SPSS) SPSS was established in 1968 by Norman H. Nie, C. Hadlai (Tex) Hull and Dale H. Bent. They want developed a revolutionary software system in order to turn raw data into representative information in an easily way. According to the SPSS’s website, “This revolutionary statistical software system was called SPSS, which stood for the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Nie, Hull and Bent developed SPSS out of the need to quickly analyze volumes of social science data gathered through various methods of research. (SPSS INC. , 2009). In addition to statistics analysis, the features of the base software, which are included Descriptive statistics (Cross tabulation, Frequencies, Descriptives, Explore, Descriptive Ratio Statistics), Bivariate statistics (Means, t-test, ANOVA, Correlation (bivariate, partial, distances), Nonparametric tests), Prediction for numerical outcomes (Linear regression), and Prediction for identifying groups (Factor analysis, cluster analysis (two-step, K-means, hierarchical), Discriminant) (Wikipedia, 2009)
In this report, there was using SPSS to analyze the statistical information, there are included Cronbach Alpha Reliability Analysis, Mean and Standard Deviation, Crosstab Test. 1. Reverse Scoring In order to calculate some opposite data in one dimension, there should be rescored the negative data to turn into positive data. This can be increasing the reliability and correlation among data in one dimension. “Items that are negatively worded in a scale must be rescored in a positive direction in order to match the other items in a scale” (S. Stark, et. al. , 2001)
In the questionnaire, Question 22 & 25 of Part A and B was used this function that in order to find out the reliable and correlated data, and these sets of data should be opposite to other data in same dimension. 2. Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Analysis “Cronbach’s alpha measures how well a set of items (or variables) measures a single unidimensional latent construct. When data have a multidimensional structure, Cronbach’s alpha will usually be low. Technically speaking, Cronbach’s alpha is not a statistical test – it is a coefficient of reliability (or consistency). (UCLA Academic Technology Services) There were used the Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Analysis to find out the reliability. The output table will then be displayed the Cronbach’s Alpha of the dimension. 3. Mean and Standard Deviation “The mean, indicated by ? (a lower case Greek mu), is the statistician’s jargon for the average value of a signal. It is found just as you would expect: add all of the samples together, and divide by N. ” (S. Smith, 2007) It is the use to find out the average in a group of population. There were calculated the means by all of the scoring of each question.
Afterwards, added up the separate mean from all dimensions which were found out the total mean of each category. “The standard deviation is one of several indices of variability that statisticians use to characterize the dispersion among the measures in a given population. To calculate the standard deviation of a population it is first necessary to calculate that population’s variance. Numerically, the standard deviation is the square root of the variance. Unlike the variance, which is a somewhat abstract measure of variability, the standard deviation can be readily conceptualized as a distance along the scale of measurement. (R. Hoffman, 2002) Besides, the standard deviation was displayed on the output table of SPSS in order to analyze the dispersion of the result of nine dimensions. 4. Crosstab Test “Cross-tabulations give us much more insight into the data than do simple profiles or frequency distributions. Cross-tabulations are an example of bivariate analysis (i. e. , examining the relationship between two variables). However, cross-tabulations are of limited value, too, because we are realistically restricted to examining the relationship between only two variables at a time (e. g. customer status and age; customer status and income; etc. ). If we try to examine a cross-tabulation of more than two variables at a time, the results are very difficult to visualize and interpret meaningfully. ” (SmartDrill, 2008) There was used the crosstabulation to compare the variability of general information. This can be easily found out the difference between two set of data. 4. Focus Group “Focus groups are a powerful means to evaluate services or test new ideas. Basically, focus groups are interviews, but of 6-10 people at the same time in the same group.
One can get a great deal of information during a focus group session. ” (C. McNamara, 2006) 5. Data Analysis 1. Calculated the mean and standard deviation for all of 9 dimensions in order to find out the overall performance of both Ocean Park and Disneyland. 2. Used SPSS reverse scoring function in order to make some conflict data that reversed into same way. This can make that the reliability must higher than origin data. Besides, Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Analysis can be found out the reliability of all of the dimensions, and ignored some irrelative items in the dimensions.
This can improve the reliability for each dimensions that if deleted the items. 3. Calculate the mean with both Ocean Park and Disneyland. 4. Used crosstabulation to compare which the general information of both Ocean Park and Disneyland such as age, gender and income, 5. After used of SPSS, there were formed a focus group that was invited 7 interviewees in order to discuss the issues that occurred in the result from SPSS. 6. Besides, found some corporate information of Ocean Park and Disneyland which how to performed the market behavior. 7.
Match the result of mean analysis and the result of crosstabutaion analysis, in order to find out the source of brand equity and the critical successful factor of the theme park. CHAPTER IV – RESULTS 4 Sample and Descriptive Statistics This survey totally collected 100 samples, 57 respondents are male and 43 respondents are female. The majority respondents aged between 20 to 24 years olds (83%). In the monthly income group, nearly 50% of respondents their salaries were $5,001 to $10,000 per month. Monthly income was “less than $5,000” which had 41% of respondents.
Many of respondents were students and workers (80%). Over a half of respondents had education level at diploma levels or associate degree, and 37% of respondents had education level at undergraduate or postgraduate. (Appendix 2) 2. Cronbach Alpha Reliability Analysis This research has nine dimensions which are belong to the four categories. The dimensions are including 25 items. Use the Cronbach Alpha Reliability Analysis to find out the reliabilities between the 25 items and the nine dimensions. The reliability test in order to define questions whether it is fit/relative to the nine dimensions.
This can find out which items can be more significant and which are the insignificant. The existence of the items was whether or not to affect the result of the dimensions such as completion, reliability and accuracy. (Appendix 3) 3. Mean and Standard Deviations Table 2: Comparison of Mean and S. D. of dimensions with Ocean Park and Disneyland |Categories |Dimensions |Ocean Park |Disneyland |Mean Differences |Ranking | | | |Mean |Std. Deviation |Mean |Std.
Deviation | | | |Loyalty Measures | |Dimensions |Ocean Park |Disneyland | |Price Premium |Medium |High (Negative) | |Satisfaction/ Loyalty |High (Positive) |High (Negative) | |Perceived Quality |High (Positive) |High (Negative) | |Leadership |High (Positive) |High (Negative) | |Perceived Value |Medium |High (Negative) | |Brand Personality |High (Positive) |Medium | |Organizational Associations |Medium |Medium | |Brand Awareness |High (Positive) |High (Negative) | |Market Share |- |- | |Price and Distribution Indices |Medium |Medium | 1. Loyalty
According to the result after crosstab the items, it found that in the loyalty category, the effect of price premium for Ocean Park was medium. The acceptability of the admission price for Ocean Park was relatively higher than the Disneyland. Its admission price was cheaper than Disneyland. Comparatively speaking, the effect of price premium for Disneyland was high. The acceptability of the admission price was low, that was relatively expensive. The influence of price premium on Disneyland is negative. Besides, the result reflected that price was not the determining factor for respondents to switch brand. On the other hands, the effect of satisfaction for Ocean Park was high. The park was better than Disneyland in satisfied customers needs and wants.
Loyalty was built by a cumulative result, which were the customers’ past visit experiences with the brands. The result indicated that the opportunity of respondents’ revisit the parks was based on their last visit experiences. Ocean Park was better than Disneyland, respondents were willing to recommend Ocean Park to others rather than Disneyland. The influence of satisfaction on Ocean Park is positive. However, the effect of satisfaction for Disneyland was high. It brings a negative influence on the park. In satisfied customers needs and wants, Disneyland was worse than Ocean Park. Respondents were unsatisfied with their last visit experience.
Only seldom of respondents would revisit the park on the next opportunity and recommend the park to others. During the result of satisfaction was negative, the management from Disneyland would improve the quality for satisfying customers’ needs and wants. 2. Perceived Quality/Leadership The result reflected that there was a linkage between perceived quality and leadership, Compare with Disneyland, Ocean Park was popular and more innovative, it was the leading brand in Hong Kong, and overall Ocean Park was better in quality. It implied that better leadership, better quality. It helps Ocean Park to keep closer relationship with loyal customers and less of switchers. The effect of perceived quality/leadership for Ocean Park was medium.
Oppositely, Disneyland was worse, it was not innovative enough and not much popular than Ocean Park, and therefore Disneyland was not the leading brand in Hong Kong. One of reasons might cause by the negative news about the park. The effect of perceives quality/leadership for Disneyland was high and negative. 3. Associations/Differentiation Ocean Park could provide good value for the money. The effect of perceived value for Ocean Park was medium. Disneyland could not provide good value for the money. The effect of perceived value for the park was high and negative. Ocean Park had its own personality and it was interesting. Respondents had a clear image of the type of person who would visit the park. The effect of personality for Ocean Park was high and positive. Disneyland also had its own personality.
However, seldom of respondents were agreed the park was interesting. Normally, respondents had a clear image for what type of person would visit the park. The personality of Disneyland was medium. The personality of Disneyland was indistinct. It could reflect the respondents’ imagery, which was a key driver of brand personality. About the organization management of Ocean Park, the results reflected that respondents were answered “neutral” about the organization trust and admire the Ocean Park Company. But the respondents thought that the organization association with Ocean Park had credibility. The effect of organization for the park was medium.
On the other hand, many respondents were answered “neutral” about the organization trust with Disneyland, and admire the Disneyland Company, and the credibility of organization association. The results implied that the respondents were lack of knowledge about the organization management beheld Disneyland. The effect of organization for the park was medium. Organization management back of the theme parks is usually ignored by the visitors. It is because its lack of attractive for the visitors associated with its services. Therefore, the effect of this dimension with both companies was medium. Overall, Ocean Park and Disneyland were different. 4. Awareness Recognition of Ocean Park and Disneyland were high.
Respondents had heard of the two parks, it was important for the exist brands. Moreover, respondents were knew what the parks stand for, it reflected that customers had a level of brand knowledge. Besides, respondents were no opinion about Ocean Park, but respondents had opinion with Disneyland. The result of brand opinion implied that respondents were less confidence with Disneyland. The effect of awareness for Ocean Park was high and positive, and for Disneyland was high and negative. . 5. Market Behavior For the market share measure, there was lack of information to compare the sales performance between Ocean Park and Disneyland. Therefore, the effect of market for both Ocean and Disneyland would not be evaluated.
As the result, the market price was not compared between Ocean Park and Disneyland, because Disneyland’s admission income was not being provided in the Annual Report individually. The financial information of Hong Kong Disneyland was combined with European Disneyland. In the distribution coverage, the result of Attraction Attendance 2007 and 2008 (Appendix 1a & b) indicated that Ocean Park had higher indicated that Ocean Park had recorded higher attendance rather than Disneyland. It is implied that Ocean Park should be more successful on the admission income, and gained a large number of visitors rather than Disneyland. On the other hand, Disneyland had higher distribution coverage on the world, because it involved that its operations were involved 5 countries in the world.
Besides, Ocean Park had lower distribution coverage in the market, because it only had one amusement in the world. As a result, both of Ocean Park and Disneyland were medium in the effect of market price/ distribution indices. To conclude that after use high/low method to compare with the two parks, it found that the brand equity of Ocean Park was better. Table 3 shown each category has a key driver of influence. Loyalty, the key driver is satisfaction. Perceived quality and leadership measures, leadership variable in this category should be considered. The key component of associations and differentiation measures is including the personality. In the category of awareness measures, brand awareness is the important component.
Attendance of distribution coverage in market behavior is the most important. Matching mean analysis with crosstab test analysis, it found out that the loyalty is the most influence category among the brand equity of Ocean Park. The dimension of satisfaction in the loyalty category is the critical success factor of Ocean Park. CHAPTER VI – DISCUSSION During the study, there were faced such problems. This part of discussion would point out the problems, in order to share the editor’s opinions with those people who would having study or survey in the future. 1. Questionnaire Setting 1. Sample of the survey is not many, only collected 100 samples, representation of the result is low. 2.
The method of collecting the data is not good enough. It is because through e-mail, which is inconvenience, low efficiency, and usually will ignore by addressees. E-mail is a passive method, and the respondents their replies are also passive. 3. Questionnaire is distributed to visitors through e-mail. Some respondents had their feedback about the questionnaire, such as wrong words, the questionnaire format, etc. 4. Focus on the questionnaire design, it could be improved. For example, in the price premium, the questionnaire did not ask respondents some questions about the “dollar metric”, and market research approach (conjoint/ “trade-off” analysis). Therefore, the dimension of price premium an not be accurately and clearly to analysis whether it can build up customer loyalty and whether it is important part of loyalty measures. 2. Information Collection 1. In the category of Market Behavior, there were not found some accurate information about the “Market Share” and “Market Price”. That is the admission price of Disneyland. According to the Disneyland Annual Report 2008, the financial information about Hong Kong Disneyland was displayed that it was combined the financial information associated with European Disneyland. This is indicated that the financial information should not be compared with Ocean Park directly, because any changes of the financial information may be occurred by both Hong Kong and European one.
Therefore, the related information should not be really reflected the true information especially for Hong Kong Disneyland. 3. SPSS – Data Entry and Output 1. When setting the questionnaires, sometimes, may need to set some reverse questions. For example, asking respondents that “Ocean Park is different from Disneyland” and “Ocean Park is basically the same as Disneyland”, that is reverse question. After using SPSS to calculate the reliability of a group of items (named the items as questions), the result of output may find that the reliability of the group of items is become “negative”. It indicated that the reliability between the items is low, and not consistence.
After the discussion why the reliability between the items is become “negative”, there are two possible reasons. First, maybe among the group of items, the questions are asking different things, and then cause the reliability of the group of items become “negative”. For example, asking respondents about Ocean Park’s recognition, knowledge and opinion. Even though these three items are belongs to dimension of awareness, but they are really asking different things. Moreover, each group of items may have to face that some of items within the group are sensitive. These items may affect the reliability of a whole group of items. Second, it is easy to forget to reverse those questions. It means change the value of the items during using SPSS.
Some questions if no reverse, then the reliability of the group of items may be become “negative”. 2. Crosstabulation figures shown that the some data of the result are trend to one side, such as question no. 25 of Ocean Park and Disneyland, the answers of the respondents reply on Ocean Park is trend to “Agree and Strongly Agree”. The answer of the respondents answer to Disneyland is trend to “Agree and Strongly Agree”. These situations occur by make mistake in select a wrong set of data to crosstab. Checking the process of data entry, find that the data put into to crosstab is the set of reversed data. Reverse is use to calculate the reliability of the groups of items.
But when calculating the mean of the items and crosstab the items, it should not be use the reversed data to measure the result. It is because use reversed data will wrongly reflect the respondents’ opinion. The authenticity of the result is low. The wrong result will trend one side. 4. Result analysis 1. Even though calculate the mean can find out which dimension is better and which one is worse between Ocean Park and Disneyland. Mean may not reflect the real situation that the respondents’ opinion. CHAPTER VI I – CONCLUSIOUS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4. 5. 6. 7. 1. Conclusions Overall, the brand equity of Ocean Park is better. As the result of this report, it finds that the best performance is the category of loyalty and then is leadership.
Among the category of loyalty, the critical success factor of Ocean Park is satisfaction. Ocean Park provides better satisfaction in services and performances for customers. Ocean Park gives customers a positive image. Customers are satisfying their visit experiences. They want to revisit the park, and also willing recommend the park to others. The acceptable admission price is one of competitive advantages for Ocean Park. Satisfaction can be also effect by the leadership performance. In the category of leadership, innovative is the key driver, which is also another one of selling point of Ocean Park. It implies that better leadership, better quality.
Ocean Park is better in providing overall quality. Ocean Park has its own personality, the park provides educational, conservation and entertainment, and it is the only one local theme park. It is a popular theme park in Hong Kong. In 2008, Ocean Park was recorded that there were 5. 03 million people visit to it. It is increase 2 % of attendance by compare with 2007. Ocean Park is the leading brand in Hong Kong. 2. Recommendations According to the discussion of limitation at the above, this part will point out some suggestions. Last but not least, recommendation is not only for those limitations, also recommend to others that the good aspects. 1. Questionnaire Setting 1.
Suggest that target sample should have around 200, because for individual project, the sample set too high will more difficultly to handle. 2. For collecting data, suggest that face to face interview. It is an active method, interviewer and interviewee have a conversation, and thus interviewer can know more about what the interviewee thinking. 3. In order to avoid the issue of questionnaire mistaken occur again, it should double check the questionnaire and pre-test before sending out to the addressees. 4. For the questionnaire design, suggest that the dimension of price premium can be determine by ask respondents some questions like how much more they would willing to pay for the Ocean Park or Disneyland.
Another one example is asked some questions like “Would you prefer the admission price of Ocean Park at $250, and Disneyland at $350? ”, to get more information. 2. Information Collection 1. Suggest that there can be sending an email to Hong Kong Disneyland Company for requesting the financial information of Disneyland. This is a direct way to get the information. 3. SPSS – Data Entry and Output 1. Normally, the sensitive items will be reduce or ignore for remaining the group of items more consistent during measure the dimensions. Determine whether the sensitive items are necessary for the measurement. 2. By using crosstabulation, check the questions carefully.
Determine the reverse questions and then change the value of the items before calculate the reliability of the group items. After reverse the questions and calculate the reliability of the group items, the result may turn to be “positive”. 4. Result analysis 1. Mean may not reflect the real situation of the respondents’ opinion. For this reason, it needs to use crosstab test to compare with the two parks, because it can reflect the respondents truly opinions. Then match with mean, in order to find out the source of brand equity and the critical successful factor of the theme park. 5. Methodologies 1. This study used Brand Equity Ten to measure theme parks.
This method can measure whether the brand is strong or weak, and which dimension performance of the brand is the best and the worst. An organization can through this measurement to enhance its capability to manage the brands and markets. Also, the measurement can help managers to develop valid instruments for individual brands. The managers can strengthen their brands by focus on the brand-building activities they have been successful. The Brand Equity Ten are involving five categories, it can let the managers know that among the categories, the brands in some of which may have its own feature and challenges, thereby the managers can suggest new positioning options.
Furthermore, the measurement is comprehensive, not only evaluate the customer perceptions of the brand, also the brand’s market behavior. Besides, the measurement can be applied into other markets and products as well. If people who want to have a study or survey about brands, products or markets, the Brand Equity Ten is one of the measurement that recommend them to use. 2. Focus group is one of tools to get a lot of information. It is through interview participants to acquire the feedback about new products, as well as various topics. For instance, in this study, the first four categories are about customer perception of brand equity of Ocean Park. Focus group can reflect the participants’ opinion about Ocean Park.
It is help to evaluate the brand equity of Ocean Park and to make the evaluation become more comprehensive. It is because questionnaire can not express the reasons of the respondents answer to those questions, but focus group can filling the drawback of the questionnaire. Besides, firms also can form focus groups for discussing, and/or test a new product before it is available to the public. Focus group can let the firms know that the acceptability of potential customers for the products and/or the brands. If it is necessary, focus group is the tool that recommends to people for obtaining a great information. 3. SPSS is a program for statistical analysis. The program involve many functions, it helps people to analysis the data.
For instance, in the SPSS program, there is a function called “reverse”, it can change the value of the question. Besides, it is convenience that using crosstabutation to compare different set of data. SPSS also can save time to save the tables or charts, because the “Output” document can save all of them. The tables and charts will be classified into different files. It is easy to use. REFERENCES Aaker, David A (1996), “Measuring Brand Equity Across Products and Markets”, California Management Review, Spring 1996,38,3, ABI/INFORM Global, pg. 102 N. Hill, J. Alexander (2006),”Loyalty”, The handbook of customer satisfaction and loyalty measurement, pg. 13, para. 1 Aaker, David A (2009), “Perceived Quality: Critical Asset For Brands”,
Building Strong Brands, [online] available from [31 May 2009] Answers. com (2009), “Likert scale”, Answers. com, [online] available from ; http://www. answers. com/topic/likert-scale;  B. VanAuken (2007), “Defining Brand Leadership”, Branding Strategy Insider, [online] available from [18 November, 2007] Census and Statistics Department, HKSAR (2009), “Statistical Tables”, Hong Kong Statistics, [online] available from [15 May 2009] C. McNamara (2006), “Basics of Conducting Focus Groups”, Free Management Library, [online] available from ; http://www. managementhelp. org/evaluatn/focusgrp. htm;  Jon Chandler and Mike Owen. 2003), “Developing Brands with Qualitative Market Research”, Qualitative Management Research, 2nd ed. London, Thousand Oaka and New Delhi: SAGE Publications Judith Rubin (2008), “Themed Entertainment Association/Economics Research Associates’ Attraction Attendance Report”, Attraction Attendance 2007, [online] available from Judith Rubin (2009),“Themed Entertainment Association/Economics Research Associates’ Attraction Attendance Report”, Attraction Attendance 2008, [online] available from [16 April 2009] R. Hoffman (2002), “Standard Deviation”, Statistics Explained, [online] available from ; http://www. animatedsoftware. com/statglos/sgstdev. tm ; [February 2002] Ocean Park Hong Kong (2009), “Ocean Park Corporation annual report 2007-2008”, Annual Report, [online] available from [29 June 2009] Pierre Chandon (2003), “Note On Measuring Brand Awareness, Brand Image, Brand Equity And Brand Value”, OPPAPERS. COM, [online] available from [March 2003] SmartDrill (2008),”Crosstabulation”, Analytic Techniques, [online] available from ; http://www. smartdrill. com/About/process2. html;  S. Smith (2007), “Mean and Standard Deviation”, Statistics, Probability and Noise, [online] available from ; http://www. dspguide. com/ch2/2. htm ;  SPSS INC. (2009), “Corporate History”, SPSS.
COM, [online] available from ; http://www. spss. com/corpinfo/history. htm;  S. Stark, et. al. (2001), “Reverse Scoring”, IRT Modeling Lab, [online] available from ; http://io. psych. uiuc. edu/irt/prep_1. asp;  The Walt Disney Company (2009), “2008 Annual Report”, The Walt Disney Company, [online] available from  UCLA Academic Technology Services, “What does Cronbach’s alpha mean? ”, The University of California, [online] available from ; http://www. ats. ucla. edu/stat/Spss/faq/alpha. html ; Wikipedia (2009), “Statistics program”, SPSS, [online] available from ; http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/SPSS#cite_note-1; [29 July 2009]
Wikipedia (2009), “Walt Disneyland Parks and Resorts”, Wikipedia, [online] available from ; http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Walt_Disney_Parks_and_Resorts; [3 August 2009] Word Count: 9,830 APPENDIXES Attraction Attendance Report 2007-08 Appendix 1 a-b SPSS-Frequency Appendix 2 SPSS-Reliability Appendix 3 SPSS- Mean and Standard Deviation Appendix 4 SPSS- Crosstab General Information Appendix 5 SPSS-Crosstab Primary Data Appendix 6 Questionnaire-Chinese Version Appendix 7a Questionnaire-English Version Appendix 7b Ocean Park Annual Report 2008 Appendix 8a The Walt Disneyland Annual Report 2008 Appendix 8b The Four Key Industries in the Hong Kong Economy Appendix 9