Project - (Cigarette Brand Preference)

CIGARAETTES BRAND PREFERNCE OF

CONSUMER ACCORDING TO

A.I.C.O.L

A Thesis submitted to the Department of Marketing

Faculty of

Management Sciences

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMISTRATION

(MBA,MARKETING)

Supervised by:

Muhammad Sajjada Shamim Ahmed

Senior Lecturer

Submitted By:

NADEEM ABBAS

ID: 1564

April 2010

Table of Contents

Acknowledgment-----------------------------------------------------------------------i

Executive Summery--------------------------------------------------------------------ii

Market Segmentations & promotional strategies ----------------------------------iii

CHAPTER-1---------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW-----------------------------------------------1.1 Background-------------------------------------------------------------------------1.2 Problem Statement----------------------------------------------------------------1.3 Scope of the research-------------------------------------------------------------1.4 Research objectives--------------------------------------------------------------1.5 Conclusion------------------------------------------------------------------------1.6 Limitations-------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAPTER-2--------------------------------------------------------------------------

LITERATURE REVIEW----------------------------------------------------------

2.1 International work done---------------------------------------------------------

2.1.1 Tobacco use among Middle & High school students---------------------

2.1.2) Tobacco use in 1980 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse-----

2.2 Tobacco industry in Pakistan ---------------------------------------------------

2.2.1) Article by Syed M Aslam-----------------------------------------------------

2.2.2) Investigating socio-economic demographic determinants in Pindi.-----

2.2.3) Prevalence and factor association with current smoking among high

School adolescents in Karachi.----------------------------------------------

CHAPTER – 3

DATA ANALISIS, RESULTS/FININDINGS & DISCUSSIONS------------------

3.1) Data Analysis----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3.2 Data gathering instruments--------------------------------------------------------------

3.3) Procedure followed to gather data------------------------------------------------------

3.4) Statement of Hypotheses------------------------------------------- ---------------------

3.5) Statistical Techniques---------------------------- ----------------------------------------

3.5.1) Data analysis-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.5.2) Statistical Analyses----------------------------------------------------------------------

3.5.2.1 Descriptive Statistics-------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.5.2.2 Inferential Statistics--------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.6) Methodologies-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.6.1 Selecting Brand names for the Questionnaire------------------------------------------

3.6.2 Data collection method---------------------------------------------------------------------

3.6.3 VARIABLE AND MEASURES----------------------------------------------------------

3.7 Solutions and Evaluation-------------------------------------------------------------

3.7.1 Frequencies-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAPTER – 4

HYPOTHESIS TESTING-----------------------------------------------------------

4.1 Hypothesis 1-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.2 Hypothesis 2-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.3 Hypothesis 3-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.4 Hypothesis 4-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.5 Hypothesis 5-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.6 Hypothesis 6--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAPTER – 5----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RECOMMENDATIONS-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNEXTURE-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BIBLIOGRAPHY-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

“THANKS TO ALMIGHTY ALLAH”

My sincere thanks to my whole factuality specially Sir Shamim Ahmed without whose

Teachings, help and guidance this project would not have been possible.

I would like to thank also all the people who cooperated with me especially Sir Uzair for

his precious time to interpret my questionnaire’s statical analysis.

I would like to thank the KASBIT’s Library Staff, my friends outside KASBIT and my

class fellows for providing help, books & materials related to this topic.

I would like to thanks my parents with out their dedication and Sacrifice to my future I

really wouldn’t be where I am today. Thanks to them all.

CIGARAETTES BRAND PREFERNCE OF

CONSUMER ACCORDING TO

AICOL

Executive Summary

This Term report focus on cigarette brands preference of consumers according to “AICOL”

People belonging to same age group, income, consumption of cigarettes, occupation &

location prefer same brand of cigarettes.

Knowing the Correct market segment of each cigarette brand is very important

So that companies of different cigarette brands can apply their:-

Promotion Strategies

Placement Strategies

Price Strategies

Promotion Strategies

Advertising and all other kinds of promotion methods and awareness creation so that the

company will achieve its financial and commercial objectives by first knowing what add

will attract their consumer best and so on.

Placement Strategies

It’s basically creating a favorable image in the minds of the consumers about the product

and/or the company; let us say for example here, what the consumers think about k-2, Gold

leaf, Benson & hedges etc.

Price Strategies

At what price that the consumers can and will buy these brands. Is the current price suitable

for the current and potential customers? What price is suitable for what group? Loyal to

what brand?

Department of Marketing Faculty of Management Sciences

KHADIM ALI SHAH BUKHARI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

(KASBIT)

Certificate

I am pleased to certify that Mr. Nadeem Abbas S/o. Muqarrab Khan has satisfactorily

carried out a research work, under my supervision on the topic of “Cigarette Brand

Preference of consumer according to Age, Income, Consumption, Occupation &

Living.”

I further certify that her distinctive original research and her thesis is worthy of

presentation to the Department of Marketing, Faculty of Management Sciences Khadim Ali

Shah Bukhari Institute of Technology (KASBIT) for the degree of MBA.

Senior Lecturer Muhammad Sajjada Shamim Ahmed

CHAPTER 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

Let us define the term which we created for the understanding and easiness of the work at

hand and to facilitate the work for us and for the respondents a like and the word is:

“AICOL” Consisting of these followings:

A= Age

I= Income

C= Consumption 1

O=Occupation

L=Location2

This report focuses on cigarettes brand preferences of consumers as smoking is an

addiction. If a person smokes, what he needs is a filter, tobacco & paper and most

importantly a taste which will satisfy him best. If taste has the most importance here so

1 ( cigarettes per day smoke by a sample or respondent)?

2 ? Area in which respondent lives

consumer will prefer only one brand over others. If that is the case, how many consumers

belonging to same “AICOL”, than will prefer a specific brand? Consumer preference

defers from consumer to consumer but can be same according to “AICOL”. In order

to check the level of preference of consumer this report was started.

Contradicting to the statement “consumer preference differs from person to person” I found

that people according to AICOL use same cigarette brand. Means usually consumer from

alike set has same psychology and same kind of products usually satisfies them and

provides them value.

A Questionnaire was designed by keeping respondents in mind & their precious time that is

why it consists of only 9 questions because we already studied that the questionnaire

should not be too long and too short and we followed the teachings of our teacher. But

these 9 questions are enough to provide necessary information according to our hypothesis.

During my research Questionnaire filling, the respondents responded very comfortably and

easily and cooperated well with us.

I selected my respondents randomly and visited different places like: Offices, Collages,

Shopping malls, Parks, Different Pan shops & Super Markets in different locations.

1.2 Problem statement:

The problem statement of my research is “to determine the consumer usage pattern of

cigarette according to AICOL i.e Age, Income, Consumption, Occupation and

Occupation.

It is usually thought that people from same AICOL use or prefer same kind of brands, same

kind of products. It has also been observed that people from same AICOL have similar

likes and dislikes, they have same psychology. I have taken this topic as this will help me

in understanding the behavior of consumers who belongs to similar group of people. And

will also help me to prove this thinking right or wrong.

1.3 Scope of the Research:

Scope of the research is to test out and confirm the known statements and study the

consumption pattern in Pakistan. I have selected six hypotheses, among which five are to

prove basically brand preference according to age, brand preference according to income,

cigarette brand preference according to consumption pattern, cigarette brand preference

according to occupation and cigarette brand preference according to location, the last

hypotheses is the consumption rate according to consumer’s occupation. The last

hypothesis is set to check the consumption rate according to occupation. Weather

occupation and consumption have any relation or not?

1.4 Research objectives :

The objectives of the study/research are to determine:

1) To determine the relationship between age of the consumers to their cigarette brand

preference

2) To determine the relationship between income of the consumers to their cigarette brand

preference.

3) To determine the relationship between consumption of the consumers to the amount of

cigarettes per day.

4) To determine the relation of cigarette brand preference to the occupation of the consumers

5) To determine the changing behavior of cigarette consumers according to the location they

live.

6) To determine if there is any relationship between rate of consumption to the occupation

they are in.

1.5 Conclusion:

6 hypothesis were set are as follow

1) Consumers belong to same AGE group prefer same brand of cigarettes.

2) Consumers belong to same group of INCOME prefer same brand of cigarettes.

3) Consumers belong to same rate of CONSUMPTION group prefer same brand of cigarettes.

4) Consumers belong to same OCCUPATION prefer same brand of cigarettes.

5) Consumers belong to same LOCATION prefer same brand of cigarettes.

6) Consumers belonging to same OCCUPATION have same rate of CONSUMPTION of

cigarettes.

1.6 Limitations:

This study was conducted only in Karachi. Due to the fact that convenience sample was

used; the findings cannot be generalized and would be low in external validity. Sample size

was selected as 263, focusing on people who are from different organizations and different

areas of Karachi.

I tried to make this study comprehensive but there is always a possibility of getting wrong,

inadequate answers from few of the respondents. Therefore my results may give an idea but

cannot be 100 % correct. As in researches at bigger level respondents are paid or

compensated for their time and to provide correct answers but for this small level research

it may not be the case.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

The focus of this chapter is to provide insights to the theories that have shaped the

understanding of consumer cigarette consumption, their brand preferences according to age,

income, consumption, occupation and location.

Given the focus of this research study, it is important to have a sound understanding of tobacco

industry and usage patterns on international and national level.

2.1 INTRODUCTION:

Tobacco is a plant grown for its leaves, which are smoked, chewed, or sniffed for variety of

effects. It is considered as addiction substance because it contains the chemical nicotine.

Cigarette is a small role of finely cut tobacco for smoking, enclosed in a wrapper of thin paper.

It is addiction which means physical or psychological need for a habit- forming substance, such

as a drug or Alcohol. In physical addiction, the body adapts to a substance being used and

gradually requires increased amounts to reproduce the effects originally produced by smaller

doses. Everyone knows smoking is bad for them, but millions cannot overcome the addiction.

Let us see the work done in the relevant topics world wide

2.2 International work done

2.2.1 Tobacco Use among Middle and High School Students -- United

States, 1999Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report

January 28, 2000 / 49(03); p.49-53

The prevalence of cigarette smoking nationwide among high school students increased during

the 1990s; more than 80% of current adult tobacco users started smoking cigarettes before age

18 years. To determine the prevalence of cigarette, smokeless tobacco (i.e., chewing tobacco

and snuff), cigar, pipe, bidi, and kretek use among middle school and high school students

nationwide, the American Legacy Foundation, in collaboration with the CDC Foundation,

conducted the National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) during the fall of 1999.

This report summarizes data from the NYTS on current use of tobacco products, which indicate

that 12.8% of middle school students and 34.8% of high school students use any type of

tobacco; that the low prevalence of current cigarette smoking observed among black high

school students throughout the 1990s is not found among middle school students; and that the

percentages of high school students who currently use bidis and kreteks (two new forms of

tobacco in the United States) are almost as high as the proportion who use smokeless tobacco.

The school-based 1999 NYTS employed a nationally representative sample of students in

grades 6-12. 145 schools were selected, and approximately five intact classes of a required

subject (e.g., English or social studies) across grades 6-12 were randomly selected from each

participating school. All students in the selected classes were eligible to participate. 15,058

students in 131 schools completed questionnaires. The school response rate was 90%, and the

student response rate was 93%, resulting in an overall response rate of 84%.

Students completed an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire that included questions

about tobacco use, exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, minors' ability to purchase or

otherwise obtain tobacco products, knowledge and attitudes about tobacco, and familiarity with

pro- and anti-tobacco media messages. Current use of bidis, cigarettes, cigars, kreteks, pipes,

and smokeless tobacco was defined as use on one or more of the 30 days preceding the survey.

Any current tobacco use was defined as using any of these products on one or more of the 30

days preceding the survey.

Middle School Students

Among middle school (grades 6-8) students, the overall prevalence of any current tobacco use

was 12.8% (see Table 1 below). Cigarettes (9.2%) were the most prevalent type of tobacco

used, followed by cigars (6.1%). Cigarette smoking rates were similar among boys and girls

and among racial/ethnic groups.

Boys were significantly more likely than girls to use smokeless tobacco (4.2% and 1.3%,

respectively), smoke cigars (7.8% and 4.4%, respectively), and smoke tobacco in a pipe (3.5%

and 1.4%, respectively). Black students were significantly more likely than white students to

smoke cigars (8.8% and 4.9%, respectively).

High School Students

Among high school (grades 9-12) students, the overall prevalence of any current tobacco use

was 34.8%. Cigarettes (28.4%) were the most prevalent type of tobacco used, followed by

cigars (15.3%). Boys were significantly more likely than girls to use smokeless tobacco (11.6%

and 1.5%, respectively), smoke cigars (20.3% and 10.2%, respectively), smoke tobacco in a

pipe (4.2% and 1.4%, respectively), and smoke bidis (6.1% and 3.8%, respectively).

White and Hispanic students were significantly more likely than black students to smoke

cigarettes (32.8%, 25.8%, and 15.8%, respectively). White students were significantly more

likely than black and Hispanic students to use smokeless tobacco (8.7%, 2.4%, and 3.6%,

respectively).

TABLE 1

Percentage of students in middle school (grades 6-8) and high school (grades 9-12)

currently* using tobacco products, by type of tobacco product, sex, and race/ethnicity

United States, National Youth Tobacco Survey, 1999

[95% Confidence intervals in parentheses. Middle School = MS; High School = HS]

* Used tobacco on one or more of the 30 days preceding the survey

A. Any Tobacco Use (cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, cigars, pipes, bidis, or kreteks)

Sex Race/Ethnicity

Male Female White Black Hispanic Total

MS 14.2 (± 2.2) 11.3 (± 2.2) 11.6 (± 2.3) 14.4 (± 2.7) 15.2 (± 5.2) 12.8 (± 2.0)

HS 38.1 (± 3.2) 31.4 (± 3.1) 39.4 (± 3.2) 24.0 (± 4.2) 30.7 (± 4.4) 34.8 (± 2.7)

B. Cigarettes


MS 9.6 (± 1.7) 8.8 (± 1.7) 8.8 (± 2.0) 9.0 (± 1.8) 11.0 (± 4.1) 9.2 (± 1.6)

HS 28.7 (± 2.8) 28.2 (± 3.3) 32.8 (± 3.1) 15.8 (± 3.8) 25.8 (± 4.7) 28.4 (± 2.7)

C. Smokeless Tobacco/Chew/Snuff


MS 4.2 (± 1.3) 1.3 (± 0.5) 3.0 (± 1.1) 1.9 (± 0.9) 2.2 (± 0.9) 2.7 (± 0.7)

HS 11.6 (± 2.8) 1.5 (± 0.6) 8.7 (± 2.1) 2.4 (± 1.3) 3.6 (± 1.6) 6.6 (± 1.6)

D. Cigars


MS 7.8 (± 1.3) 4.4 (± 1.3) 4.9 (± 1.0) 8.8 (± 2.3) 7.6 (± 2.9) 6.1 (± 1.1)

HS 20.3 (± 1.9) 10.2 (± 1.6) 16.0 (± 1.6) 14.8 (± 3.5) 13.4 (± 2.9) 15.3 (± 1.4)

E. Pipe


MS 3.5 (± 0.8) 1.4 (± 0.6) 2.0 (± 0.6) 2.0 (± 0.9) 3.8 (± 1.7) 2.4 (± 0.5)

HS 4.2 (± 0.9) 1.4 (± 0.5) 2.6 (± 0.6) 1.8 (± 0.9) 3.8 (± 1.4) 2.8 (± 0.5)

F. Bidis


MS 3.1 (± 0.8) 1.8 (± 0.6) 1.8 (± 0.5) 2.8 (± 1.3) 3.5 (± 1.6) 2.4 (± 0.6)

HS 6.1 (± 1.0) 3.8 (± 1.0) 4.4 (± 0.9) 5.8 (± 2.1) 5.6 (± 2.1) 5.0 (± 0.8)

G. Kreteks


MS 2.2 (± 0.6) 1.7 (± 0.7) 1.7 (± 0.7) 1.7 (± 0.8) 2.1 (± 0.6) 1.9 (± 0.5)

HS 6.2 (± 1.1) 5.3 (± 1.5) 6.5 (± 1.5) 2.8 (± 1.5) 5.5 (± 1.9) 5.8 (± 1.2)

CDC Editorial Note

This report is the first to measure the prevalence of current tobacco use among a nationally

representative sample of middle school students and the first to report the prevalence of current

bidi and kretek use among a nationally representative sample of middle and high school

students.

Although previous national surveys have shown that cigarette smoking rates among black high

school students have been increasing, black students still were smoking at much lower rates

than other high school students. However, the findings in this report indicate that current

cigarette smoking prevalence among middle school black students was similar to rates among

white and Hispanic students and that current cigar use prevalence among middle school black

students was significantly higher than among white students.

Future surveys should evaluate whether the rate of increase in smoking rates among black

students has accelerated and whether the difference in smoking rates between black and white

high school students are disappearing. In addition, more research is needed to determine

whether black youth are finding smoking appealing and socially acceptable.

Current use of novel tobacco products, such as bidis and kreteks, is an emerging public health

problem among U.S. youth. Cigarettes remain the most widely used tobacco product by youth;

however, recent trends underscore the importance of monitoring the rates at which youth adopt

other tobacco products. The social and cultural factors related to differing patterns of tobacco

product use across sex and racial/ethnic groups require additional study.

The 1999 NYTS estimates for high school students will be compared with those of the

Monitoring The Future (MTF) study and the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), the other

national school-based surveys. Comparison of NYTS estimates with those of other national

surveys must be interpreted with caution for several reasons.

First, YRBS and MTF were conducted during spring 1999, and NYTS was conducted during

September-October 1999, a different academic year. Within each grade, the fall school

population is approximately 6 months younger than the spring school population. This

difference can be expected to lead to higher estimates of ever smoking in the spring surveys

and may lead to higher estimates of current smoking.

Second, the tobacco industry increased the wholesale price of tobacco products during 1999,

but also provided substantial price discounts during the same period, making determination of

the precise effect of retail prices on smoking rates difficult. However, preliminary per capita

consumption estimates from the U.S. Department of Agriculture suggest cigarette consumption

has decreased in 1999, suggesting that the prevalence among youth also may have decreased.

Third, the NYTS is a single-topic survey (tobacco), and MTF and YRBS are multi-topic

surveys. The effect of the number of topics surveyed on the resulting estimates is unknown.

Finally, NYTS had a 90% school response rate, a higher reported school response rate than

YRBS and MTF. Some schools that participated in the NYTS may not participate in YRBS or

MTF.

The findings in this report are subject to at least two limitations. First, these data apply only to

youth who attended middle or high school and are not representative of all persons in this age

group. Few persons aged less than 16 years do not attend school and, in 1997, only 4% of 16-

year-olds and 6% of 17-year-olds who had not completed high school were not enrolled in a

high school program. The dropout rate for young adults aged 16-24 years varies greatly by

race/ethnicity (7.6%, white; 13.4%, black; and 25.3%, Hispanic). Second, "any current tobacco

use" might be underestimated in this report because it does not include a measure of "roll-your-

own" tobacco smoking.

To evaluate the potential impact of the expanding levels of tobacco prevention efforts

nationwide and in the individual states, surveillance of trends in tobacco use among youth must

be continued and expanded. YRBS has provided national and state-specific surveillance of

tobacco use among high school students since 1991. The NYTS and state-specific youth

tobacco surveys are extending this surveillance effort to middle school students and across a

wider range of evaluation variables, including knowledge and attitudes about tobacco, exposure

to environmental tobacco smoke, familiarity with pro-smoking and antismoking media

messages, and exposure to tobacco-use prevention curriculum in schools.

CDC has prepared "Best Practices" guidelines to help states determine funding priorities and to

plan and carry out effective comprehensive tobacco-use prevention and control programs. If

current patterns of smoking behavior persist, an estimated 5 million U.S. persons who were

aged less than or equal to 18 years in 1995 could die prematurely from smoking-related

illnesses.

Implementation of the "Best Practices" guidelines, along with nationwide prevention efforts,

enforcement of the proposed Food and Drug Administration rules, increases in the excise tax

on tobacco products, and increased availability of smoking cessation treatment options, could

dramatically reduce these projected deaths.

Editorial Note

The 1999 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) is the first national school-based survey to

provide information not only about tobacco use, but about related knowledge, beliefs, attitudes

and behaviors. It is also the first national survey to focus on all varieties of tobacco use among

youth and the first survey of middle school students.

As such, this survey will provide us with considerable new knowledge about the onset of the

nicotine epidemic and should serve to remind us not to forget about all forms of tobacco use.

We look forward to reading future reports on the 1999 survey and hope that future surveys will

be conducted to enable us to examine trends over time.

The prevalence of current cigarette use among high school students in Fall 1999 has decreased

substantially since Spring 1997. These comparisons are shown in Table 2 below.

TABLE 2</TD< TR>

1997 YRBS 1999 NYTS

Overall 36.4% (± 2.3) 28.4% (± 2.7)

Males 37.7% (± 2.7) 28.7% (± 2.8)

Females 34.7% (± 2.8) 28.2% (± 3.3)

Whites 39.7% (± 2.4) 32.8% (± 3.1)

Blacks 22.7% (± 3.8) 15.8% (± 3.8)

Hispanics 34.0% (± 2.7) 25.8% (± 4.7)

Current smokeless tobacco among male high school students declined from 15.8% (± 3.7) in

1997 to 11.6% (± 2.8) in 1999; however, this decline was not statistically significant (as the

95% confidence intervals overlap). The declines in cigarette use may be due to events that

occurred in the interim (e.g. price increases due to the Tobacco Settlement or state tax

increases) or to cohort differences. However, it's also possible that the differences in smoking

prevalence are at least partially attributable to differences in the methods used in these two

surveys (e.g., different content of survey questionnaires and response rates).

The National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) appears to have employed very high quality

survey methods. Sampling, survey administration, response rates, and weighting and analysis

of the data appear to be very strong. The overall response rate of 84% boosts our confidence

that the results from this sample are generalizable to the national school population. (The

report, however, did not indicate whether private schools were included in the sample.) The

overall response rate and the school participation rate (90%) for this survey are remarkable

especially as compared to other national school-based surveys (e.g., the overall response rate

for the 1997 National Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) was 69% and for the 1998

Monitoring the Future Survey (MTF) was less than 58%). Also remarkable is how quickly the

preliminary findings from this survey were released to the public. Perhaps, other national

surveys can be improved in these areas.

The 95% confidence interval means that there is a 95% likelihood that the actual value in the

population should be within that many percentage points of the observed sample value. For

example, 12.8 (± 2.0) for total tobacco use among middle school students (which appears at the

end of the first row of Table 1) can be interpreted as follows: there is a 95% likelihood that

from 10.8% (12.8 - 2.0) to 14.8% (12.8 + 2.0) of middle school students in the U.S. used some

form of tobacco in the 30 days preceding the survey.

2.2.2 Tobacco Use in the 1998 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse

The results of the 1998 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA) have been

released by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The results for tobacco use

have been summarized below followed by a summary of the survey design.

Tobacco Use in the United States

An estimated 60 million Americans were current cigarette smokers in 1998. This represents a

smoking rate of 27.7 percent for the population age 12 and older. The rate decrease from 29.6

percent in 1997 is statistically significant.

Current smokers were more likely than nonsmokers to be heavy drinkers and illicit drug users.

Among current smokers, the rate of heavy alcohol use (five or more drinks on the same

occasion on five or more days in the past month) was 14.0 percent, the rate of

marijuana/hashish use was 13.6 percent, and the rate of current illicit drug use was 16.1

percent. Among nonsmokers, only 2.9 percent were heavy drinkers, 1.8 percent were

marijuana/hashish users, and 2.5 percent were illicit drug users.

An estimated 3.1 percent of the population were current users of smokeless tobacco in 1998.

The rate has remained steady since 1991.

An estimated 6.9 percent of the population were current users of cigars in 1998. This represents

a statistically significant increase from 1997, when the rate was 5.9 percent.

Age

Approximately 4.1 million youth age 12-17

were current smokers in 1998. The rate of

smoking among youth age 12-17 was 18.2

percent. The rate was 18.9 percent in 1994,

20.2 percent in 1995, 18.3 percent in 1996,

and 19.9 percent in 1997. There were no

statistically significant changes.

The current smoking rate among young adults

age 18-25 continues to follow an upward path

from 34.6 percent in 1994 to 35.3 percent in

1995, 38.3 percent in 1996, 40.6 percent in

1997, and 41.6 percent in 1998. The 1998 rate

is significantly higher than the 1994, 1995

and 1996 rates.

An estimated 5.6 percent of youths age 12-17, or 1.3 million, were current cigar users in 1998.

This rate compares to 5.0 percent in 1997; the difference is not statistically significant.

Race/Ethnicity

In 1998, current smoking rates were 29 percent among Blacks, 28 percent among Whites, 26

percent among Hispanics, and 24 percent among those of other race/ethnic groups.

Smokeless tobacco use was more prevalent among Whites (3.7 percent) than among Blacks

(2.0 percent) or Hispanics (0.8 percent).

Gender

Males had higher rates of smoking than females (29.7 percent vs. 25.7 percent). Among youths

age 12-17, the rates for males and females were similar (18.7 percent for males, 17.7 percent

for females). The rate for females age 12-17 years decreased significantly between 1997 and

1998, from 20.7 percent to 17.7 percent.

The rate of current smokeless tobacco use was significantly higher for men than for women in

1998 (5.9 percent vs. 0.5 percent). About 91 percent of smokeless tobacco users were men.

Similarly, males were more likely than females to use cigars (11.9 percent vs. 2.3 percent).

Region/Urbanicity

The rate of current cigarette use was 32.0 percent in the North Central region, 27.9 percent in

the South, 25.5 percent in the Northeast, and 24.5 percent in the West. The rate of smoking was

26.5 percent in large metropolitan areas, 27.2 percent in small metropolitan areas, and 30.5

percent in nonmetropolitan areas.

Education

Level of educational attainment was

correlated with tobacco usage. Fifty percent

of adults age 26-34 who had not completed

high school smoked cigarettes, while only

15 percent of college graduates in this age

group smoked. The opposite relationship

was found for cigar use: 10.7 percent of

college graduates age 26-34 were current

cigar smokers, compared to 7.5 percent of

those who had not completed high school.

Tobacco As a "Gateway Drug"

Youths age 12-17 who currently smoked cigarettes were 11.4 times more likely to use illicit

drugs and 16 times more likely to drink heavily than nonsmoking youths.

An estimated 5.6 percent of youths age 1217 were current cigar smokers in 1998. This

compares to 5.0 percent in 1997, not a statistically significant difference.

Between 1997 and 1998, there was no change in the percentages of youths age 12-17 reporting

great risk from using cigarettes, marijuana, cocaine, or alcohol.

The current rate of smoking among young adults age 18-25 has increased from 34.6 percent in

1994 to 40.6 percent in 1997 and 41.6 percent in 1998.

Survey Design

This survey is the primary source of statistical information on the use of illegal drugs by the

United States population. Conducted since 1971, the survey collects data by administering

questionnaires to a representative sample of the population at their place of residence. The

survey covers residents of households, noninstitutional group quarters (e.g., shelters, rooming

houses, dormitories), and civilians living on military bases. Persons excluded from the survey

include homeless people who do not use shelters, active military personnel, and residents of

institutional group quarters, such as jails and hospitals.

Interviews were conducted with 25,500 persons between January and December 1998.

Response rates for household screening and for interviewing were 93.0 percent and 77.0

percent, respectively. The sample design oversampled Blacks, Hispanics, and young people, to

improve the accuracy of estimates for those populations. In addition, residents of Arizona and

California were oversampled to provide direct survey estimates for these state populations.

Editorial Note: The National Household Survey on Drug Abuse is one of the most carefully

conducted surveys in the nation. The sample coverage and the response rate are very good. The

survey administration methods are designed to elicit accurate responses even to very sensitive

questions.

Cigarette smoking has declined slightly among older adults and adolescent females, has

remained stable among adolescent males, and has increased substantially among young adults

(18-25 years of age). Smokeless tobacco use has remained stable, and cigar smoking has

increased.

More attention must be paid to prevention and cessation of smoking among young adults

as 42% of this group now smoke cigarettes.

2.3 Tobacco industry in Pakistan

2.3.1 Article by Syed M Aslam:

Smoking may not be good for health but it is certainly good for numerous national

economies around the world, and Pakistan is no exception. This article intends to highlight

the important role tobacco plays in the economics of the country, nothing more nothing less.

By Syed M. Aslam

Jul 31 - Aug 06, 2000

Tobacco industry — growing, manufacturing, distribution and retailing — contributed 4.4 per

cent or over Rs 27.5 billion to the total GDP of Pakistan including Rs 15.17 billion, including

Rs 14.54 billion in excise duty and sales tax, in 1997. It is the single biggest contributor of

excise duty, six-times than that from cotton yarn. Over 5 per cent of all taxes collected in the

country comes from the tobacco industry. It employs over one million people directly or

indirectly which in terms of full-time equivalent jobs means 312,500 jobs supporting some 1.2

million persons.

The area under tobacco cultivation increased by 30 per cent during 1990-91 to 1998-99 —

from 44,000 hectares to 57,000 hectares. The production has increased even more significantly

during the same period — by 145 per cent from 75,000 tonnes to 109,000 tonnes. The value-

added sector, the cigarette production, depicted a far more unproportionate increase of 72 per

cent — from 29.8 billion sticks to 51.5 billion sticks during the same period.

Tobacco is the only crop grown in Pakistan whose yield is well above the world average and

matches the per hectare yield in the US and other developed countries — an average yield of

1,900 kilograms per hectare. Tobacco industry — growing, manufacturing, distribution and

retailing employs over one million persons directly or otherwise. This translates in the full time

equivalent of 312,500 jobs supporting approximately 1.2 million persons. Manufacturing

employs the highest number of persons — 35 per cent followed by 33 per cent by growing and

32 per cent in distribution and retail.

Smuggling

It is easy to understand the threat of huge revenue loss that presence and easy availability of

smuggled cigarettes pose to the economy of Pakistan. The government is losing a substantial

revenue of Rs 3 billion from the smuggling of cigarettes into the country. According to Aslam

Khaliq, the director consumer and regulatory affairs of Pakistan Tobacco Company, the second

top cigarette manufacturer after Lakson Tobacco, the government is losing at least Rs billion

every year due to cigarette smuggling. He blamed the high taxation as the singular most

important incentive for cigarette smuggling.

This is true if one looks at the global trends of taxation on cigarettes. Smokers in Pakistan pay

the highest tax in the world second only to Denmark and the UK where 85 per cent and 82 per

cent of the retail price respectively goes toward taxation. In Pakistan, 78 per cent of the retail

price of premium brands ( all brands whose retail price is over Rs 10 per 20 sticks) and 58 per

cent of the retail price of low segment brands go toward taxation.

Price war

Defending the price war started by PTC by slashing the prices of a number of its middle-priced

brands early this year, Aslam said that it brought numerous domestic manufacturers in the

excise duty and sales tax net. For instance, slashing the prices on some of its brand by 50 per

cent from Rs 19 to Rs 9 reduced the excise duty from 63 per cent to 43 per cent with sales tax

remaining unchanged at 15 per cent. Despite price reduction, Aslam said, PTC was able to

break even due to increased turnover and at the same time forced manufacturers who did not

pay excise duty and sales tax in the net to create a level playing field.

Though worried about smuggling and high taxation, Aslam expressed that cigarette prices in

Pakistan are on the much low side. He said that the manufacturers should be allowed to

increase the prices of their products to better their revenues which are constantly threatened by

massive smuggling. He also suggested that price increases would help discourage smoking in

the country.

True. Experience in many countries show that each 10 per cent increase in cigarette prices

results in a 5 per cent decrease in the numbers of smoking adults and much more in young

adults — between 6 to 8 per cent — who have little surplus funds to spend on smoke.

However, the argument that high prices discourage smoking is a bit flawed particularly in the

context of Pakistan.

Number one, unlike all developed and many developing countries Pakistan choose not to spend

even a negligible portion of tobacco taxes on healthcare, research, education, and anti-smoking

activities. Such developing countries, not to mention the developed ones, as Nepal and Peru

spend a share of cigarette taxes to support cancer research and treatment. Latvia allocates 30

per cent of the revenue which it earns from the tobacco tax on healthcare. Iran earmarks a

portion of tobacco tax revenue on healthcare and education.

Secondly, if the manufacturers and policy makers are really serious about reducing smoking in

Pakistan through price increases — and no one say that they are — they need to raise taxes on

all brands of cigarettes be it locally manufactured — imported. Supporting the domestic

tobacco industry against imports, as is the case with Pakistan, may be good for the local

industry but negates the very argument that higher prices and taxation discourages smoking.

2.3.2 Investigating socio-economic-demographic determinants of

tobacco use in Rawalpindi, Pakistan:

Research article

Investigating socio-economic-demographic determinants of tobacco use in

Rawalpindi, Pakistan Ali Yawar Alam*1, Azhar Iqbal2, Khalif Bile Mohamud3,

Ronald E Laporte4,Ashfaq Ahmed5 and Sania Nishtar6

To investigate the socio-economic and demographic determinants of tobacco use

in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Cross sectional survey of households (population based) with

2018 respondent (1038) Rural; 980 Urban) was carried out in Rawalpindi (Pakistan) and

included males and females 18–65 years of age. Main outcome measure was self reported

daily tobacco use.

Overall 16.5% of the study population (33% men and 4.7% women) used tobacco on a

daily basis. Modes of tobacco use included cigarette smoking (68.5%), oral

tobacco(13.5%), hukka (12%) and cigarette smoking plus oral tobacco (6%). Among those

not using tobacco products, 56%were exposed to Environmental tobacco smoke.

The adjusted odds ratio of tobacco use for rural residence compared to urban residence was

1.49(95% CI 1.1 2.0, p value 0.01) and being male as compared to female 12.6 (8.8 18.0, p

value 0.001).

Illiteracy was significantly associated with tobacco use. Population attributable percentage

of tobacco use increases steadily as the gap between no formal Education and level of

education widens.

There was a positive association between tobacco use and rural area of residence,

male gender and low education levels. Low education could be a proxy for low awareness

and consumer information on tobacco products. As Public health practitioners we should

inform the general public especially the illiterate about the adverse health consequences of

tobacco use.

Counter advertisement for tobacco use, through mass media particularly radio and

television, emphasizing the harmful effects of tobacco on human health is very much

needed.

2.3.3 PREVALENCE AND FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH CURRENT SMOKING AMONG HIGH SCHOOL ADOLESCENTS IN KARACHI, PAKISTANShafquat Rozi1, Saeed Akhtar1, Sajid Ali1 and Javaid Khan2

Our objective was to estimate the prevalence and evaluate factors associated with smoking

among high school adolescents in Karachi, Pakistan. A school-based, cross-sectional

survey was conducted in three towns in Karachi, namely, Gadap Town, Bin-Qasim Town

and Malir Town, from January through May 2003. Two-stage cluster sampling stratified by

school type was employed to select schools and students. We recruited and interviewed 772

male students regarding socio-demographic factors, smoking history of students, their

families/friends, number of siblings,

and place of residence.

The prevalence of smoking (30 days) among adolescents was 13.7%. Final multiple logistic

regression analysis showed that after adjusting for age, ethnicity, and place of residence,

being a student at a government school (OR=1.6; 95%CI: 1.0-2.7), parental smoking

(OR=1.7; 95%CI: 1.1-2.8), uncle smoking (OR=1.7; 95%CI: 1.2-2.8), peer smoking

(OR=6.2; 95% CI: 3.9- 9.9), and spending leisure time outside home (OR=3.9; 95%CI 1.2-

13.2) were significantly associated with adolescent smoking.

Cigarette smoking is the largest preventable risk factor for morbidity and mortality in

developed countries. Dramatic changes in the prevalence of cigarette smoking in the

second half of this century in the United States (i.e., a reduction among men and an

increase among women) have reduced current smoking levels to approximately one quarter

of the adult population and have reduced differences in smoking prevalence and smoking-

attributable diseases between the sexes. Current smoking in the United States is positively

associated with younger age, lower income, reduced educational achievement, and

disadvantaged neighborhood environment.

Daily smokers smoke cigarettes to maintain nicotine levels in the brain, primarily to avoid

the negative effects of nicotine withdrawal, but also to modulate mood. Regular

smokers exhibit higher and lower levels of stress and arousal, respectively, than

nonsmokers, as well as higher impulsivity and neuroticism trait values. Nicotine

dependence is the single most common psychiatric diagnosis in the United States, and

substance abuse, major depression, and anxiety disorders are the most prevalent psychiatric

comorbid conditions associated with nicotine dependence. Studies

in twins have implicated genetic factors that explain most of the variability in vulnerability

to smoking and in persistence of the smoking phenotype. Future research into the causes of

smoking must take into account these associated demographics,

social factors, comorbid psychiatric conditions, and genetic factors to understand this

complex human behavior.

Bangladesh is a moderate Islamic country. There are six full pledged Islamic banks

providing services to wide range of customers. This study is designed to examine the

impact of demographic disparities on the bank selection criteria applied by diversified

customers of domestic Islamic banks in Bangladesh. We have run regression analysis after

controlling for four demographic groupings such as Gender, Marital Status, Age and

Educational Qualification. The beta scores were taken for identifying the influential factors

chosen by the customers of Islamic Banks. Mostly, non-Islamic factors such as Corporal

efficiency, Core-Banking services, Confidence, etc. were given higher weights by majority

of the respondents. The report recommends introducing complete E-Banking solution, to

increase advanced marketing efforts and to hire experienced human resources for better

Islamic Banking activities in Bangladesh.

Branding is increasingly being used as a strategy for managing markets in developed

countries while developing countries still lag behind. The objective of this study was to

assess the level of brand awareness and factors underlying brand preference of dairy brands

in Chitungwiza and Harare urban markets in Zimbabwe. A total of 90 respondents who

included individual and institutional consumers were selected using judgmental and simple

random sampling respectively. Primary data was collected using structured interview

schedules developed for each category of consumers. Consumer product

awareness indices, cluster analysis and factor analysis were the main tools used in the

analysis. The findings of the study showed that 52% of the respondent consumers were

aware of ARDA dairy brands despite having come across few ARDA DDP advertisements.

Four factors were identified as key determinants of dairy product choice namely promotion,

price and availability of product, attractive packaging and product quality. There is need for

agricultural marketers to incorporate these findings in

the formulation of responsive marketing strategies.

CHAPTER – 3

DATA ANALISIS, RESULTS/FININDINGS & DISCUSSIONS

3.1) Data AnalysisPOPULATION AND SAMPLE SIZE

Sekaran (2000 p 255) defines a population as “entire group of people, events or things of

interest that a researcher wants to research”

I have selected a population as people of Karachi City Population of 2-Crors, which is the

largest city of Pakistan. I have selected this population as per my convenience. I per

statistics Karachi is the only city to which people from almost all cities migrate and having

said that it has population of 2 million, almost all type of professions have been adopted by

this population. Therefore it will be easy for me to get the cigarette consumers from all the

occupations. Occupations include managerial as well as labor work.

Leary (2004, p. 118) defines sampling as, “the process by which a researcher selects a sample

of participants for a study from the population of interest”.

A total of 263 questionnaires were sent manually to respondents and a total of 263 completed

the questionnaire but responses of some of the questions are ambiguous. According to Sekaran

(2001), a response rate of thirty percent is acceptable for most studies. The response rate for

this study was ninety eight percent (98%). A convenience sample was used, which according to

Leary (2004) refers to a sample of participants that are readily available. Such samples, he

postulates, are used because they are easy to obtain and not representative of people in general.

Therefore the finding of studies, such as the present one which utilises convenience sampling,

is low in generalisability.

3.2 Data gathering instruments

For the purpose of this study a quantitative methodology was followed and a questionnaire was

used as the measuring instrument. According to Leary (2004), the major advantages of

questionnaires are that they can be administered to groups of people simultaneously, and they

are less costly and less time-consuming than other measuring instruments.

3.3 PROCEDURE FOLLOWED TO GATHER DATA

This section describes how the researcher gathered the relevant data for this study. Although

known to the population, the researcher relied on random sampling to obtain access to the

sample. The researcher has direct contact with the population and therefore had more influence

in terms of creating a sense of urgency to complete the questionnaires.

Each respondent was given a time of 15 minutes to understand and fill the questionnaire. While

making a questionnaire I tried my best to make it as easy as possible so that there will be no

difficulty for respondents to fill the questionnaire.

3.4 STATEMENT OF THE HYPOTHESES

7) Consumers belong to same AGE group prefer same brand of cigarettes.

8) Consumers belong to same group of INCOME prefer same brand of cigarettes.

9) Consumers belong to same rate of CONSUMPTION group prefer same brand of cigarettes.

10) Consumers belong to same OCCUPATION prefer same brand of cigarettes.

11) Consumers belong to same LOCATION prefer same brand of cigarettes.

12) Consumers belonging to same OCCUPATION have same rate of CONSUMPTION of

cigarettes.

3.5 STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES

3.5.1 DATA ANALYSIS

The statistical programme used for the analyses and presentation of data in this research is the

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 12. The descriptive statistics utilized

are based on frequency tables and graphical illustrations to provide information on key

demographic variables in this study. This is followed with presentation of the inferential

statistics based on examination of each hypothesis formulated for the research. The upper level

of statistical significance for null hypothesis testing was set at 5%. All statistical test results

were computed at the 2-tailed level of significance in accordance with the non-directional

hypotheses presented (Sekaran, 2001).

3.5.2 STATISTICAL ANALYSES

According to Leary (2004, p. 37), “statistical analyses are used to describe an account for the

observed variability in the behavioural data.” This involves the process of analysing the data

that has been collected. Thus the purpose of statistics is to summarise and answer questions

about the behavioural variability that was obtained in the research. Statistical analyses involve

both descriptive and inferential statistics.

3.5.2.1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

Descriptive statistics are used to describe and summarise the behaviour of the respondents in a

study. They refer to the ways in which a large number of scores or observations are reduced to

interpretable numbers such as averages and percentages.

The descriptive statistics utilized in this study are based on frequency tables and graphical

illustrations to provide information on key demographic variables, as well as the means and

standard deviations for the responses on the Work Motivation and Satisfaction Questionnaire.

3.5.2.2 INFERENTIAL STATISTICS

Inferential statistics are used to draw conclusions about the reliability and generalisability of

the findings. According to Leary (2004, p. 38), inferential statistics are used to assist in

answering questions such “How likely is it that my findings are due to random extraneous

factors rather than to the variables of central interest in the study? How representative are the

findings of the larger population from which the sample was taken?” In order to test the

research hypotheses, the inferential tests used include the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation

Coefficient, Multiple Regression Analysis and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).

3.6 METHODOLOGIE

The methodology we have adopted for the subject study is briefly discussed below

3.6.1 SELECTING BRAND NAMES FOR THE QUESTIONNAIRE

Pan shops, super markets, retailer stores and cigarette consumer were asked about brand

names & then it was put in to the questionnaire. So that respondents can identify his\her

brand of choice on this question and if their brand of choice is not there he\she can reply on

the option of “others”

3.6.2 DATA COLLECTION METHOD

Data was collected through a questionnaire which was distributed on different locations

and some were filled or noted down through an informal interview3 form some of

respondents.

3 by translating it into Urdu

3.6.3 VARIABLE AND MEASURES

Our Questionnaire was based on nine different questions, out of which five were related to

personal information (gender, age, occupation, income & location); a Nominal Scale was

used to measure the personal data. The other remaining four were related to independent

variables like: Do you smoke? How long have you been smoking? Which brand do you

smoke? & how many cigarettes do you smoke per day).

3.7 Solutions and Evaluation

Frequencies

Statistics

263 263 263 226 226 227 226 220 263

0 0 0 37 37 36 37 43 0

Valid

Missing

N

what isyour

gender

whatis your

agedo yousmoke

how longhave you

beensmoking

howmany

cigrettesper day

what isyour

ocupation

whichbranddo yousmoke

what isyour

income

wheredo you

live

Interpretation:-

263 out of 263 respondents replied on gender, age, do you smoke & where do you live,

no one was found missing.

226 out of 263 respondents replied on how long you have been smoking & how many

cigarettes per day, 37 found to be missing in both.

227 out of 263 respondents replied on what is your occupation, 36 were found missing.

226 out of 263 respondents replied on which brand you smoke, 37 found to be missing.

220 out of 263 respondents replied on what is your income, 43 found to be missing.

Frequency Tables

what is your gender

233 88.6 88.6 88.6

30 11.4 11.4 100.0

263 100.0 100.0

male

female

Total

ValidFrequency Percent Valid Percent

CumulativePercent

233 male respondents were male having valid percentage of 88.6% and 30 were female

having valid percentage of 11.4% no one was found missing.

femalemale

what is your gender

100

80

60

40

20

0

Perc

ent

11.41%

88.59%

what is your gender

what is your age

7 2.7 2.7 2.7

39 14.8 14.8 17.5

63 24.0 24.0 41.4

38 14.4 14.4 55.9

36 13.7 13.7 69.6

21 8.0 8.0 77.6

30 11.4 11.4 89.0

15 5.7 5.7 94.7

14 5.3 5.3 100.0

263 100.0 100.0

16-17

18-20

21-25

26-30

31-35

36-40

41-45

46-50

50 & above

Total


CumulativePercent

According to age group, 2.7 % belong to 16-17 age groups with 7 frequencies, 14.8 %

belong to 18-20 age groups with 39 frequencies, 24% belong to 21-25 age groups with 63

Frequencies, 14.4% belong to 26-30 age groups with 38 frequencies, 13.7% belong to 31-

35 age groups with 36 frequencies, 8 % belong to 36-40 age groups with21 frequencies,

11.4% belong to 41-45 age groups with 30 frequencies, 5.7% belong to 46-50 age groups

with 15 frequencies, 5.3% belong to 50 & above age groups with 14 frequencies

50 &above

46-5041-4536-4031-3526-3021-2518-2016-17

what is your age

25

20

15

10

5

0

Per

cen

t

5.32%5.7%

11.41%7.98%

13.69%14.45%

23.95%

14.83%

2.66%

what is your age

do you smoke

25 9.5 9.5 9.5

225 85.6 85.6 95.1

13 4.9 4.9 100.0

263 100.0 100.0

no

yes

already quited

Total


CumulativePercent

25 respondents replied they do not smoke which is 9.5%, 225 replied yes they smoke

which is 85.6%, 13 replied that they had quite smoking which is 4.9%, no data was found

missing.

already quitedyesno

do you smoke

100

80

60

40

20

0

Per

cen

t

4.94%

85.55%

9.51%

do you smoke

how long have you been smoking

68 25.9 30.1 30.1

83 31.6 36.7 66.8

75 28.5 33.2 100.0

226 85.9 100.0

37 14.1

263 100.0

1-5 years

6-10 years

11 years & above

Total

Valid

SystemMissing

Total

Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative

Percent

Respondents were asked to reply on “how long have you been smoking”, in which 37

respondent are missing due to they are not smoker which holds 14.1%.

30.1% valid percent4 have been smoking from 1-5 years, 36.7% valid percent have been

smoking from 6-10 years & 28.5% valid percent have been smoking from 11 years &

above.

4 the percentage of non missing data

11 years & above6-10 years1-5 years


40

30

20

10

0

Perc

ent

33.19%36.73%30.09%


how many cigrettes per day

21 8.0 9.3 9.3

39 14.8 17.3 26.5

46 17.5 20.4 46.9

63 24.0 27.9 74.8

57 21.7 25.2 100.0

226 85.9 100.0

37 14.1

263 100.0

0-5

6-10

11-15

16-20

25 & above

Total

Valid

SystemMissing

Total


Percent

Respondents were asked to reply on “how many cigarettes per day you smoke”, in which

37 respondent are missing due to they are not smoker which holds 14.1%.

9.5% valid percent is smoking 0-5 cigarettes per day, 17.3% valid percent is smoking 6-10

cigarettes per day, 20.4% valid percent is smoking 11-15 cigarettes per day, 20.4% 27.9%

valid percent is smoking 16-20 cigarettes per day & 25% valid percent is smoking 25 &

above cigarettes per day.

25 & above16-2011-156-100-5


30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Perc

ent

25.22%27.88%20.35%17.26%

9.29%


what is your ocupation

17 6.5 7.5 7.5

20 7.6 8.8 16.3

21 8.0 9.3 25.6

20 7.6 8.8 34.4

19 7.2 8.4 42.7

31 11.8 13.7 56.4

56 21.3 24.7 81.1

43 16.3 18.9 100.0

227 86.3 100.0

36 13.7

263 100.0

professional

management

technical

sales

financial

business man

student

others

Total

Valid

SystemMissing

Total


Percent

Respondents were asked to reply on “what is your occupation”, in which 36 respondent are

missing because they are not smokers which holds 13.7%.

7.5% valid percent belong to professional, 8.8% valid percent belong to management,

9.3% valid percent belong to technical, 8.8% valid percent belongs to sales, 8.4% valid

percent belong to financial, 13.7% valid percent belongs to business man, 24.7% valid

percent belongs to students & 18.9% valid percent belong to others.

othersstudentbusinessman

financialsalestechnicalmanagement

professional


25

20

15

10

5

0

Per

cent

18.94%

24.67%

13.66%8.37%8.81%9.25%8.81%7.49%


which brand do u smoke

32 12.2 14.2 14.2

29 11.0 12.8 27.0

15 5.7 6.6 33.6

1 .4 .4 34.1

79 30.0 35.0 69.0

3 1.1 1.3 70.4

3 1.1 1.3 71.7

20 7.6 8.8 80.5

11 4.2 4.9 85.4

8 3.0 3.5 88.9

2 .8 .9 89.8

5 1.9 2.2 92.0

1 .4 .4 92.5

2 .8 .9 93.4

15 5.7 6.6 100.0

226 85.9 100.0

37 14.1

263 100.0

benson & hedges

capstan

dunhill

diplomet

goldleaf

goldflake

K2

marlboro

more

morven gold

pine

red & white

555

others

No preference

Total

Valid

SystemMissing

Total


Percent

Respondents were asked to reply on “which brand do you smoke”, in which 37 respondents

are missing because they are not smokers which holds 14.1%.

14.2 % smokes Benson & hedges, 12.2% smokes Capstan, 6.6% smokes Dunhill, 0.4%

smokes Diplomet, 35.0% smokes Gold leaf, 1.3% smokes Gold flake, 1.3% smokes K-2,

8.8% smokes Marlboro, 4.9% smokes More, 3.5% smokes Morven gold, 0.9% smokes

Pine, 2.2% smokes Red & White, 0.4 smokes 555, 0.9% smokes other brands.

No Preference 5 on cigarettes brand was given by 6.6% of respondent.

5 smoke more than one brand

Nopref...

others

555red &white

pinemorven...

moremarlboro

K2goldflake

goldleaf

diplomet

dunhill

capstan

benson ...


40

30

20

10

0

Percent

6.64%0.88%0.44%2.21%0.88%3.54%4.87%8.85%

1.33%1.33%

34.96%

0.44%6.64%

12.83%14.16%


what is your income

25 9.5 11.4 11.4

15 5.7 6.8 18.2

30 11.4 13.6 31.8

51 19.4 23.2 55.0

61 23.2 27.7 82.7

38 14.4 17.3 100.0

220 83.7 100.0

43 16.3

263 100.0

500-1,500

1,600-3,000

4,000-5,000

6,000-10,000

11,000-20,000

21,000 & above

Total

Valid

SystemMissing

Total


Percent

Respondents were asked to reply on “what is your monthly income/pocket money”, in

which 43 respondent are missing because they are not smokers which holds 16.3%.

11.4% belongs to monthly income group of R.s 500-1,500, 6.8% belong to monthly income

group of R.s 1,600-3,000, 13.4% belongs to monthly income group of R.s 4,000-5,000,

23% belongs to monthly income group of R.s 6,000-10,000, 27.7% belongs to monthly

income group of R.s 11,000-20,000 & 17.3% belongs to monthly income group of R.s

21,000 & above.

21,000 &above

11,000-20,000

6,000-10,0004,000-5,0001,600-3,000500-1,500

what is your income

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Per

cen

t

17.27%

27.73%23.18%

13.64%

6.82%11.36%

what is your income

where do you live

16 6.1 6.1 6.1

19 7.2 7.2 13.3

12 4.6 4.6 17.9

9 3.4 3.4 21.3

17 6.5 6.5 27.8

14 5.3 5.3 33.1

3 1.1 1.1 34.2

8 3.0 3.0 37.3

4 1.5 1.5 38.8

9 3.4 3.4 42.2

2 .8 .8 43.0

16 6.1 6.1 49.0

12 4.6 4.6 53.6

15 5.7 5.7 59.3

10 3.8 3.8 63.1

14 5.3 5.3 68.4

8 3.0 3.0 71.5

6 2.3 2.3 73.8

5 1.9 1.9 75.7

13 4.9 4.9 80.6

11 4.2 4.2 84.8

10 3.8 3.8 88.6

7 2.7 2.7 91.3

13 4.9 4.9 96.2

10 3.8 3.8 100.0

263 100.0 100.0

Clifton

Defence

F.B area

Garden

Gulshan

Gulistan-e-johar

Lasbela

Liaqatabad

Landhi

Malir

Liary

Nazimabad

New karachi

Tariq road

Saddar

P.E.C.H.S

Maripur

korangi

Light house

K.D.A

Azizabad

Jahangir road

Akhter colony

Hill Park

Cantt

Total


CumulativePercent

Due to our subject location or area was very important so we selected small areas to get our

result. For that we divided it in to 25 areas

Cantt

HillPark

Akhter

colony

Jahangirroad

Azizabad

K.D.A

Lighthous

e

korangi

Maripur

P.E.C.H.

S

Saddar

Tariq

road

Newkarachi

Nazimabad

Liary

Malir

Landhi

Liaqatabad

Lasbela

Gulistan-e-

johar

Gulshan

Garden

F.Barea

Defence

Clifton

where do you live

8

6

4

2

0

Perc

ent

3.8%

4.94%

2.66%

3.8%4.18%

4.94%

1.9%2.28%

3.04%

5.32%

3.8%

5.7%

4.56%

6.08%

0.76%

3.42%

1.52%

3.04%

1.14%

5.32%

6.46%

3.42%

4.56%

7.22%

6.08%

where do you live

4. HYPOTHESIS TESTING

HYPOTHESIS 1

Consumers belonging to same AGE group prefer same brand of cigarettes.

1:- Statement:

H1o:- consumers belonging to same age group do not smoke same brand of cigarette.

H1a:- consumers belonging to same age group smoke same brand of cigarette

2:- Statement:

Level Of Significance = α = 0.05

3:- Test’s Statistics:-

χ² = Σ [ (ø i,j – e i,j)²]

e i,j

i, expected frequency

o, observed frequency

4:- Critical Region:-

Rejected H1o if p-value is less then 0.05

5:- Calculation :-

Case Processing Summary

Cases

Valid Missing Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

What is your age. * Which Brand

do you smoke.263 99.6% 1 .4% 264 100.0%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi_(letter)

What is your age. * Which Brand do you smoke. Crosstabulation

Coun

t

Which Brand do you smoke.

Missin

g

Benso

n &

Hedge

s

Capsto

n

Dunhil

l

Diplome

t

Goldlea

f

Goldflak

e

K

2

Marlbor

e

Mor

e

Morve

n Gold

Pin

e

Red

&

Whit

e

What

is

your

age.

16-17 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

18-20 30 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

21-25 0 13 29 11 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

26-30 0 5 2 4 1 20 0 0 6 0 0 0 0

31-35 0 8 2 6 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

36-40 0 2 0 1 0 7 3 3 5 0 0 0 0

41-45 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 3 4 0 0

46-50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 5

50 &

ABOV

E

0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 37 34 33 22 1 66 3 3 26 3 8 2 5


No preference

others

555red & white

pinem

orven gold

more

marlboro

K2goldflake

goldleaf

diplomet

dunhill

capstan

benson & hedges

Co

un

t20

10

0

what is your age

16-17

18-20

21-25

26-30

31-35

36-40

41-45

46-50

50 & above

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig. (2-

sided) Exact Sig. (2-sided) Exact Sig. (1-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 1.197E3a 120 .000 .b

Likelihood Ratio 786.586 120 .000 .b

Fisher's Exact Test .000 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association 242.527 1 .000 .b .b

N of Valid Cases 263

a. 132 cells (91.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .03.

5:- Conclusion:-

As Asump. Sing (2-sided) is < 0.05

Therefore:

We cannot accept H1o

H1o:- consumers belonging to same age group do not smoke same brand of cigarette.

We will accept H1a that is

H1a:- consumers belonging to same age group smoke a same brand of cigarette

HYPOTHESIS 2

Consumers belonging to same INCOME group prefer same brand of cigarettes.

1). Statement:-

H1o:- consumers belonging to same income group do not smoke same brand of cigarette.

H1a:- consumers belonging to same income group smoke same brand of cigarette

2:- Level Of Significance = α = 0.05


χ² = Σ [ (ø i,j – e i,j)²]

e i,j





5:- Calculation :-

Case Processing

Summary


Cases

Valid Missing Total


What is your income. * Which

Brand do you smoke.263 99.6% 1 .4% 264 100.0%

Count


Tot

al

Missin

g

Benso

n &

Hedg

es

Capsto

n

Dunh

ill

Diplom

et

Goldle

af

Goldfla

ke

K

2

Marlbo

re

Mor

e

Morve

n

Gold

Pin

e

Red

&

Whit

e

55

5

Other

s

1

5

What

is your

incom

e.

Missin

g37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37

500-

15000 5 0 0 0 15 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 25

1600-

30000 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15

4000-

50000 0 15 2 0 0 10 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 30

6000-

100000 5 0 3 1 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 51

11000

-

20000

0 19 0 0 0 10 3 3 20 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 61

21000

&

Above

0 7 0 0 0

40 0 10 2 2 2 1 5 5 0 38

Total37 37 29 5 1 81 13 3 33 8

72 1 6 5 0 263

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig. (2-




Fisher's Exact Test .b .b




5:- Calculation :-

As Asump. Sing (2-sided) is < 0.05

H1o:- consumers belonging to same income group do not smoke same brand of cigarette.


H1a:- consumers belonging to same age group smoke same brand of cigarette

HYPOTHESIS 3

Consumers having same rate of cigarettes CONSUMPTION6 prefers same brand of

cigarettes.

1:- Statement:-

H1o:- consumers having same rate of cigarettes consumption group do not smoke same

brand of cigarette.

H1a:- consumers having same rate of cigarettes consumption group smoke same brand of

cigarette.



χ² = Σ [ (ø i,j – e i,j)²]

e i,j





6


5:- Calculation :-


Cases

Valid Missing Total


How many cigrettes per day. *

Which Brand do you smoke.263 99.6% 1 .4% 264 100.0%

Count


Tota

l

Missin

g

Benson

&

Hedge

s

Capsto

n

Dunhil

l

Diplome

t

Goldlea

f

Goldflak

e

K

2

Marlbor

e

Mor

e

Morve

n Gold

Pin

e

Red

&

Whit

e

55

5

Other

s

1

5

How

many

cigrette

s per

day.

Missin

g37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37

0-5 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21

6-10 0 11 5 0 0 3 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39

11-15 0 4 1 9 1 29 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46

16-20 0 3 2 2 0 38 3 3 7 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 63

25 &

Above0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 11 8 2 5 1 2 0 57

Total 37 47 29 15 1 81 3 3 17 11 8 2 5 1 2 0 263

How many cigrettes per day. * Which Brand do you smoke. Crosstabulation

Nopreference

others

555red &white

pinemorven

gold

moremarlboro

K2goldflake

goldleaf

diplomet

dunhillcapstan

benson &

hedges


25

20

15

10

5

0

Coun

t

25 & above

16-20

11-15

6-10

0-5

how many cigrettes perday

Bar Chart

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)

Exact Sig. (2-

sided)

Exact Sig. (1-

sided)

Point

Probability

Pearson Chi-Square 9.423E2a 75 .000 .000

Likelihood Ratio 735.291 75 .000 .000


Linear-by-Linear

Association1.984E2b 1 .000 .000 .000 .000



b. The standardized statistic is .000.

5:- Conclusion:-

As Asump. Sing (2-sided) is < 0.05 ,

Therefore

We can not accept H1o

H1o:- consumers having same rate of cigarettes consumption group do not smoke same

brand of cigarette.


H1a:- consumers having same rate of cigarettes consumption group smoke same brand of

cigarette.

HYPOTHESIS 4

Consumers belonging to same OCUPATION prefers same brand of cigarettes.

1:- Statement:-

H1o:- consumers belonging to same occupation group do not smoke same brand of

cigarette.

H1a:- consumers belonging to same occupation smoke same brand of cigarette



χ² = Σ [ (ø i,j – e i,j)²]

e i,j







Cases

Valid Missing Total


Occupation *

Which Brand do

you smoke.

263 99.6% 1 .4% 264 100.0%

Occupation * Which Brand do you smoke. Crosstabulation

Count


Tota

lMissing

Benson

&

Hedges Capston Dunhill Diplomet Goldleaf Goldflake K2 Marlbore

Mor

e

Morve

n Gold Pine

Red

&

Whit

e 555

Ot

her

s 15

Occupation Missing 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36

Professional 0 10 0 2 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17

Management 0 11 1 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20

Technical 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21

Sales 0 0 4 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20

Finance 0 2 0 3 0 12 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19

Businessman 0 5 0 3 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31

Student 0 0 0 0 0 22 1 3 20 11 8 2 5 1 2 0 68

Others0 0 0 0 0 29 2 0 0 0 8

00 0 0 0 31

Total 37 32 29 30 1 79 3 3 20 11 8 2 5 1 2 0 263

Nopreference

others

555red &white

pinemorven

gold

moremarlboro

K2goldflake

goldleaf

diplomet

dunhillcapstan

benson &

hedges


30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Coun

t

others

student

business man

financial

sales

technical

management

professionalwhat is your ocupation

Bar Chart

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig. (2-








5:- Calculation :-


Therefore

H1o:- consumers belonging to same occupation do not smoke same brand of cigarette.


H1a:- consumers belonging to same occupation smoke same brand of cigarette.

HYPOTHESIS 5

Consumers belonging to same LOCATION7 prefers same brand of cigarettes.

1:- Statement:-

H1o:- Consumers belonging to same LOCATION do not prefers same brand of cigarettes.

H1a:- Consumers belonging to same LOCATION prefers same brand of cigarettes.



χ² = Σ [ (ø i,j – e i,j)²]

e i,j






Cases

Valid Missing Total


Where do you live. * Which

Brand do you smoke.263 99.6% 1 .4% 264 100.0%

5:- Calculation :-

7


Where do you live. * Which Brand do you smoke. Crosstabulation

Count


Tota

l

Missin

g

Benson

&

Hedge

s

Capsto

n

Dunhil

l

Diplome

t

Goldlea

f

Goldflak

e

K

2

Marlbor

e

Mor

e

Morve

n Gold

Pin

e

Red

&

Whit

e

55

5

Other

s

1

5

Wher

e do

you

live.

Clifton 4 4 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

Defense 5 5 1 4 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19

F.B Area 2 2 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

Garden 0 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 9

Gulshan 0 4 3 0 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17

Gulistan-a-

Johar0 0 8 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14

Lesbela 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Liaquataba

d0 2 4 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

Landhi 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

Malir 0 3 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

Liary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Nazimabad 0 2 4 0 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 16

New

Karachi0 1 3 0 0 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

Tariq Road 0 2 2 1 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15

Saddar0 1 3 0 0 3 0 0

20 0 0 0 1 0 0 10

P.E.C.H.S 0 2 2 1 1 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14

Maripur 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

Korangi 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

Light House 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

K.D.A 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 13

Azizabad 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

Jahangir

Road0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 10

Akhtar

coliny0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 7

Hill Park 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 1 2 0 13

Cantt 0 2 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 10

Total37 32 29 15 1 79 3 3 20 11 8 2 5 1 2

1

5263


Coun

t30

20

10

0

distric

south

north

east

west

malir

central

Chi-Square Tests

Value Df

Asymp. Sig. (2-



Likelihood Ratio 1.037E3 360 .062 .b

Fisher's Exact Test .b .b



a. 398 cells (99.5%) have expected count less more 5. The minimum expected count is .01.

Conclusion :-

As Asump. Sing (2-sided) is > 0.05 ,

Therefore

We will accept H1o that is

H1a:- Consumers belonging to same location do not prefers same brand of cigarettes.

And will reject H1

H1a:- Consumers belonging to same location prefers same brand of cigarettes

HYPOTHESIS 6

Consumers belonging to same occupation have same consumption rate of cigarettes.

1:- Statement:-

H1o:- Consumers belonging to same occupation do not have same consumption rate of

cigarettes.

H1a:- Consumers belonging to same occupation have same consumption rate of cigarettes.



χ² = Σ [ (ø i,j – e i,j)²]

e i,j





5:- Calculation :-


Cases

Valid Missing Total


Occupation * How many

cigrettes per day.263 99.6% 1 .4% 264 100.0%


Occupation * How many cigrettes per day. Crosstabulation

Count

How many cigrettes per day.

TotalMissing 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 25 & Above

Occupation Missing 36 0 0 0 0 0 36

Professional 1 16 0 0 0 0 17

Management 0 5 15 0 0 0 20

Technical 0 0 21 0 0 0 21

Sales 0 0 3 17 0 0 20

Finance 0 0 0 19 0 0 19

Businessman 0 0 0 10 21 0 31

Student 0 0 0 0 31 0 31

Others 0 0 0 0 11 57 68

Total 37 21 39 46 63 57 263

Chi-Square Tests

Value df

Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)

Exact Sig. (2-

sided)

Exact Sig. (1-

sided)

Point

Probability

Pearson Chi-Square 1.044E3a 40 .000 .000

Likelihood Ratio 768.754 40 .000 .000


Linear-by-Linear

Association2.506E2b 1 .000 .000 .000 .000


a. 36 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.36.

b. The standardized statistic is .000.


25 & above16-2011-156-100-5

Coun

t20

10

0

what is your ocupati

professional

management

technical

sales

financial

business man

student

others

5:- Calculation :-


Therefore

we can not accept H1o

H1o:- Consumers belonging to same occupation do not have a same consumption rate of

cigarettes.


H1a:- Consumers belonging to same occupation have a same consumption rate of

cigarettes.

CHAPTER – 5

CONCLUSION

The Top Three most preferred cigarette brands

1st = Gold leaf

With 79 out 263 respondents smoke it having 35%.

2nd = Benson & hedges

With 32 out of 236 respondents smoke it having 14.2%

3rd =Capstan

With 29 out of 263 respondents smoke it having 12.8%

RECOMMENDATIONS

Target Segments of Gold leaf:-

Age: - 18-20

Income: - 11,000 – 20,000

Consumption: - 25 & above

Occupation: - students

Location: - East

Target Segment of Benson & hedges:-

Age: - 41-45

Income: - 21,000 & above

Consumption: - 16 - 20

Occupation: - Financials

Location: -East

Target Segment of Capstan:-

Age: - 21-25

Income: - 6,000 – 10,000

Consumption: - 16- 20

Occupation: - Others

Location: - North

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The anatomy of the United States housing crisis by Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson is a faculty member, economist, and contributing scholar with the Center for Vision and Values at Grove City College (January 02, 2008 6:00 AM).

Backgrounder: Sub prime mortgage crisis Editor: Wang Hongjiang www.chinaview.cn 2008-11-15 12:59

The Conservative Origins of the Sub-Prime Mortgage Crisis the American Prospect.htm.John Atlas and Peter Dreier December 18, 2007 web only.

Finance & Development a quarterly magazine of IMF Dec 2007 volume 4, no 4 Sub prime: Tentacles of a Crisis by Randall Dodd is a Senior Financial Expert in the IMF’s Monetary and Capital Markets Department.

Credit Crisis Bailout Plan by New York Times Monday, June 8, 2009.

Regional Economic Outlook: Europe, International Monetary Fund, April, 2008, p.

19-20; and EU Banking Structures, European Central Bank, October 2008, p. 26.

Flash Estimates for the Fourth Quarter of 2008, Eurostat news release, STAT/09/19,

February 13, 2009.

CRS Report RS22988, Iceland’s Financial Crisis, by James K. Jackson.

Anderson, Camilla, Iceland Gets Help to Recover From Historic Crisis, IMF Survey

Magazine, November 19, 2008.

CRS Report RS22850, Tax Provisions of the 2008 Economic Stimulus Package,

coordinated by Jane G. Gravelle.

Dougherty, Carter, British Central Bank Cuts Its Key Rate, The New York Times,

March 6, 2009; March 5, 2009 –Monetary Policy Decisions, press release, the

European Central Bank.

http://www.chinaview.cn/index.htm

112

EU Sets up Crisis Unit to Boost Financial Oversight, Thompson Financial News,

October 16, 2008.

From Financial Crisis to Recovery: A European Framework for Action,

Communication From the Commission, European Commission, COM (2008) 706

final, October 29, 2008.

Bernanke, Ben S., Liquidity Provision by the Federal Reserve, May 13, 2008.

ANNEXTURE

Questionnaire

Please fill out this form

1.

What is your gender?

Female Male

2.

Your age

16 - 17 18 – 20 21 - 25 26 – 30 31 – 35

36 – 40 41 – 45 46 - 50 50 & above

3.

Do you smoke

If NO so go to Q.9

Yes No Already Quitted

4.


1 year - 5 years 6 years - 10 years 11 years & above

5.

how many cigarettes per day

0 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 – 20 25 & above

6.

Your occupation

kindly tick your occupation

Professional Management Technical Sales

Financial Business man Student Other

7.

Tick the brand you smoke

kindly tick only one brand

Benson & hedges Capstan

Dunhill Diplomat

Gold leaf Gold flake

K2

More

Marlboro

Morven gold

Pine Red & white

555 Other

8. Your monthly income\ pocket money

500 - 1500 1600 – 3000 4000 - 5000

6000 - 10,000 11,000 - 20,000 21,000 & above

9.

where do you live

117

Project - (Cigarette Brand Preference)

Documents

Transcript of Project - (Cigarette Brand Preference)