_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________ Report Information from ProQuestMarch 19 2015 08:50_______________________________________________________________

Document 1 of 1 Brand communities for mainstream brands: the example of the Yamaha R1 brand community Author: Felix, Reto ProQuest document link Abstract: Purpose - The purpose of this study is to understand consumers' product use, practices, identity, andbrand meanings in the context of a brand community dedicated to a mainstream Japanese motorcycle brand.Design/methodology/approach - A qualitative research approach was used in the form of netnography (i.e.ethnography adapted to the study of online communities). Findings - On the product level, consumersexperience multiple conflicts and negotiations of meaning related to the use of the product. These findings arereproduced on the brand level, where members of the brand community present a more differentiated look onthe brand, accompanied by lower levels of admiration and identification with the brand, as in previous reports ofbrand communities for brands such as Apple, Jeep, or Harley-Davidson. The results suggest that consumers formainstream brands may be more prone to multi-brand loyalty instead of single-brand loyalty. Practicalimplications - Marketers should monitor motivations, attitudes, and decision-making processes on both theproduct and the brand level. Further, non-company-run online communities such as the Yamaha R1 forum bearthe risk of community members transmitting brand information in a way not desired by the company. Thus,marketers should consider sponsoring an entire discussion website, a forum, or part of a forum. Originality/value- Whereas previous studies on brand communities have concentrated predominantly on highly admired anddifferentiated brands, such as Apple or Harley-Davidson, this study investigates consumer practices, identities,and negotiations of meaning on both the product and brand level for a less differentiated mainstream brand. Full text: An executive summary for managers and executive readers can be found at the end of this article. Introduction to brand communities and literature review Community-based brand relationships in marketing literature have been discussed commonly with a focus onbrand communities. A brand community is a "specialized, non-geographically bound community, based on astructured set of social relationships among admirers of a brand" ([31] Muñiz and O'Guinn, 2001, p. 412). Brandcommunities have been found to be crucial in order to understand brand loyalty ([10] Fournier and Lee, 2009;[29] McAlexander et al. , 2002, [28] 2003). They are based on a shared interest in the brand ([1] Algesheimer etal. , 2005) and, more specifically, on the three characteristics of consciousness of kind, shared rituals andtraditions, and a sense or moral responsibility ([31] Muñiz and O'Guinn, 2001). As a positive outcome of brandcommunities, consumers may engage in cocreation ([39] Schau et al. , 2009), and religious-like relationshipsbetween consumers and brands may evolve, as documented in the case of the Apple Newton brand community([32] Muñiz and Schau, 2005; [38] Schau and Muñiz, 2006). Because of their geographical independence, brand communities can exist in the form of local clubs or interestgroups ([1] Algesheimer et al. , 2005; [40] Schouten and McAlexander, 1995), entirely on the Internet ([19]Kozinets, 1997; [32] Muñiz and Schau, 2005), or in combined form ([21] Kozinets, 2001). Further, brandcommunities have emerged for virtually any product, such as cars ([1] Algesheimer et al. , 2005; [25] Leigh et al., 2006; [27] Luedicke et al. , 2010; [29] McAlexander et al. , 2002; [31] Muñiz and O'Guinn, 2001; [41] Schoutenet al. , 2007), motorbikes ([40] Schouten and McAlexander, 1995), computers ([4] Belk and Tumbat, 2005),groceries ([8] Cova and Pace, 2006), or movies and television series ([6] Brown et al. , 2003; [21] Kozinets,2001). The common denominator of the brands patronized in brand communities is a clear and uniquepositioning in combination with consumers who strongly identify with the brand. Consumers define themselvesby the brands they consume as well as the brands they do not consume, and brands are clearly classified into"our brands" and "other brands" by the community ([30] Muñiz and Hamer, 2001). In other words, members of aparticular brand community are not only supposed to be more loyal to the own brand, but also substantially less

loyal to competing brands. This phenomenon has been described as oppositional brand loyalty by [31] Muñizand O'Guinn (2001) and may lead to enhanced intergroup stereotyping, trash talk targeted at members outsidethe community, and emotional pleasures from news about a rival's failure ([15] Hickman and Ward, 2007). Inextreme cases, oppositional brand loyalty can turn into active consumer resistance or anti-brand communities([16] Hollenbeck and Zinkhan, 2006; [27] Luedicke et al. , 2010). However, brand communities are not free of oppositional forces and negotiations of meaning coming frominside. Rather, brand communities may embrace consumers who are critical with the brand or the product ingeneral, and it would thus be overly optimistic to expect equally high levels of loyalty from all visitors of a brandcommunity. For example, [20] Kozinets (1999) classifies members of virtual communities according to theidentification with the consumption activity (or brand) and the intensity of the social relationships with othermembers of the community. Whereas insiders show both high levels of brand identification and socialorientation towards the community, other members may have lower levels of brand identification (minglers),lower levels of social relationships with the community (devotees), or both (tourists). Especially consumers whoare simultaneously members in competing brand communities in the same product category may have highlevels of participation in the communities, but without showing high levels of brand loyalty or admiration for thebrands ([44] Thompson and Sinha, 2008). In an application of these segmentation approaches to a sample ofvideogame players (Settlers of Catan) and a Swatch brand community, [35] Ouwersloot and Odekerken-Schröder (2008) find one segment of community members who are highly interested in the product, but not inthe brand (36 and 7 percent, respectively) and a second segment including consumers who are neitherinterested in the product, the brand, or social relationships, yet still prefer to remain in the community (15 and 7percent, respectively). Thus, it can be argued that consumer responses, such as satisfaction or loyalty, operatenot only on the brand, but also on the product level ([45] Torres-Moraga et al. , 2008). In the following analysisof an online brand community for a Japanese mainstream motorcycle brand, it is shown how consumersnegotiate product and brand meanings, and how identity construction and brand attitudes are affected. Theanalysis is divided into a first part on issues related to the activity and practices of riding a sports bike and theidentity of sports bike consumers in general, and a second part on brand attitudes and how brands mediateidentity construction. Method Netnography was used to explore brand relationships and identity construction for an online community of amainstream Japanese motorcycle brand. Netnography has been defined as "ethnography adapted to the studyof online communities" ([22] Kozinets, 2002, p. 61) and has been used in consumption contexts such as the X-Files ([19] Kozinets, 1997), Star Trek ([21] Kozinets, 2001, [23] 2006), wedding messages ([34] Nelson andOtnes, 2005), cars ([6] Brown et al. , 2003), and consumer gift systems ([11] Giesler, 2006). Similar to traditionalethnography, netnography is open-ended, interpretative, flexible, metaphorical, and grounded in the knowledgeof the specific and particularistic ([22] Kozinets, 2002). However, netnography is usually faster, simpler, and lessexpensive than traditional ethnography ([22] Kozinets, 2002, [23] 2006). Further, it has been argued that newonline communication technologies have "expanded the array of generalized others contributing to theconstruction of the self" ([7] Cerulo, 1997, p. 386), and netnography as a tool of analyzing online communities isthus able to integrate the broadened spectrum of agents involved in the construction of individual and collectiveidentity. Data collection Because of its size and relevance for the motorcycle community, the Yamaha R1 forum (www.r1-forum.com)was chosen as the primary data source. Yamaha is one of four mainstream Japanese motorcycle brands withworldwide sales of US$12.5 billion in 2009 ([47] Yamaha Motor Co., 2009). As a comparison, Harley Davidson'ssame year consolidated sales from motorcycles and related products were US$4.3 billion ([13] Harley-Davidson, 2009). The Yamaha R1 forum is primarily dedicated to Yamaha's top-of-the-range sport bike, the

Yamaha R1, but there are also members subscribed to the forum who either have motorbikes from differentbrands, such as Honda, Suzuki, Kawasaki, or Ducati, or who currently do not have a motorbike. As of June 14,2010, the R1 forum had 107,249 subscribed members and more than four million postings in approximately265,000 threads. The threads in the forum are organized into five different sections: Community R1-related discussion Technique, racing, and stunt discussion Marketplace/classified. Misc. section. After starting reading threads in the Community section, it was possible to identify preliminary themes andissues by further browsing through the postings. At a very early stage of the research, evidence was found formore complex and ambiguous brand relationships than in previous studies on brand communities. Following apurposive sampling approach ([26] Lincoln and Guba, 1985; [46] Wallendorf and Belk, 1989), reading anddownloading posts were continued as long as analysis of the postings generated new insights and did not leadto redundancy ([3] Belk et al. , 1988). At a later stage of the study, the forum's search engine was used toimmerse more systematically into the data. Over the period between August 2006 and June 2010, around10,000 postings were read, of which approximately 300 were downloaded. Organization, analysis, and ethical procedures In a first step, downloaded postings were pre-classified into different categories and reoccurrences were codedby assigning one or several codes to the statements in the postings. Using an iterative approach, jumping backand forth between coded and uncoded statements facilitated the interpretation of the data. Codes were thencondensed into more meaningful constructs and subsequently into interpretive themes in order to obtainrelevant layers of meaning and richly textured interpretations ([2] Arnould and Wallendorf, 1994). Thisprocedure allowed a grounded, hermeneutic interpretation to emerge from the data that did not strive forrepresentativeness, but rather for analytic depth and relevance. In order to impede the tracking of forum members' identities, user names were changed to generic membernames, such as "forum member 1." Deviating from [22] Kozinets' (2002) recommendations, permissions fromcommunity members to use direct quotations were not requested. The reason for this decision was twofold:First, in an initial attempt to contact community members, only one response out of ten emails sent wasobtained. If only those postings had been used that responses had been received for, the pool of usable datahad been reduced significantly. And second, [24] Langer and Beckman's (2005) reasoning was considered inthat postings in an internet community forum are intentionally public postings, comparable to readers' letters in anewspaper, and that it would be highly unusual to seek permission to use direct quotations in this context.However, Kozinet's concerns about adequate ethical procedures in netnography research are certainly valid,and the pragmatic issue (non-responses for permission requests) finally was the one that complicated followinghis recommendations. The product level: practice and identity Although recreational motorcycling in general is considered a high-risk leisure time activity, there are differentsegments within the motorcycle community that distinguish themselves in attitudes and behaviors related toriding style and speed. On one extreme of street bike riding are the easy-rider oriented owners of choppers ortouring bikes who prefer to ride at moderate speeds and enjoy the immediate experience with the environment.On the other extreme are sports bike enthusiasts who prefer a fast, competitive riding style that is oftenaccompanied by the exhibition of riding skills and risky stunting maneuvers such as performing wheelies ([14]Haigh and Crowther, 2005). Commercial sports bikes aim to be copies of racing bikes used by professionalriders at the Moto GP or Superbike competitions, and a modern liter bike, available at dealerships for underUS$15,000, accelerates from zero to 200 km/h (125 miles) in less than ten seconds and reaches speeds in

excess of 290 km/h (180 miles). A complete safety gear, consisting of helmet, leather gear, gloves, and boots,is considered an obligation for any sports bike rider by some, but lead to mock comments by others, ridiculingthe "power ranger" outfit of sports bike riders. An important number of psychological and social conflicts are derived from the inherent nature of sports bikeriding. Physical, functional, financial, psychological and social risks form a complex, multilayered field oftensions and constraints that are constantly negotiated by the individual, both internally and externally, andrarely resolved with simple heuristics. The actual or anticipated implications of an accident are dominant inmany of the comments on the R1 forum, as the following sequence of succeeding narratives related toaccidents and quitting riding suggests: I quit riding one time in my life. I was just getting married, building a house, etc. [...] and coincidentally I wasinvolved in a string of near misses: cars cutting me off, almost getting side swiped by an idiot who didn't knowhow to turn into his own lane, getting run off road and up over a curb through a gas station parking lot by agarbage truck who just decided he wanted to cut across two lanes with no warning. It was my opinion that therewas just some bad energy around me right then, and with all the other stress in my life maybe it was adding tothe problem. I don't know. I hung it up for a few years, then got back into it when everything felt right again. Itstill feels right [...] all the while I've witnessed bike wrecks, been close to others' fatal accidents, laid my ownbike down at a track day, etc. [...] but it still feels right for me. My single rule is that as long as my head is in thegame, then it's "right". If my head is constantly focusing on crashing, dying, etc. [...] then it's time to take anothertime-out. Shouldn't be riding if you can't focus on what you're doing. Period. No shame in that (forum member1). I've seen bad accidents but also I believe its mental. With so many, "I've gone down" threads, it can eat yourconfidence away and make riding not fun. If it ain't fun, that's a good time to step back and let time rebuild yourenjoyment (forum member 2). [...] Subscribed [...] (forum member 3). Personally everyday that I wake up and am fortunate enough to ride I tell my wife I love her I get my brainfocused and I always keep reminding myself that this could be my last ride and I think that is half the reason Iride so responsibly on the street. I don't want to have a last ride I love this sport. I have been down once veryhard and that was a wake up call but I can't give up what I love and to all my friends and fellow riders if I do godown and don't get up please keep riding for me cause I would do the same (forum member 4). The conflict between the hedonistic and aesthetic pleasures of riding a bike and the inherent risks involved inthe activity becomes salient in forum member 2 comment about how riding a motorcycle should be related tofun. Specific life events, such as those mentioned in forum member 1 narrative, amplify these tensions and maylead to important changes in attitudes or behaviors. However, these attitudinal or behavioral changes arefrequently dynamic and unstable in time. For example, the decision to quit riding is in many cases a temporalone, and forum members compare riding to an addiction such as drinking or smoking. This addiction-like needto ride a motorbike then becomes an important factor in identity construction: From the point of view of theindividual, riders do not choose riding a motorbike in order to signal certain values. Rather, as expressed byforum member 4, the activity forms a natural part of the self and is just there, similar to early conceptualizationsof gender or race in the essentialist identity logic. Riding a bike is elevated to a mission that does not leaveroom for choices, and fellow riders are encouraged to honor the dead by continuing the mission and keeping thespirit alive. The inherent trait of being addicted to motorcycles is assessed critically in a reflective discourse by many riders.For example, forum member 5 explains that he is aware of the multiple conflicts that surround his hobby, butapparently resolves these conflicts by stating that riding is the most important thing in his life, and that he haslearned that riding makes him happy. The shared consciousness and discourse related to themes such as therisk of experiencing a severe accident, losing a fellow rider, or problems with girlfriends, spouses, or the family

in general, leads to a collective identity that is constructed, complex, and deprived of precise classifications. The brand level: attitudes mediating identity construction The negotiations of meaning related to the practice of riding a sports bike are reproduced at the more specificbrand level. Whereas previous research on brand communities has been largely focused on communities withextraordinary high levels of brand loyalty and commitment, members of the R1 sports bike community show amore ambiguous and differentiated relationship with the Yamaha brand: I'm really faithful to Yamaha, but when sitting on a new R1 and a new GSX-R1000 side by side, I have to say Ilike the Suzuki. The R1 just feels so much [...] bigger. I don't know. Also, the magazines bitch about thesuspension [...] yet how many serious track people leave suspension stock anyway? Regardless, I'm too poor tobuy a new bike, so I'll continue riding my 02 R1 on the track (forum member 6). Faithfulness in this context is not experienced as absolute loyalty to only one brand. Rather, it is legitimate toquestion publicly the qualities of the favorite brand. Contrary to what might be expected, forum member 6receives very few objections from the community members, and a relatively rational, attribute-based discussionof the merits and disadvantages of different motorcycle brands and models follows. In general, discoursespresented by the forum members include few elements of real enthusiasm and emotional commitment for thebrand. Apparently, community members perceive both the products and the brands in the sports bike categoryas little differentiated. This does not mean that R1 owners are dissatisfied with their bike or the Yamaha brandin general. Rather, the specific situation of the sports bike community suggests customers who are highlysatisfied with their brand, yet nevertheless would switch to another brand easily. It has been suggested thatbrand loyalty can be measured by asking individuals how likely it is they would recommend the brand to a friendor colleague ([37] Reichheld, 2003). Because people new to sports bike riding frequently ask for advice on theforum, a great number of posts are related to what bike from which brand would be recommended. Typicalanswers include statements such as "any of the new bikes are great" (forum member 7) or "I've spent sometime on all the bikes and seriously there is no true winner, no matter what you get nowadays is a rocket out ofthe crate and you will be getting a good bike! Each has its ups and down but overall I could see myself on anyof them really!" (forum member 8). Rather than showing indifference, consumers like and actually buy any of theimportant sports bike brands. Using the conceptual partition of the awareness set into an evoked set, an inertset, and an inept set ([33] Narayana and Markin, 1975; [42] Spiggle and Seawall, 1987), it seems that R1community members place most of the important sports bike brands into the evoked set, whereas the inert setis relatively small. Instead of a highly committed loyalty to one single brand, as in previous accounts of brandcommunities, the Yamaha R1 brand community is, if anything, prone to multi-brand or split loyalty ([17] Jacoby,1971; [18] Jacoby and Kyner, 1973). Identity is thus less defined by a specific brand, but rather by the activity ofriding a sports bike itself. Wherever brand personalities influence decision making, it seems that these criteriaare exclusive rather than inclusive. That is, the consideration set is not formed by the inclusion of a specificbrand or set of brands, but rather by excluding unattractive brands. For example, in the R1 forum, somemembers distance themselves from Suzuki, one of Yamaha's main competitors, because they don't identify withthe people who ride Suzukis: Yes, gixxer is by far the "squid bike" all the first time riders and newbies love the gixxers [...] Their mentality andunfriendly attitude is because they are young, dumb, and think their bike is the best ever (forum member 9). In motorcycle slang, Gixxer stands for Suzuki's GSX-R line of super sport motorbikes. Forum members do notreject the Suzuki brand because of issues with the quality or performance of the product, but rather because ofthe characteristics of the riders who use the brand. Squid, an expression that, according to some forummembers, is a combination of the two words "squirrel" and "kid," describes irresponsible motorcycle riders whooverestimate their riding skills and frequently wear inappropriate and insufficient riding gear. By claiming that theSuzuki GSX-R series is the typical squid bike, attributes of the consumers are ascribed to the brand. Thus,brand identity is built on exclusion ("this is not how we want to be") rather than on inclusion. Further, meaning

transfer in this case deviates substantially from the traditional symbolic consumption process. Symbolicconsumption suggests that individuals transfer the symbolic meaning of a brand to themselves, andsubsequently the audience, such as peers and significant others, assigns the attributes of the brand to theindividual ([12] Grubb and Grathwohl, 1967). However, meaning in the example above is transferred in thereverse direction, from the user to the brand. Negative attributes of Suzuki brand users (such as beingsquiddish, dumb, and inexperienced) are transferred to the brand and clash with the otherwise positivelyperceived performance and quality of the product. The identity of the R1 brand community is further formed by the relationship with two other groups ofmotorcycles. On one hand, most forum members seem to admire the more exclusive Italian sports bike brands,such as Ducati and MV Agusta. On the other hand, the relationship to Harley Davidson is not marked by a cleardistinction of acceptance versus rejection pattern, but rather by a complicated and sometimes ambiguouspattern of mixed emotions toward the brand and its users: There are a lot of douche bag riders, Harley and sportbike alike, but I will admit I've flipped off quite a fewHarley riders. I've gotten less camaraderie from Harley riders than anyone, but those are just the youngwannabies, the old guys are usually cool tho, hahaha (forum member 10). Here, forum member 10 develops a differentiated look toward Harley-Davidson riders by explaining that the lessfriendly Harley riders are typically those that are younger (and thus less experienced), whereas the older ridersseem to be more open. Both positive and negative feelings co-exist at the same time as the result of a cognitiveevaluation that avoids simple stereotyping found at other brand communities. Many R1 forum membersperceive the Harley-Davidson brand as both cool and obsolete at the same time, and this ambiguity toward thebrand is replicated for the users of the brand, where Harley-Davidson riders have been experienced as bothcool and authentic riders or as ignorant and unfriendly "weekend warriors." Thus, brands in the R1 communityare not iconic symbols that unambiguously communicate attitudes and lifestyles of brand users to the largeraudience via the meaning of the brand. Rather, brands are complex, multidimensional entities that gainmeaning only in the reciprocal relationship with the brand user. Unconditional single-brand loyalty and "we"versus "us" stereotypes are replaced in large part by ambiguous, differentiated, and often critical attitudestoward the own brand. Brand identity is based on exclusion (Suzuki is a typical brand for squids) instead ofinclusion, and within a relatively large evoked set, multi-brand loyalty is more common than religious-like brandworshipping described for, e.g. the Apple Newton. Conclusions and managerial implications Brand communities have sparked the interest of marketing researchers and practitioners alike because of thehigh levels of brand loyalty and commitment observed in previous studies on brands such as Apple, Jeep, orHarley Davidson. However, the results of this qualitative study suggest that instead of single-brand loyalty,consumers for mainstream brands may be more prone to multi-brand loyalty. As forum member 8 (see citationabove) expressed it, "[...] no matter what you get nowadays is a rocket out of the crate and you will be getting agood bike! Each has its ups and down but overall I could see myself on any of them really!" The case of theYamaha R1 brand community thus presents preliminary evidence that specific industry conditions may shapethe relationships consumers have with their brand, and more specifically, that multi-brand loyalty is moreprobable to occur for low levels of brand differentiation ([9] Felix, 2009) combined with more choices ([5]Bennett and Rundle-Thiele, 2005). It follows that from the point of view of a company, having many members ina specific brand community does not necessarily translate into a highly loyal customer base. Rather, undercertain conditions, higher levels of participation may actually increase the likelihood of adopting products fromcompeting brands, especially if individuals are simultaneously members in several brand communities ([44]Thompson and Sinha, 2008). The results of this study suggest that marketers should monitor and track consumers' motivations, attitudes, anddecision making processes on two levels: On the product level, it is important for marketers to understand

barriers and conflicts related to the general use of the product. In the specific case of a sports bike, the physicalrisk (in the form of experiencing a severe accident) is probably the most important issue, which in turn may leadto substantial social tensions, especially with family members. For other products, such as clothing, computers,or food, the motivations why consumers may or may not consider a specific product category may be different,but it remains essential to understand these reasons. On the brand level, it is important for marketers tounderstand the degree of brand identification in the community as well as the way how consumers perceive aconsciousness of kind, share rituals and traditions, and experience a sense of moral responsibility ([31] Muñizand O'Guinn, 2001). In a world of online consumer-to-consumer communications, companies are increasingly losing control overtheir brands. It is therefore important for marketers to get involved in the process of image building and brandpositioning in online communication platforms. Non-company-run communities, such as the Yamaha R1 forum,bear the risk of community members transmitting brand information in a way not desired by the company ([43]Stokburger-Sauer, 2010). Marketers thus should try to integrate consumers by either sponsoring an entirediscussion website, a forum, or part of a forum ([36] Pitta and Fowler, 2005). Finally, an unobtrusive andauthentic way of increasing a company's involvement in a non-company-run forum is exemplified by a companythat provides motorcycle braking systems. One of the company's employees invites Yamaha R1 forummembers to ask him brake related questions and explains that he is on the forum not to sell, but to educateriders about brakes in general. By choosing a non-selling approach in the R1 forum, the company manages togain credibility in the community and to build customer relationships that are more consumer-focused andauthentic than many of the hard-selling approaches at the dealerships. The employee's thread on brakequestions has more than 600 postings, which is significantly above the forum's average of around 15 postingsper thread, and evidences the interest of the community in a direct contact with company representatives. Theexample also suggests that online communities are not limited to relationships between consumers and thebrand and between consumers and consumers. Rather, consumers develop complex relationships with severalbrands, products, marketing agents, and other consumers within the same community. Avenues for future research Future research may strive to examine in more detail the impact of overlapping (i.e. multiple) communitymemberships ([29] McAlexander et al. , 2002). There are also questions about the specific impact of multi-brandloyalty on brand relationships. For example, if multi-brand loyalty is the more adequate model to describe brandrelationships for mainstream brands, does that mean that commitment and brand love are divided among thedifferent brands in the evoked set? Or is it possible that several brands receive the same amount ofcommitment and dedication, as might be claimed by a husband being in a polygynous relationship with severalwives? Finally, how can corporations increase their share in the multi-loyal brand set? As in many otherindustries, differentiation on the product level seems to be difficult for sports bikes, but efforts in brandcommunication, e.g. by using events and experiences to build brand image, might be a promising avenue to go. References 1. Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, U.M. and Herrmann, A. (2005), "The social influence of brand community:evidence from European car clubs", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69 No. 3, pp. 19-34. 2. Arnould, E.J. and Wallendorf, M. (1994), "Market-oriented ethnography: interpretation building and marketingstrategy formulation", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 484-504. 3. Belk, R.W., Sherry, J.F. Jr and Wallendorf, M. (1988), "A naturalistic inquiry into buyer and seller behavior ata swap meet", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 449-70. 4. Belk, R.W. and Tumbat, G. (2005), "The cult of Macintosh", Consumption, Markets, and Culture, Vol. 8 No. 3,pp. 205-17. 5. Bennett, R. and Rundle-Thiele, S. (2005), "The brand loyalty life cycle: implications for marketers", Brand

Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 250-63. 6. Brown, S., Kozinets, R.V. and Sherry, J.F. Jr (2003), "Teaching old brands new tricks: retro branding and therevival of brand meaning", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 67 No. 2, pp. 19-33. 7. Cerulo, K.A. (1997), "Identity construction: new issues, new directions", Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 23No. 1, pp. 385-409. 8. Cova, B. and Pace, S. (2006), "Brand community of convenience products: new forms of customerempowerment - the case 'my Nutella The community'", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40 Nos 9/10, pp.1087-106. 9. Felix, R. (2009), "Explaining loyalty: the personal relationship analogy", in Kehoe, W.J. and Whitten, L.K.(Eds), Advances in Marketing: Embracing Challenges and Change, Society for Marketing Advances,Tuscaloosa, AL, pp. 59-62. 10. Fournier, S. and Lee, L. (2009), "Getting brand communities right", Harvard Business Review, Vol. 87 No. 4,pp. 105-11. 11. Giesler, M. (2006), "Consumer gift systems: insights from Napster", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 33No. 2, pp. 283-90. 12. Grubb, E.L. and Grathwohl, H.L. (1967), "Consumer self-concept, symbolism and market behavior: atheoretical approach", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 22-7. 13. Harley-Davidson (2009), "Annual report", available at: www.harley-davidson.com/en_US/Media/downloads/Annual_Reports/2009/HD_Annual2009.pdf (accessed June 14, 2010). 14. Haigh, J. and Crowther, G. (2005), "Interpreting motorcycling through its embodiment in life storynarratives", Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 21 Nos 5/6, pp. 555-72. 15. Hickman, T. and Ward, J. (2007), "The dark side of brand community: inter-group stereotyping, trash talk,and Schadenfreude", in Fitzsimons, G. and Morwitz, V. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 34,Association for Consumer Research, Duluth, MN, pp. 314-9. 16. Hollenbeck, C.R. and Zinkhan, G.M. (2006), "Consumer activism on the internet: the role of anti-brandcommunities", in Pechmann, C. and Price, L. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 33, Association forConsumer Research, Duluth, MN, pp. 479-85. 17. Jacoby, J. (1971), "A model of multi-brand loyalty", Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 25-31. 18. Jacoby, J. and Kyner, D.B. (1973), "Brand loyalty vs. repeat purchasing behavior", Journal of MarketingResearch, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 1-9. 19. Kozinets, R.V. (1997), "I want to believe: a netnography of the X-Philes' subculture of consumption", inBrucks, M. and MacInnis, D.J. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 24, Association for ConsumerResearch, Provo, UT, pp. 470-5. 20. Kozinets, R.V. (1999), "E-tribalized marketing? The strategic implications of virtual communities ofconsumption", European Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 252-64. 21. Kozinets, R.V. (2001), "Utopian enterprise: articulating the meanings of Star Trek's culture of consumption",Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 67-88. 22. Kozinets, R.V. (2002), "The field behind the screen: using netnography for marketing research in onlinecommunities", Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 61-72. 23. Kozinets, R.V. (2006), "Click to connect: netnography and tribal advertising", Journal of AdvertisingResearch, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 279-88. 24. Langer, R. and Beckman, S.C. (2005), "Sensitive research topics: netnography revisited", Qualitative MarketResearch: An International Journal, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 189-203. 25. Leigh, T.W., Peters, C. and Shelton, J. (2006), "The consumer quest for authenticity: the multiplicity ofmeanings within the MG subculture of consumption", Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 34 No.

4, pp. 481-93. 26. Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985), Naturalistic Inquiry, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA. 27. Luedicke, M.K., Thompson, C.J. and Giesler, M. (2010), "Consumer identity work as moral protagonism:how myth and ideology animate a brand-mediated moral conflict", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 36 No.6, pp. 1016-32. 28. McAlexander, J.H., Kim, S.K. and Roberts, S.D. (2003), "Loyalty: the influences of satisfaction and brandcommunity integration", Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 1-11. 29. McAlexander, J.H., Schouten, J.W. and Koenig, H.F. (2002), "Building brand community", Journal ofMarketing, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 38-54. 30. Muñiz, A.M. Jr and Hamer, L.O. (2001), "Us versus them: oppositional brand loyalty and the Cola wars", inGilly, M.C. and Meyers-Levy, J. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 28, Association for ConsumerResearch, Valdosta, GA, pp. 355-61. 31. Muñiz, A.M. Jr and O'Guinn, T.C. (2001), "Brand community", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27 No.4, pp. 412-32. 32. Muñiz, A.M. Jr and Schau, H.J. (2005), "Religiosity in the abandoned Apple Newton brand community",Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 737-47. 33. Narayana, C.L. and Markin, R.J. (1975), "Consumer behavior and product performance: an alternativeconceptualization", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 1-6. 34. Nelson, M.R. and Otnes, C.C. (2005), "Exploring cross-cultural ambivalence: a netnography of interculturalwedding message boards", Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 89-95. 35. Ouwersloot, H. and Odekerken-Schröder, G. (2008), "Who's who in brand communities - and why?",European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42 Nos 5/6, pp. 571-85. 36. Pitta, D.A. and Fowler, D. (2005), "Internet community forums: an untapped resource for consumermarketers", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 265-74. 37. Reichheld, F.F. (2003), "The one number you need to grow", Harvard Business Review, Vol. 81 No. 12, pp.46-54. 38. Schau, H.J. and Muñiz, A.M. Jr (2006), "A tale of tales: the Apple Newton narratives", Journal of StrategicMarketing, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 19-33. 39. Schau, H.J., Muñiz, A.M. Jr and Arnould, E.J. (2009), "How brand community practices create value",Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73 No. 5, pp. 30-51. 40. Schouten, J.W. and McAlexander, J.H. (1995), "Subcultures of consumption: an ethnography of the newbikers", Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 43-61. 41. Schouten, J.W., McAlexander, J.H. and Koenig, H.F. (2007), "Transcendent customer experience and brandcommunity", Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 357-68. 42. Spiggle, S. and Seawall, M.A. (1987), "A choice sets model of retail selection", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51No. 2, pp. 97-111. 43. Stokburger-Sauer, N. (2010), "Brand communities: drivers and outcomes", Psychology &Marketing, Vol. 24No. 4, pp. 347-68. 44. Thompson, S.A. and Sinha, R.K. (2008), "Brand communities and new product adoption: the influence andlimits of oppositional loyalty", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 72 No. 6, pp. 65-80. 45. Torres-Moraga, E., Vásquez-Parraga, A.Z. and Zamora-González, J. (2008), "Customer satisfaction andloyalty: start with the product, culminate with the brand", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 302-13. 46. Wallendorf, M. and Belk, R.W. (1989), "Assessing trustworthiness in naturalistic consumer research", inHirschman, E.C. (Ed.), Interpretive Consumer Research, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp.69-84.

47. Yamaha Motor Co. (2009), "Annual report", available at: www.yamaha-motor.co.jp/global/ir/material/pdf/2009/2009annual-e.pdf (accessed June 14, 2010). Appendix About the author Reto Felix is an Associate Professor of Marketing at the University of Monterrey, Mexico. He received hisMaster's in Marketing and PhD in Business Administration from the University of St Gallen, Switzerland. He hasbeen a Visiting Scholar at the Marketing Group, Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley,and has published in journals such as Journal of International Marketing , Journal of Business &IndustrialMarketing , and Journal of International Consumer Marketing . Further, he has presented his research atconferences hosted by the Association for Consumer Research, the American Marketing Association, theAcademy of Marketing Science and the Society for Marketing Advances. Reto Felix can be contacted at:rfelix@udem.edu.mx Executive summary and implications for managers and executives This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives a rapid appreciation of the content of thisarticle. Those with a particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in toto to take advantage ofthe more comprehensive description of the research undertaken and its results to get the full benefits of thematerial present. The topic of brand communities has provided the focus for much marketing literature. Brandcommunities transcend geographical boundaries and contain people who exhibit passion for a particular brand.These individuals also display similarities in consciousness while "shared rituals and traditions" is anothercornerstone of their social relationships. Some scholars have even noted the propensity for "religious-like"associations to develop. Evidence shows that groups can be based locally, online or a combination of both. A wide range of productshas supplied the inspiration for brand communities to form. In addition to strong consumer identification with thebrands, "clear and unique positioning" is viewed as a common characteristic among brands concerned. Brandloyalty can be fervent to a degree that an "us and them" mentality often arises with regard to other brands.Bonding within the community can generate stereotypes and outsiders are treated with some disdain. Anyfailure of competitor brands is cause for celebration. It is, however, a misconception to assume that brand communities are always homogenous. Significant internaldifferences appear to be the rule not the exception. Relationship intensity with other members is subject tovariation because some are loyal to the brand while others may identify more closely with the product. Levels ofsocial orientation can similarly differ. Researchers have also pointed out the possibility of some individualslacking interest in brand, product and social relationships yet remaining in the community. Others might becomeinvolved with different brand communities in the same product category, resulting in further dissemination ofloyalty. Felix explores the topic in a study of an online Yamaha brand community principally devoted to the Japanesemanufacturer's R1 luxury sports motorcycle. Yamaha is one of the world's leading brands in its category and in2009 boasted sales of $12.5 billion. At the time of the study, there were 107,249 registered members in the R1forum. Some members did not currently own a motorcycle, while others possessed a different brand. The author considers netnography as the most relevant study method for the investigation of brandrelationships and "identity construction of an online community". This approach is regarded as ethnographyadapted for the purpose of exploring online communities. Among other things, netnography has beencommended for its flexibility, open-endedness and interpretative qualities. Different researchers have used theapproach in a variety of study contexts including cars, consumer gifts and TV programs. Following initial analysis of messages posted on the forum, the threads were arranged into five differentsections respectively labeled as: Community; R1-related Discussion; Technique, Racing and Stunt Discussion;Marketplace/Classified; and Miscellaneous Section. Analysis of the threads enabled messages to be coded and

then organized into "interpretive themes" so that appropriate "layers of meaning" could be identified. Message themes were analyzed at the product level to ascertain factors which influence practice and identity. Ingeneral, considerable risk is associated with riding a motorcycle for leisure purposes. But the variation inattitudes towards factors like speed and riding style means that different segments exist within the bikingcommunity. At one end of the continuum are those who ride around at moderate speeds to savor theexperience with the environment. Positioned at the other extreme are bikers whose penchant for high speed isoften accompanied by an aggressive style of riding. Such individuals are also likelier to flaunt their biking skillsthrough dangerous maneuvers like pulling wheelies. According to Felix, riding a motorcycle gives rise to various risks and conflicts that can be physical, functional,financial, psychological or social in nature. The activity is therefore highly complex and generates a web of"tensions and constraints" that the individual must constantly address internally and externally. Concern aboutaccidents is a recurring theme with community members referring to "actual or anticipated implications" in thateventuality. Message content reveals that conflict exists between knowledge of the intrinsic risks associated with bike ridingand the gratification derived from it. Forum members suggest that such tensions may prompt attitude orbehavioral changes, albeit sometimes fleeting in nature. This occurs because riding a motorcycle is almostaddictive and an important aspect of identity construction. Some comments imply that it is a "mission" thatsimply has to be fulfilled. Even though members are aware of the conflicts which surround this pastime, thedesire to ride is the main driving force. Analysis reveals a "shared consciousness" about issues includingserious accidents, loss of a fellow biker, and problems relating to the family. The author ascertains a collectiveidentity that is complex in nature but difficult to categorize precisely. An examination of meaning at the specific brand level reveals a relationship between forum members and theYamaha brand that is "ambiguous and differentiated". Instead of absolute loyalty to the brand, it is more evidentthat people engage in balanced debate about its qualities and those of other motorcycle brands. Membersapparently perceive little differentiation between brands and may switch to another brand even if they are highlysatisfied. Many studies have noted that some consumers can display loyalty to multiple brands and there is someevidence of this tendency here. Messages seeking advice on future purchases are frequent and memberstypically recommend a range of brands they consider decent. In the opinion of Felix, this indicates that riding asports motorcycle defines identity much more that the specific brand of bike. Another significant finding is how decision making seems influenced more by exclusive than inclusive brandcriteria. A key example is the negative perceptions of the Suzuki brand among some R1 forum members. Theinteresting fact about this hostility is that is has little to do with product quality concerns. Instead, suchevaluation arises because members question those who ride Suzuki sport bikes. With regard to identityconstruction, meaning is normally transferred from brand to individual. Here, however, it is the negative traits ofSuzuki riders that are transferred to the brand. Some conflict with positive perceptions of the productsubsequently occurs. That brands are complex and multidimensional is further illustrated by the contrasting ways in which R1members relate to Harley Davidson. Positive and negative feelings exist simultaneously as the brand isregarded as cool yet obsolete. Contrasting statements are likewise directed at Harley Davidson riders. Oneimportant deduction is that ambiguity surrounds brand meaning, attitude and lifestyle conveyed within thiscommunity. This study indicates that consumer-brand relations might be shaped by "specific industry conditions". Marketersare also alerted to lack of clear brand differentiation and the possibility that multi-brand loyalty will ensue, evenwhen a large brand community exists. Understanding what influences consumer attitudes, motivations anddecision-making at both product and brand level is essential. Certain factors may encourage or deter choice of

a particular product, while it is equally important to be aware of brand identification levels and collectivesensitivities among consumers. Given the revealing nature of online communication, Felix suggests that firms might gain greater insight intoconsumer thinking by becoming actively involved in non-company forums. An unobtrusive approach isconsidered vital though. The aim should not be to sell but to build authentic consumer-focused relationshipswith an emphasis on providing advice or information. (A précis of the article "Brand communities for mainstreambrands: the example of the Yamaha R1 brand community". Supplied by Marketing Consultants for Emerald.) AuthorAffiliation Reto Felix, Department of Business Administration, University of Monterrey, San Pedro Garza García, Mexico Subject: Brand identification; Motorcycles; Loyalty; Consciousness; Community; Communication; Brakingsystems; Marketing; Studies; Classification: 8680: Transportation equipment industry; 7000: Marketing; 9130: Experimental/theoretical Publication title: The Journal of Consumer Marketing Volume: 29 Issue: 3 Pages: 225-232 Publication year: 2012 Publication date: 2012 Year: 2012 Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing, Limited Place of publication: Santa Barbara Country of publication: United Kingdom Publication subject: Business And Economics--Marketing And Purchasing ISSN: 07363761 Source type: Scholarly Journals Language of publication: English Document type: Feature DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363761211221756 ProQuest document ID: 1008637915 Document URL: http://search.proquest.com/docview/1008637915?accountid=149759 Copyright: Copyright Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2012 Last updated: 2012-05-29 Database: ProQuest Research Library

BibliographyCitation style: Harvard - British Standard

FELIX, R., 2012. Brand communities for mainstream brands: the example of the Yamaha R1 brand community.The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29(3), pp. 225-232.

_______________________________________________________________ Contact ProQuest Copyright 2015 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms and Conditions