Presentation on Consumer’s

perception towards Frutika Juice

Prepared For

Mr. Zaheed Halim

(Course Instructor)
Marketing Research
Group Members
Md. Fahad Ahmed Bhuiyan ID# 051 105 030

Abu M Nazim Uddin ID # 052 093

030

Tanzid Hakim ID # 052 400 030

 
Problem Definition

Our problem which is rather an opportunity can be

laid out like this: Gathering information to determine
which option is more influential on consumer
purchasing decision of Frutika Juice – Taste, Price,
Promotion, Availability or Packaging.
VARIABLE & ANALYTICAL TOOL

VARIABLE:

Dependent Variable: Purchasing Behavior

Independent Variables: Taste, Promotion, Price,

Packaging, Availability

ANALYTICAL TOOL:
SPSS
HYPOTHESIS

H1: There is some relationship between purchasing behavior of Frutika

Juice and it’s taste.
H2: There is some relationship between purchasing behavior of Frutika
Juice and it’s promotion.
H3: There is some relationship between purchasing behavior of Frutika
Juice and it’s price.
H4: There is some relationship between purchasing behavior of Frutika
Juice and it’s packaging
H5: There is some relationship between purchasing behavior of Frutika
Juice and it’s availability.
QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN

General information
Product specific questions
Questions supporting our independent
variable
Coding Data

For doing the data entry much easier we

systematically coded the value of the variables.
Data Entry
Data Entry
Data Analysis Method
Statistical tools like mean, regression, chi- square test
were used to analyze the data.
We use bar & pie chart to display data in graphical
form.
With the help of the SPSS we analyze them using
various methods like frequency, percentage count and
cross tabulation.
Test of Hypothesis
Independent Sample T –test
Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Mean Std. Error Difference
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper
Buy Frutika? Equal variances
5.586 .020 -2.066 118 .041 -.219 .106 -.428 -.009
assumed
Equal variances
-1.919 32.584 .064 -.219 .114 -.451 .013
not assumed

From the above table, the significance is .041 which is greater than .025. So we
fail to reject the null hypothesis, that means - There is no relationship between
purchasing behavior of Frutika Juice and it’s promotion.
 
Test of Hypothesis
One way ANOVA (Relationship between purchasing behavior and
promotion)

Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups
1.223 4 .306 1.400 .238
Within Groups
25.102 115 .218
Total
26.325 119

From the above ANOVA table, significance is .238 which is greater

than .05. So we fail to reject the null hypothesis, that means - There is no
relationship between purchasing behavior of Frutika Juice and it’s
promotion.
 
Test of Hypothesis
One way ANOVA (Relationship between purchasing behavior and taste)

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups
4.410 4 1.102 5.785 .000

Within Groups
21.915 115 .191

Total
26.325 119

From the above ANOVA table, significance is .000 which is less than .05. So the
test result is significant and we reject the null hypothesis, that means - There is
some relationship between purchasing behavior of Frutika Juice and it’s taste.
 
Test of Hypothesis
Cross Tabulation: Chi- square Test
Consumer purchasing behavior influences toward taste
of Frutika Juice.
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
20.101(a) 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 22.320 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association
16.258 1 .000

N of Valid Cases
120

From the above table, we find that the significance is .000 which is less than .05
which is a significant result. Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis that means-
the taste of Frutika Juice has some influence on the purchasing of it.
Test of Hypothesis
Cross Tabulation: Chi- square Test
Consumer purchasing behavior influences toward
price of Frutika Juice.
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 7.498(a) 4 .112
Likelihood Ratio 7.515 4 .111
Linear-by-Linear Association
1.706 1 .192

N of Valid Cases
120

From the above table, we find that the significance is .112 which is greater
than .05 which is an insignificant result. Therefore, we fail to reject the null
hypothesis that means- There is no relationship between purchasing behavior of
Frutika Juice and it’s price.
Test of Hypothesis
Cross Tabulation: Chi- square Test
Consumer purchasing behavior influences toward
promotion of Frutika Juice.
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 8.199(a) 4 .085
Likelihood Ratio 8.426 4 .077
Linear-by-Linear Association
.358 1 .550

N of Valid Cases
120

From the above table, we find that the significance is .085 which is greater
than .05 which is an insignificant result. Therefore, we fail to reject the null
hypothesis that means- There is no relationship between purchasing behavior of
Frutika Juice and it’s promotion.
Test of Hypothesis
Cross Tabulation: Chi- square Test
Consumer purchasing behavior influences toward
packaging of Frutika Juice.
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
6.778(a) 4 .148
Likelihood Ratio 7.082 4 .132
Linear-by-Linear Association
4.633 1 .031
N of Valid Cases
120

From the above table, we find that the significance is .148 which is greater
than .05 which is an insignificant result. Therefore, we fail to reject the null
hypothesis that means- There is no relationship between purchasing behavior of
Frutika Juice and it’s packaging.
Test of Hypothesis
Cross Tabulation: Chi- square Test
Consumer purchasing behavior influences toward
availability of Frutika Juice.

Asymp. Sig. (2-

Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.270(a) 3 .099
Likelihood Ratio 6.947 3 .074
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.804 1 .179
N of Valid Cases
120

From the above table, we find that the significance is .099 which is greater
than .05 which is an insignificant result. Therefore, we fail to reject the null
hypothesis that means- There is no relationship between purchasing behavior of
Frutika Juice and it’s packaging.
Test of Hypothesis
Correlations
Correlation between purchasing behavior and taste of
Frutika Juice
Taste of
Buy Frutika? Frutika
Buy Frutika? Pearson Correlation
1 .370(**)

Sig. (2-tailed) . .000

N 120 120
Taste of Frutika Pearson Correlation
.370(**) 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 120 120

From the above table, it is clear that the correlation between purchasing behavior
and taste of Frutika Juice has very strong relationship which leads to accepting
our alternative hypothesis
Test of Hypothesis
Correlations
Correlation between purchasing behavior and price
of Frutika Juice
Price of
Buy Frutika? Frutika
Buy Frutika? Pearson
1 .120
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) . .193
N 120 120
Price of Frutika Pearson
.120 1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .193 .
N 120 120

From the above table, it is clear that the correlation between purchasing behavior
and price of Frutika Juice has not good relationship which leads to failure to
reject our null hypothesis.
Test of Hypothesis
Correlations
Correlation between purchasing behavior and
promotion of Frutika Juice
Promotion of
Buy Frutika? Frutika
Buy Frutika? Pearson Correlation 1 .055
Sig. (2-tailed) . .552
N 120 120
Promotion of Frutika Pearson Correlation .055 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .552 .
N 120 120

From the above table, it is clear that the correlation between purchasing behavior
and promotion of Frutika Juice has not good relationship which leads to failure to
reject our null hypothesis.
Test of Hypothesis
Correlations
Correlation between purchasing behavior and
availability of Frutika Juice
Availability of
Buy Frutika? Frutika
Buy Frutika? Pearson Correlation 1 .123
Sig. (2-tailed) . .180
N 120 120
Availability of Frutika Pearson Correlation .123 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .180 .
N 120 120

From the above table, it is clear that the correlation between purchasing behavior
and availability of Frutika Juice has not good relationship which leads to failure
to reject our null hypothesis.
Test of Hypothesis
Correlations
Correlation between purchasing behavior and packaging of
Frutika Juice

Packaging of
Buy Frutika? Frutika
Buy Frutika? Pearson Correlation 1 .197(*)
Sig. (2-tailed) . .031
N 120 120
Packaging of Frutika Pearson Correlation .197(*) 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .031 .
N
From the above table, it is clear that the correlation between purchasing
120
behavior
120
and packaging
of Frutika Juice has good relationship in some extend which leads to reject our null hypothesis.

 
Test of Hypothesis
Regression Analysis
Model Summary

Adjusted R Std. Error of the

Model R R Square Square Estimate
1
.392(a) .154 .117 .442

Sum of
Model Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression
4.050 5 .810 4.145 .002(a)
Residual
22.275 114 .195
Total
26.325 119
 Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

1 (Constant) .779 .178 4.373 .000
Taste of Frutika
.184 .049 .387 3.757 .000

Price of Frutika
-.031 .045 -.069 -.685 .495

Promotion of
Frutika -.042 .046 -.088 -.912 .364

Availability of
Frutika .073 .053 .131 1.379 .170

Packaging of
Frutika .022 .058 .039 .370 .712

Therefore, from the regression analysis we can conclude that the current price,
promotion, packaging and availability don’t have any influence on the
consumer’s purchasing decision, only it is taste which actually drives the
customer to purchase the Frutika Juice.
Findings

The major findings of our research are:

 People usually purchase Frutika Juice for it’s taste.
 There is no effect of price, promotion, packaging, availability of Frutika Juice on
consumer purchasing decision. This implies that these variables are not so powerful
to drive the potential customer to purchase it.
 Most of the people aware about Frutika Juice through the promotional activities of it
though it doesn’t really induce them to purchase it. They actually frequently buy it
for it’s taste.
Recommendation
 Frutika Juice can handle their promotional activities more efficiently and effectively.
 They can reduce the price to some extent in future to increase the sale. But they also have to be cautious not to reduce it
too much as it creates negative impression in the mind of the customers.
 Frutika Juice can go to universities, schools, and other places where their target customers belong, to create better
positioning in the mind of customers by activities like concert, sponsoring program, etc.
 As Akij posses the largest distribution network of country, Frutika Juice must be intensively distributed to the each and
every corner of the country.
 Product packaging should be improved more..
 To avoid the medium or average impression about Frutika Juice, they can associate with the higher brand image of
their parent company AKIJ Group as it has very good image in the mind of people.
 
 
Thank You