IntroI

page

What accounts for the difference in price of bubble teas in

Bangkok?

Suphattra Chatromyen 5704642171

EE 489 Seminar in Industrial Economics

23 May 2017

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the pricing practice of bubble tea market in Bangkok.
Different brands can charge different prices for one glass of bubble tea. So the paper observes
basic information from 22 brands of bubble tea. SCP framework is introduced to demonstrate
and analyze the market. To strengthen the analysis, 230 samples were surveyed about the
bubble tea purchasing decision and preference. According to product differentiation criteria,
the paper categorizes product into three types. The result indicates that product differentiation
has an effect on prices differently according to the types of bubble tea market. In other words,
General tea charges the lowest price with franchise strategy. Tea with special topping
launches a new product as much as possible. Premium tea charges the highest price with
quality strategy. Interestingly, Tea with special topping category gains the highest popularity
even the price is higher than General tea category.
1. Introduction

Due to the hot climate in Thailand, nothing is better than a sweetness and refreshment

of bubble tea. A smell of tea with chewy tapioca balls can attract many customers to try this

tasty drink. Nowadays, a lot of bubble tea shops are popping up throughout Bangkok.

Consumers easily find bubble tea shops in crowded areas such as department store, Central

Business District (CBD area), BTS Skytrain, and etc. Since bubble tea became popular for

the past few years, customers need to wait long queue for some brands. Many photos and

reviews of the popular brand are posted on social media. Some brands stay ahead from their

competitors by launching new menus that never exist in the market.

For the basic recipe, bubble tea consists of iced tea, milk, sugar and tapioca balls.

However, if you try to observe the price, one glass of bubble tea has the different price ranges

for the different brands. Some brands charge price up to 130 baht per glass while others

charge only 25 baht. The highest observable price of bubble tea on this paper can buy a good

meal in a restaurant. This wide gap of bubble tea price leads to the main question of this

paper: What accounts for the difference in price of bubble teas in Bangkok?

According to the wide range of price, this paper attempts to observe and understand

the price of bubble tea market and also analyze the reason behind each strategy by taking

product differentiation into consideration. Various strategies of each brand provide different

market power and degree of competition. Hence, with more understanding of firm’s strategy,

it tends to be valuable information to beverage industry in Thailand and investors who want

to start their business in bubble tea market.

The paper organized the remainder as follows. Firstly, I mainly emphasize on

literature review. Then, the paper explains the background of bubble tea industry. The next
section demonstrates economic theory and methodology that adopted in this paper. Lastly,

this paper analyzes the results and summarize our finding and implications.

2. Literature review

Law of one price rarely exists in the real world situation. According to Sorensen

(2000), “Homogeneous goods are often sold at widely different prices by rival firms, even in

environments that seem particularly conducive to economic competition”. Consumers mostly

consider products or brands of a various firm to be imperfect substitutes. Although bubble tea

has the similar characteristic in the market, different brands can charge different prices for

one glass of bubble tea. When looking at the characteristic of bubble tea market, it follows

monopolistic competition criteria (see Carlton and Perloff: 2005).

There are many works that link price strategy with location. Many authors (e.g.

Gannon, 1997; Steward and Davis, 2005) point out that​ ​products at different locations must

be treated as different. The basic logic of Hotelling clearly extends to encompass product

differentiation in a market that is spatially distributed. We can notice that price of bubble tea

in CBD or urban area is different from school or suburb area. Copeland (1940) has been

suggested that potential new seller, in considering where to locate, will have to consider not

only the number of buyers who might be moved to a prospective location but also the ease or

difficulty of moving them.

Other common distinguishing characteristics of products such as design, color, taste,

packaging, and advertising image can affect price strategy of each firm (Gannon, 1997). Dana

and Fong (2011) stated that competition creates an incentive for the firm to maintain their

market share by competing in product’s quality. Gregory (1948) is linked with Dana and

Fong (2011) research. He found that if there were many sellers of a fairly standardized and
stable commodity, sellers' rivalry would take the form of price cuts or improved quality or

both. Quality competition is an attempt to stimulate sales without reducing prices.

Additionally, Chioveanu (2012) considers price and quality choice in an oligopoly

market​.​ The research showed that consumers have various needs and tastes for quality. Some

consumers prefer to buy a low-quality product. Whereas others can afford and prefer to buy a

high-quality product. “In the symmetric equilibrium, firms use mixed strategies that

randomize both price and quality, and obtain strictly positive profits” (Chioveanu, 2012).

When the true quality of a product is not known before purchase, consumers may rely

on a firm's reputation to form expectations of the product's quality. In this case, product

prices will depend on firm reputation, as shown by Klein and Leffler (1981), Shapiro (1983),

and Allen (1984). Since bubble tea is an experienced product, consumer relies on the

reputation of the brand. There is empirical evidence that collective reputation is an important

factor in determining price premiums. Landon and Smith (1998) used data from Bordeaux

wines to estimate the effect of current product quality and reputation on price. The study

demonstrated that reputation is an integral factor in determining price premiums for wine.

Quagrainie, McCluskey, and Loureiro also found that a common reputation exists and has a

positive effect on the price of Washington apples relative to apples from other.

Since bubble tea is invented from Taiwan, brands from the origin can charge a higher

price and perceived higher quality than the local brand. Eckhardt (2005) found that Indian

consumers perceived a local pizza brand as foreign because the product category's perceived

foreignness overshadowed the perceptions of brand localness. Therefore, product categories

perceived as foreign, such as pizza in India and coffee in China, are more likely to benefit

from perceived brand globalness. Moreover, Steenkamp, Batra and, Alden (2003) research

use consumer data from the U.S.A. and Korea. They found that perceived brand globalness is
positively related to both perceived brand quality and prestige and, purchase likelihood.

Besides, perceived brand globalness may provide a significant source of competitive strength:

the higher a brand's perceived globalness, the higher its perceived quality, prestige, and

purchase likelihood. Perceived quality and prestige cannot be readily copied, and hence

provide a more defensible competitive advantage (Shocker et al.,1994).

3. Industry background

Bubble tea is a tea-based drink (e.g. black tea, green tea, milk tea, and fruit tea) served

with chewy tapioca balls. It is also known as boba tea, pearl tea, tapioca tea, and many other

names. This drink is originated from Taichung, Taiwan. In the late 1990s, bubble tea became

a popular drink in most parts of Asia and well received by global consumers from Canada,

USA, and Europe.

For Thailand, Mr.shake was the first brand that enters this market since 1999. The

popularity of bubble tea attracts many sellers such as Orient station, QQ house, Snow pop,

and etc. Nowadays, these brands disappeared from the market except Mr.shake because of the

high degree of competition. Although Mr.shake still gain popularity because of first-mover

advantage, the market share is extracted by new sellers in the market.

Due to sweetness and hot climate in Thailand, bubble tea has become one of the

favorite drinks for Thai consumers. Many bubble tea shops are popping up throughout the

city in Thailand especially in Bangkok. Consumers easily found bubble tea shops in different

locations such as office building, university, department store, and BTS Skytrain. Different

brands of bubble tea in Thailand are owned by the local and multinational company. They use

different strategies, different quality, and different recipe to compete in the market. Some

sellers introduce high price with the premium ingredient, while others sell cheaper price and
reduce quality to gain some market share. Furthermore, many sellers try to create the wide

range of menus and ingredients to differentiate themselves from other brands and satisfy

customer needs.

4. Theoretical framework

One of the well-known framework in industrial organization to analyze the market is

SCP-paradigm. This framework explains the relationship between market structure, market

conduct, and market performance. Since we need to understand the market characteristics and

interaction of bubble tea industry, we will go through the market structure, conduct, and

performance respectively.

The first element of this framework is a market structure which determines the

character and competitiveness of the market. There are many common measurements in this

element. So this paper mainly focuses on analyzing product differentiation. The criteria will

be used to categorize the type of bubble tea market. “If consumers believe that the products

differ and shop accordingly, then the products are effectively differentiated” (Carlton and

Perloff, 2005). Since consumers have the variety of preferences, product differentiation can

distinguish one product from another and create a competitive advantage for that brand.

To extend the meaning of product differentiation, this paper also applies Salop’s

circular model to analyze the bubble tea market. “All firms that offer the differentiated goods

are located on a circle with equal distance” (Policonomics, 2012). Consumers will purchase

the products that closed to their preference by considering both differentiated products

(variety brands of bubble tea) and undifferentiated products from another industry (outside

options such as soft drink, fruit juice, and coffee). Thus, this theory will be adopted to support
and interpret the relationship between customer’s preferences and product differentiation

scheme.

Secondly, market conduct is influenced by the market structure. The conduct can be

determined by pricing strategies, quality choice, advertising strategies, R&D, and franchise.

Since this research classifies the product by product differentiation, the strategy that each

brand used will depend on market conduct in the earlier part. So the detail in market conduct

will be discussed more in the result part.

The last element is a market performance which is the consequence of market

structure and conduct. Market Performance indicates market power or ability to charge price

over the marginal cost. In order to measure the degree of market competition, there are two

different measurements which are a rate of return (profits earned per dollar of investment)

and price-cost margin (the difference between price and marginal cost). So this paper will

focus on price-cost margin to analyze the competition in the market, whether it is perfect

competition, monopolistic competition, oligopoly or monopoly.

5. Methodology

To see the linkage between the degree of competition, strategy, and market power of

each firm, SCP framework is an appropriate tool to understand the market and answer the

main question of this paper. As a result, this paper uses SCP-paradigm as the main

framework and relies on primary data collection of pricing in bubble tea market. I observe 22

popular brands of bubble tea by looking at the number of branches, types of tea, the variety of

menus and sizes to analyze the pricing scheme. This paper gathers the data based on my

observation and views additional information from brand’s website. (Appendix 1)

 Each type of bubble tea will be analyzed separately to see the characteristics of the

market, perceived quality, number of competitors, and degree of competition. Furthermore,

the paper analyze the behavior of each type along with the price range. From all analyses, I

decide to explore the reason behind why each type charges at that specific amount and why

different types of bubble tea set different pricing schemes.

In order to support the interpretation about competition level in bubble tea market,

there will be a total number of 230 surveys self-administered questionnaires related to bubble

tea purchasing conducted to customer’s side. The first part would be a multiple choice related

to factors that affect bubble tea purchasing, brand preferences and reason, and quality of

bubble tea in each brand. The second section of the questionnaire related to demographic

questions including age, gender, income level and education level. Moreover, there are

questions about socio-economic status such as free time activity and frequency of going to

the department store to reflect consumption pattern and lifestyle for each group of customers.

After that, a descriptive analysis would be used as data analysis approach to the

demographic and socio-economic status of the respondents in the first place. Then, the

analysis will be conducted pass through the SCP paradigm as it has been written in a

theoretical framework.

6. Result

6.1 Types of bubble tea market

Generally, bubble tea consists of a tea base mixed with milk and fruit and served with

tapioca balls. However, different brands provide different types of bubble tea with different

price ranges. Therefore, this paper attempts to categorize bubble tea into three types by using

product differentiation as a criterion (Table1).

 Table 1: types of bubble tea by product differentiation criteria

Average Average
Type of bubble
Category Brands Quality number of price
tea
branches (THB)
Ochaya, Pearly tea, Mochi,
Wawa cha, Mr.cup T, Mr.shake,
Milk tea, Green
Tea story, Mikucha, Monkey Medium - 42.5
General tea tea, Black tea, 13
shake, Kin cha, Bubble boy, Low (25-60)
Fruit tea
Chamiji, Bubble republic,
8 hachi tea
Golden bubble,
Tea with
Cheese, KOI The, Kamu, Fuku matcha, High - 87.5
special 13
Macchiato, Dakasi, Coco, Osaka milk tea Medium (50-125)
topping
Hokkaido milk
Earl Grey tea,
Uji matcha tea,
High - 107.5
Premium tea Houjicha tea Nomi mono, ATM tea bar 1
Medium (80-135)
with golden
bubble

Source: constructed from the author’s own survey

The first category is General tea. Types of tea are used as criteria for differentiated

products. Brands that positioned in this type will provide milk tea, green tea, black tea, and

fruit tea served with tapioca balls. In other words, most of bubble tea brands will provide

these tea drinks on their menus. Some brands offer only bubble milk tea while other brands

provide the wide range of tea.

The second type is Tea with special topping. This category is differentiated by

topping and premium ingredients. Since there are many brands of bubble tea in the market,

brands of this type provide additional toppings such as golden bubble, cheese, Hokkaido

milk, and macchiato. The paper mainly focuses on 6 well-known brands; KOI The, Kamu,

Fuku matcha, Dakasi, Coco, and Osaka milk tea. To attract customers, location is an
important factor. These brands mostly located in the crowded area such as office building,

department store and BTS Skytrain.

The last category is Premium tea. The producer sells premium tea that other brands do

not have such as Earl Grey tea, Uji matcha tea, and Hojicha tea with golden bubble. So the

type of tea, topping, premium ingredient, location, and uniqueness are the criteria for this

type. This paper included two brands in this category which are Nomimono and ATM tea bar.

The process of bubble tea is visibly shown to customers. Brands demonstrate that they use

premium ingredient instead of artificial one with hygiene and meticulousness. The product

can be made to order for each customer such as sweet adjustment, a richness of tea, and

additional topping. Moreover, both of the brands are located in high income and crowded

area; Paragon and Siam Square.

Figure 1: Salop’s circular model with brand’s location

 In addition, figure 1 represents the brand’s location. The circle determines location

with no endpoints while each triangular shows all brands of bubble tea market in this paper.

From Salop’s circular model, the seller of each category sets price by taking the number of

brands into account. “That is, the further away other stores are from your store, the greater the

market power you have to the customers located near your store” (Carlton and Perloff, 2005).

For instance, Premium tea is considered as monopoly region since there are only 2 firms in

the market. On the other hand, brands in General tea (competitive region) are located closer

together and compete for the same consumers. So it easier to lose customers to two its nearest

rivals.

6.2 Survey analysis

The paper uses the result from the survey to construct customer’s characteristic and

support the analysis. From Appendix 2, more than half of the respondents are female who get

income lower than 15,000 baht and age between 19-23. Furthermore, there is a question

about frequency of going to department store which imply socio-economic status. I divided

customer into three groups by using types of department store as a criteria. Customers who

mostly go to Paragon, Emquartier, Emporium, and Central World are categorized in grade A

customers. The Central group is classified as grade B customers. Lastly, customers who go to

The mall, Lotus, and Big-c are grade C customers. The table in appendix 2 shows that most

of respondents are grade B customer.

6.3 Market structure (Product differentiation)

From considering bubble tea characteristics, there are a lot of competitors in this

market. We can see bubble tea shops throughout Bangkok. The barrier to entry in this market

is considered to be low since producers do not need a huge amount of money to invest and no
special licensed needed. Although this market looks familiar to perfect competition, products

in this market are not identical due to product differentiation.

In case of bubble tea market, a product can be differentiated by type of tea, topping,

premium ingredient, location, and uniqueness. Each category has different factors in product

differentiation. Besides, these factors are consistent with the survey of customer side.

From the survey, there are many factors that affect consumer purchasing. (Figure 2).

Consumers will purchase a drink that closed to their preference. Taste and quality are the

most significant factors that affect customer purchasing. Customers consider good taste and

good quality of bubble tea with reasonable price. In addition, consumers also take location

into account. Many opinions from customer indicate that they not willing to buy bubble tea

that far away from their home even that brand has high a reputation. In other words, cost and

time of transportation may affect the purchasing decision. Therefore, we can notice that many

brands try to extend their branches to attract customers. Some brands are located in high

populated to gain higher market share. Additionally, I classified the respondents into three

levels of socioeconomic status (Appendix 3). The result also demonstrates that taste, quality,

preference toward bubble tea, and location are the most important factors that customers

considered.
 Figure 2: Factors that affect bubble tea purchasing

Source: constructed from the author’s own survey

6.4 Market conduct and performance (strategy and market power for each type)

Since the paper uses product differentiation as a criteria to categorize the type of

bubble tea, this section will separately explain strategy and performance of each type.

6.4.1 General tea

Table 2: Information on general tea

Average Average
Type of
Category Brands Quality number of price
bubble tea
branches (THB)
Ochaya, Pearly tea, Mochi,
Wawa cha, Mr.cup T,
Milk tea,
Mr.shake, Tea story,
Green tea, Medium - 42.5
General tea Mikucha, Monkey shake, 13
Black tea, Low (25-60)
Kin cha, Bubble boy,
Fruit tea
Chamiji, Bubble republic,
8 Hachi tea
Source: constructed from the author’s own survey

The paper considers 16 brands in the market (Table 2). The perceived quality of

customer side is medium to low (Appendix 4, category 1). The number of branches varies

from 5 to 39. So I approximately calculate the number of branches to analyze the market
share1. Since there are many competitors in this market, general tea can charge the lowest

price. The average price is around 42.5 baht. The price also affects the location of brand. Due

to a low price, brands in this category are located in various locations such as hypermarket,

gas station, department store and school/university area to match with their target market.

Mostly, brands in this category use franchise strategy to compete in the market. The

franchise is one special type of vertical relationship. This strategy relies on

franchisor-franchisee relationship. In other words, a franchisee will pay a purchase fee or

percentage of sales to franchisors, while franchisee gets initial training, a trademark license,

raw materials, operation manuals, and etc. in return. Sellers expand the number of branches

as much as they can to attract customers and gain market share instead of competing with

price. For instance, Ochaya and Pearly tea have the highest number of branches in this

observation which are 39 and 35 respectively. Bubble republic is another interesting example.

This brand has strong distribution system by selling products through Family Mart, 7-eleven,

Tops, and Villa market. This will facilitate the product's reach into its target market. Some

brands such as Monkey shake and Kin Cha have only five branches in Bangkok but they have

a lot of branches in many provinces in Thailand. That is to say, each brand has the different

channel of distribution to maintain their market share.

The market for General tea is considered to be competitive because there are a lot of

sellers and buyers in this market. Sellers do not have the power to set price since they need to

follow franchise’s regulation. Although most of the brands use artificial ingredients to lower

the cost of production, the price charged is still low when comparing to other categories.

Namely, General tea market has the lowest market power to charge price over marginal cost.

1
​The average number of branch excludes Chamiji and Bubble republic to avoid overestimation. Chamiji has
approximately 100 branches in Bangkok and 600 branches in Thailand. Bubble republic has approximately 200
branches in Bangkok and 400 branches in Thailand.
6.4.2 Tea with special topping

Table 3: Information of tea with special topping

Average Average
Type of bubble
Category Brands Quality number of price
tea
branches (THB)
Golden bubble,
Tea with
Cheese, KOI The, Kamu, Fuku matcha, High - 87.5
special 13
Macchiato, Dakasi, Coco, Osaka milk tea Medium (50-125)
topping
Hokkaido milk
Source: constructed from the author’s own survey

The second category is Tea with special topping by considering six well-known

brands (Table 3). Osaka milk tea is only one brand that owned by Thai people while the

remaining brands are owned by multinational companies such as Taiwan and Japan. The

perceived quality from the customer perspective is considered to be high to medium due to

the origin of the brand (Appendix 4, category 2). The number of branches varies from 1 to 25.

The average price is around 87.5 baht.

To stay ahead of high competition market, these brands try to differentiate their

products and attract customers attention by providing special topping that General brand does

not have. Although the average number of branches is the same with the first category, the

average price of this market is higher than the first category more than double. This strategy

may help sellers in this market to gain more market share or profit and survive in this market.

In addition, this strategy is linked with Salop’ circular model. Customer will choose the

product closed to their preference. As a result, sellers in this category try to differentiate the

products to attract the customer and to satisfy their need since the customer has the different

preference.

The number of buyers in this category is high when considering popularity from

figure 3. KOI the and Kamu gain the highest popularity even though the price is higher than
the first category. On the other hand, there are only six brands that provided this type of

product. Since the market has high demand and low supply, it implies that market has a lower

level of competition than the first category which leads to higher market power.

Figure 3: Favourite brand of bubble tea from customers

Source: constructed from the author’s own survey

When classified the respondents into three levels of socioeconomic status, it implies

that different grade of customers have different preferences. Appendix 5 demonstrates that

more than half of grade A and B customers prefer brands in Tea with special topping

category. Whereas the most popular category of grade C customer is General tea.

Interestingly, Premium tea category only gain popularity from grade A customer.
6.4.3 Premium tea

Table 4: Information of premium tea

Average Average
Category Type of bubble tea Brands Quality number of price
branches (THB)
Earl Grey tea,
Uji matcha tea, High - 107.5
Premium tea Nomi mono, ATM tea bar 1
Houjicha tea with Medium (80-135)
golden bubble
Source: constructed from the author’s own survey

In case of Premium tea category, it consists only two brands in this observation (Table

4). The perceived quality from customer’s perspective is high to medium (Appendix 4,

category 3). Both brands have only one branch. The average price around 107.5 baht.

“When consumers prefer different levels of quality, a monopoly manipulates the

qualities of goods produced in the market in order to extract consumer surplus” (Carlton and

Perloff, 2005). From the observation, the strategy of both brands is quality choice. They need

to apply this strategy to maintain quality in the whole supply chain. That’s why the average

branch is only one and located in a high-income area to match with high price strategy.

This category can view as duopoly market since they can charge the highest price

with the lowest number of branches. There are fewer buyers and sellers in premium tea

market which imply a low degree of competition. From Appendix 5, Most of target customers

are in Grade A which only count for 11 percent. Namely, some consumers are willing to pay

even though the price is high. Furthermore, brands face high cost because they have to use

premium ingredients such as brewed tea and fresh milk. However, they get a lot of profit

because they charge consumers at the high price. It is found that there is high margin, saying

a lot of difference between price and marginal cost. This means the sellers have a high degree

of market power. Hence, they are able to charge prices a lot higher than cost.
6.5 Loyalty program

Table 5: Loyalty program of each brand

Loyalty program (Buy 10 free 1)

Yes No
KOI The, Kamu, Fuku matcha,
Coco fresh tea&juice, Dakasi,
Nomimono, ATM tea bar, Osaka
Ochaya, Pearly tea, Wawa cha,
milk tea, Mr.shake, Chamiji,
Mr.cup T, Tea story, Mikucha,
Bubble republic
Mochi milk tea, Monkey shake,
Kin Cha, Bubble boy, ​8 hachi tea

16 brands 6 brands
Source: constructed from the author’s own survey

Apart from product differentiation, loyalty program creates an incentive for customers

to repurchase the product and increases market power. Punch card commonly uses in bubble

tea market. Customers get a stamp for every bubble tea they buy. However, every brand not

uses this promotion.

From table 5, six brands do not have this program because of different reasons. Both

brands in Premium tea can view as the high-end product. The loyalty program can devalue

brand image and decrease profit because they use the premium ingredient in a production

process. Moreover, the target market for this category has high willingness to pay. So brands

can ignore this program and focus more on improving quality rather than promotion. Osaka

milk tea has a similar situation with Premium tea. Whereas Bubble republic and Chamiji have

more than 400 branches in Thailand. Many individual owners and variety of distribution

channels through FamilyMart and 7-Eleven create less incentive for brands to use the

program since they can gain market power by expanding the number of branches.

Interestingly, although Mr.shake charges low price with the low number of branch, a brand

still gain high popularity from customers because of first-mover advantage without applying
for a loyalty program. From figure 3, Mr.shake gains the highest popularity in General tea

category and gets the third rank when compared to 22 brands.

7. Conclusion

The paper attempts to enlarge the understanding of product differentiation and

strategy by introducing the case of bubble tea market in Bangkok as an example. According

to product differentiation criteria, we can categorize bubble tea market into 3 types; General

tea, Tea with special topping, and Premium tea. Our finding demonstrates that each type has

different market structure, conduct, and performance.

For General tea, brands use franchise strategy and expand the number of branches to

compete in the market because there are a lot of sellers and buyers in this market. It implies a

high degree of competition in the first category. In case of Tea with special topping, brands in

this category try to differentiate their product as much as possible to gain market power. The

high number of demand and less number of supply indicate the lower level of competition

when compared to General tea category. Lastly, the market for Premium tea is less

competitive when considering the number of seller and buyer. They use quality strategy

rather than quantity strategy to gain market power. This strategy describes the reason why

brands can charge the highest price with the lowest number of branches.

As a consequence, the strategies are different for each type since each brand has the

different level of market power, behavior, and the number of supply and demand in the

market.
8. Limitation and further improvement

This study demonstrates the result of the strategy that has been adopted by most

brands of bubble tea in Bangkok. However, the paper only focuses on well-known brands.

There are many small brands and brands in other provinces that the paper does not include.

Moreover, this paper approximately estimates marginal cost of the brand in each category

since profit and cost are a business secret of the company. Therefore, the further study would

be better to include a number of observations in other provinces and concern more on the

marginal cost. So it could give more insight results about all types of bubble tea market.
 References

Balabanis, G., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2008). Brand Origin Identification by Consumers: A

Classification Perspective. ​Journal of International Marketing,​ ​16​(1), 39-71.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25049110

Bubble tea. (2018, May 08). Retrieved from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_tea#cite_note-珍珠奶茶的製作方法-3

Bubble Tea Market Analysis 2017-2023: Key Findings, Regional Analysis, Key Players
Profiles and Future Prospects. (n.d.). Retrieved March 29, 2018, from
http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/3446755

Chioveanu, I. (2012). Price and quality competition. ​Journal of Economics,​ ​107​(1), 23-44.
Retrieved from ​http://www.jstor.org/stable/43574603

Copeland, M. (1940). Competing Products and Monopolistic Competition. ​The Quarterly

Journal of Economics,​ ​55​(1), 1-35. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1881664

Dana, J., & Fong, Y. (2011). PRODUCT QUALITY, REPUTATION, AND MARKET
STRUCTURE. ​International Economic Review,52​(4), 1059-1076. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41349187

Dodds, W. (1995). Market Cues Affect on Consumers' Product Evaluations. ​Journal of

Marketing Theory and Practice,​ ​3​(2), 50-63. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40469751

Gandolfo, R. (2018, May 09). China's Bubble Tea Boom: Top 10 of Popular Milk Tea Shops
in the PRC. Retrieved from
https://www.whatsonweibo.com/chinas-bubble-tea-boom-top-10-of-popular-pearl-mil
k-tea-shops-in-china/

Gannon, C. (1977). Product Differentiation and Locational Competition in Spatial Markets.

International Economic Review,18​(2), 293-322. doi:10.2307/2525750

Gregory, P. (1948). Fashion and Monopolistic Competition. ​Journal of Political Economy,

56​(1), 69-75. Retrieved from ​http://www.jstor.org/stable/1825032

Jan-Benedict E. M. Steenkamp, Batra, R., & Alden, D. (2003). How Perceived Brand
Globalness Creates Brand Value. ​Journal of International Business Studies,​ ​34​(1),
53-65. Retrieved from ​http://www.jstor.org/stable/355713

Landon, S., & Smith, C. (1998). Quality Expectations, Reputation, and Price. ​Southern
Economic Journal,​ ​64​(3), 628-647. doi:10.2307/1060783
Özsomer, A., & Altaras, S. (2008). Global Brand Purchase Likelihood: A Critical Synthesis
and an Integrated Conceptual Framework. ​Journal of International Marketing,​ ​16​(4),
1-28. Retrieved from ​http://www.jstor.org/stable/27755578

Product Differentiation. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2018, from

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/product_differentiation.asp

Rao, A., & Monroe, K. (1989). The Effect of Price, Brand Name, and Store Name on Buyers'
Perceptions of Product Quality: An Integrative Review. ​Journal of Marketing
Research,​ ​26​(3), 351-357. doi:10.2307/3172907

Schooler, R., & Wildt, A. (1968). Elasticity of Product Bias. ​Journal of Marketing Research,
5​(1), 78-81. doi:10.2307/3149798

Tregear, A., & Gorton, M. (2005). Geographic Origin As a Branding Tool for Agri-food
Producers. ​Society and Economy,​ ​27​(3), 399-414. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41472041

What Is Bubble Tea and Where Did It Come From? (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.thedailymeal.com/what-bubble-tea-and-where-did-it-come/12/03/13

Winfree, J., & McCluskey, J. (2005). Collective Reputation and Quality. ​American Journal of
Agricultural Economics,​ ​87​(1), 206-213. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3698002
 Appendix

Appendix 1:​ Collected observation

The number
Brand Types of tea Special menu Size Price
of branches
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
KOI The 11 Gloden bubble 2 70-90
tea,
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Kamu 12 Cheese tea 2 99-119
tea,
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Dakasi 15 Whip cheese 2 50-105
tea,
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Ochaya 39 - 1 30-35
tea,
Milk tea, Green tea, Black Matcha, soft serve
Fuku Matcha 25 1 70-120
tea (ice cream)
Moshi milk tea 20 Milk tea, Green tea - 1 35
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Pearly tea 35 - 1 30-50
tea,
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Wawa Cha 7 - 2 30-50
tea,
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Mr.Cup T 12 - 2 30-60
tea,
Mr. Shake 8 Milk tea, Green tea - 1 35-50
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Osaka milk tea 1 Hokkaido milk 2 65-125
tea,
Coco fresh Milk tea, Green tea, Black
16 Macchiato 1 65-85
tea&juice tea,
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Tea story 5 - 2 50-75
tea,
Twining tea, uji
Nomi Mono 1 all special (handemade) matcha, golden 1 90-135
bubble
Tea latte, brown
ATM tea bar 1 all special (handemade) 1 80-130
sugar bubble
Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Mikucha 14 - 1 35-45
tea, Red tea, Fruit tea
Monkey shake 5 Milk tea, Green tea - 1 35-40
Milk tea, Green tea, Fruit
Kin Cha 5 - 1 35-40
tea
Bubble boy 11 Milk tea, Green tea - 1 40-45
approximately Milk tea, Green tea, Black
Chamiji - 1 25-35
100 tea, Fruit tea
Bubble approximately Milk tea, Green tea, fruit
- 1 35-45
republic 200 tea
Milk tea, Green tea, fruit
8 hachi tea 6 - 1 35-55
tea
Source: author’s own table using data from brand’s website

Appendix 2: ​Characteristic of respondents from the survey

Survey question and answer Amount (people) Percentage

Gender
Male 32 13.9%
Female 198 86.1%
Age
Under 18 9 3.9%
19-23 169 73.5%
24-30 48 20.9%
31-45 2 0.9%
46-60 2 0.9%
Above 60 0 0%
Income
Under 15,000 127 55.2%
15,000-30,000 71 30.9%
30,001-45,000 21 9.1%
45,001-60,000 7 3.0%
60,001-75,000 1 0.4%
75,001-90,000 0 0.0%
90,001-105,000 1 0.4%
105,001-200,000 0 0%
Above 200,001 2 0.9%
Socio-economic group
Grade A customer (Paragon, Emquatier) 81 35.5%
Grade B customer (Central) 119 52.2%
Grade C customer (The mall, Lotus,
28 12.3%
Big-c)
Source: constructed from the author’s own survey

Appendix 3: ​Factors that affect bubble tea purchasing categorized by socio-economic group
Appendix 4:​ Quality of bubble tea for each category
Source: constructed from the author’s own survey
Appendix 5:​ Favourite type of bubble tea categorized by socio-economic group
Appendix 6:​ Survey question

แบบสอบถามเกี่ยวกับชานมไขม
่ ุกในกรุ งเทพฯ
ตอนที่ 1 ความคิดเห็นตอ่ ชานมไขม
่ ุก

1.1) ปัจจัยที่มีผลตอ่ การเลือกซื้อชานมไขม

่ ุกในแตล่ ะแบรนด์ (เลือกไดม
้ ากกวา่ 1 ตัวเลือก)

□ รสชาติ □ คุณภาพ □ สถานที่ตัง้

□ ความหลากหลายของสินคา้ □ ชื่อเสียงของแบรนด์ □ จาํ นวนสาขา
□ โปรโมชั ่น □ บัตรสะสมแตม
้ □ ความชื่นชอบในชานมไขม
่ ุก
□ ตามกระแสนิ ยม ่ เพื่อน ครอบครัว ญาติ
□ คนรอบขา้ ง เชน
□ รี ววิ ตา่ งๆจาก social media □ อื่นๆ (ระบุ) ________

่ ุกที่ทา่ นชื่นชอบ (เลือกไดม

1.2) แบรนดช์ าไขม ้ ากกวา่ 1 ตัวเลือก)

□ Nomi mono □ ATM tea bar □ KOI the □ Kamu

□ Fuku matcha □ Coco fresh tea&juice □ Dakasi □ Ochaya
□ Pearly tea □ Mochi milk tea □ Wawa cha □ Mr.cup T
□ Mr.shake □ Tea story □ Osaka milk tea □ Mikucha
□ Monkey shake □ Kin cha □ Bubble boy □ Chamiji
□ Bubble republic □ 8 hachi tea

่ ุกแบรนดน
1.3) เหตุใดทา่ นถึงชอบบริ โภคชาไขม ้ ๆ _________________
์ ัน

่ ุกในแตล่ ะแบรนด์ โดยคาํ นึ งถึงคุณภาพชาและไขม

1.4) โปรดให้คะแนนคุณภาพของชานมไขม ่ ุก

แบรนด์ สูง ปานกลาง ตา่ ํ ไมเ่ คยบริ โภค ์ ้ี

ไมร่ ู้ จักแบรนดน

Nomi mono

ATM tea bar

KOI The

Kamu

Fuku matcha
 Coco fresh
tea&juice

Dakasi

Ochaya

Pearly tea

Mochi milk tea

Wawa cha

Mr.cup T

Mr.shake

Tea story

Osaka milk tea

Mikucha

Monkey shake

Kin cha

Bubble boy

Chamiji

Bubble republic

8 hachi tea

ตอนที่ 2 ขอ
้ มูลทั่วไป
2.1) เพศ □ ชาย □ หญิง

2.2) อายุ □ ตา่ ํ กวา่ 18 □ 19-23 □ 24-30 □ 31-45 □ 46-60 □ 60 ขึ้นไป

ึ ษาสูงสุด
2.3) ระดับการศก

□ไมไ่ ดเ้ รี ยนหนังสือ / ตา่ ํ กวา่ ประถม ึ ษา

□ ประถมศก ึ ษา
□ มัธยมศก

□ ปวช./ปวส./ปวท./อนุ ปริ ญญา □ ปริ ญญาตรี □ สูงกวา่ ปริ ญญาตรี

□ อื่นๆ (ระบุ) ________

2.4) รายไดเ้ ฉลี่ยตอ่ เดือนของทา่ น (ให้ผูต
้ อบแบบสอบถามลองประมาณรายไดจ้ ากทุกแหลง่ ในเดือนที่แลว้ )

□ น้อยกวา่ 15,000 บาท □ 15,000 - 30,000 บาท □ 30,001 – 45,000 บาท

□ 45,001 - 60,000 บาท□ 60,001 -75,000 บาท □ 75,001 - 90,000 บาท

□ 90,001 - 105,000 บาท □ 105,001 - 200,000 บาท □ 200,001 บาทขึ้นไป

2.5) หากมีเวลาวา่ ง ทา่ นมักทาํ กิจกรรมใด (เลือกไดม

้ ากกวา่ 1 ตัวเลือก)

□ อยูบ
่ า้ น/นอนเลน
่ /เลน
่ social media □ วาดรู ป/อา่ นหนังสือ/ฟังเพลง

□ ออกกาํ ลังกาย/เขา้ ฟิ ตเนส ้ ปปิ้ งตามห้างสรรพสินคา้ และสถานที่ตา่ งๆ

□ ชอ

□ นัดเพื่อนหรื อครอบครัวกินขา้ ว □ ปาร์ต้ี/สั งสรรค์

□ นั่งคาเฟ่ □ ถา่ ยรู ปเลน

่

□ ทอ่ งเที่ยว □ อื่นๆ (ระบุ) ________

2.6) ทา่ นไปห้างสรรพสินคา้ เหลา่ นี้ กี่ครัง้ ตอ่ เดือน

ไมไ่ ปเลย 1-3 ครัง้ 4-6 ครัง้ 7 ครัง้ ขึ้นไป

พารากอน, เอ็มควาเทีย,เอ็มโพเรี ยม,เซนท

รัลเวิล

่ ปิ่ นเกลา้ , ลาดพร้าว, เว

เซนทรัลตา่ งๆเชน
สเกต ฯลฯ

เดอะมอลตา่ งๆเชน
่ บางแค, บางกะปิ ,
งามวงศว์ าน

้ ซี, คาร์ฟูล
โลตัส, บิก