Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Article

The Power of Online Branding: A Closer Look at Canary’s Fashion Industry

Altmetrics

Downloads

136

Views

94

Comments

0

Submitted:

03 June 2024

Posted:

04 June 2024

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
The present study seeks to assess the Brand Equity in the network of new fashion designers in the Canary Islands. To this end, we have adapted the Brand Equity model to an online context and proposed a set of metrics for four dimensions: estimate, relevance, awareness, and differen-tiation. The multidimensional approach to online Brand Equity was employed to measure the online Brand Equity of 129 fashion designers from the Canary Islands. The study's findings re-vealed that the number of social media profiles significantly impacts brand awareness and dif-ferentiation. Moreover, the digital maturity level influences brand relevance and overall Brand Equity . Our study highlights the practical value of web data-driven metrics for measuring online Brand Equity , which can be utilised for diagnostic, evaluative, or predictive purposes. The study's outcomes have substantial implications for marketers in the fashion industry aimed at improving online Brand Equity
Keywords: 
Subject: Business, Economics and Management  -   Marketing

1. Introduction

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in digital marketing and its role in boosting digital transformation across all industries [1]. Technology and digitalisation have played a pivotal role in supporting businesses, particularly through digital marketing. Research has shown that social networks such as Meta Group, TikTok, and Twitter, now known as X, can provide valuable user information [2]. Furthermore, web metrics have emerged as a critical avenue of interest for brands [3]. Websites and social media platforms can help brands position themselves among consumers and gain insights into their behaviour and preferences. In this context, the structural brand dimensions of awareness, estimation, relevance, and differentiation can be measured and operationalised to manage organisations on the internet effectively [4,5].
The fashion industry has experienced rapid growth thanks to the online context [6]. As such, fashion designers must build Brand Equity based on online metrics. By leveraging the power of digital marketing and web metrics, businesses can gain valuable insights into their target audience and position themselves for success in the digital age.
Researchers have explored the various aspects of Brand Equity, emphasising elements such as brand awareness and relevance and Brand Equity on social media [7,8]. This highlights the evolving nature of the concept in recent years. Brand Equity is defined as the value consumers attribute to a brand across four dimensions, and it can significantly affect their purchasing decisions and overall experiences [9]. [10,11,12] argue that Brand Equity should be defined from the customer's perspective rather than product and service features. In this context, [13,14] suggest that Brand Equity comprises several dimensions: awareness, esteem, relevance, and differentiation. Therefore, fashion brands with a digital presence should consider aspects like stature and strength when building Brand Equity. Brand Stature is linked to awareness and esteem, while Brand Strength is associated with relevance and differentiation.
The concept of Brand Equity has been extensively explored in the context of brick-and-mortar businesses and has also been applied to the emerging fashion industry [15]. However, there is growing interest among researchers in developing new measurement tools that can capture the social media and digital marketing aspects of Brand Equity [16]. Adopting novel methods to assess intangible values and performance is imperative [17]. Against this backdrop, this study aims to evaluate the measurement and explication of online Brand Equity within the networks of fashion designers in the Canary Islands' new fashion industry. Furthermore, it aims to offer insights into enhancing the online presence of fashion designers by utilising social media strategies and data-driven web technologies to improve their fashion brand effectively and efficiently.
To provide clear direction for our present study on the new fashion industry in the Canary Islands, we have formulated a set of research questions. These questions include:
RQ1: How can we adapt the Brand Equity model to the online marketplace?
RQ2: What are the antecedents of Brand Stature in the online market?
RQ3: What are the antecedents of Brand Strength in the online market?
RQ4: What are the antecedents of Brand Equity in the online market?
To address those questions, we assessed online Brand Equity within the emerging network of fashion designers in the Canary Islands. We adapted the Brand Equity model to the online context of the fashion designer network and considered the most appropriate digital metrics. Additionally, we identified the factors contributing to Brand Strength and stature by examining dimensions such as awareness, esteem, relevance, and differentiation. Finally, we identified the online factors influencing Brand Equity and measured the overall structural impact of Brand Strength and stature on Brand Equity .
The present study is organised into five distinct sections in addition to the introduction. The first section, a comprehensive literature review, identifies and systematises critical online metrics and precursors of the Brand Equity phenomenon. The second section delves into the methodological framework, encompassing the fieldwork, measuring instruments, and research context. The third section presents a statistical analysis and empirical evidence derived from the research. Next, a discussion section examines the significance of the findings in the context of other studies. Finally, the article concludes with a summary of its theoretical contribution, limitations, and future research directions.

2. Literature Review

This section of the literature review is divided into two fundamental parts. The study will delve into the concept and measurement of Brand Equity as well as the determinants thereof. Firstly, the study will explore how Brand Equity is defined and measured, examining the various approaches used in academic literature. Secondly, the study will address the antecedents of brand value.

Brand Equity and Online Metrics

The present study postulates that Brand Equity constitutes a multifaceted construct encompassing several dimensions, including awareness, estimation, relevance, and differentiation [13,14]. The first dimension, i.e., awareness, is crucial in Brand Equity growth. It denotes the extent of recognition and visibility consumers have with the brand, allowing them to identify it under any condition [2]. In the online context, brand awareness can be evaluated through web traffic and social media reach, as these metrics are inherently linked to awareness [18]. Developing robust digital marketing strategies can enhance brand-consumer engagement, enabling consumers to establish a stronger connection with the products and services offered through websites or social media platforms [19,20]. Furthermore, digital metrics can measure awareness and effectiveness of a brand's online presence [21]. Based on this evidence, we confirm that there is sufficient proof to suggest that online brand awareness can be measured with digital metrics.
According to [22], brand estimates result from consumers' perspectives. In the online environment, this estimation process is comparable to the traditional context, which incorporates metrics such as backlinks, visit duration, page views, bounce rate, and social media likes. These metrics directly relate to the consumers' outlook towards the brand and signify approval or appreciation. The metrics are interdependent, and it is reasonable to assume that consumers would not link to a website stay longer, view pages, or express their favorability if they do not value their visit [23]. In contrast, if the consumer does not appreciate the visit, the consumer is likely to bounce from the website [24].
Moreover, the level of Brand Stature is also contingent upon the estimate level. This concept indicates the level of admiration that the consumer holds for the brand [25]. In summary, digital metrics can be employed to measure online brand estimate.
When choosing a brand, relevance is a crucial factor that reflects the strength of the brand [26]. Brand relevance can be obtained through domain authority (DA) and social media engagement. DA is a critical metric for analysing search engine optimisation (SEO) as it calculates various elements like linking root domains and the total number of links [27]. This metric can predict the web page's chances of appearing and ranking in the search engine results page (SERP) [27]. Additionally, social media engagement measures consumers' interactions with the brand's social networks. Consumers are more receptive to social media content and interact with them by sharing, liking, and other means [28]. Therefore, in the online context, brand relevance is measured by the level of engagement in social media and DA. Hence, we can conclude that digital metrics can measure online brand relevance.
According to [29] research, differentiation is one of the intrinsic aspects of brand management. Therefore, a brand's strength is also influenced by the level of differentiation in terms of content originality and social media interactions [30]. Differentiation, in essence, refers to the degree of uniqueness a brand exhibits compared to its competitors. Consequently, the originality of content can be measured by assessing whether similar or duplicate pages exist, which is an essential factor in Brand Equity. Brands must generate original content to enhance their SEO and build customer loyalty. In addition, social media comment interactions are a crucial aspect of brand differentiation. This refers to the number of times and manner in which consumers communicate with a brand [31]. The engagement and differentiation that social media comments provide are critical for brands. Depending on the platform, consumers can react with an emoji, mention another consumer account, or write a text. Therefore, in online contexts, brand differentiation encompasses content originality and social media comment interactions, which require consumers to come up with distinct responses. There is sufficient theoretical foundation for measuring online brand differentiation using digital metrics.

Online Precursors of Brand Equity

A multidimensional approach must be adopted to comprehend the antecedents of online Brand Equity. An amalgamation of factors such as digital capability, social media resources, content marketing quality, and product line diversity have been identified as crucial dimensions contributing to online Brand Equity development. Thus, for fashion designer brands, the online precursors of Brand Equity must be based on these dimensions, and all of them must be employed to measure online stature and strength, considering its non-tangible attributes.
Regarding digitalisation, skills beyond IT are crucial in improving and implementing digital strategies to enhance Brand Equity [32]. This includes specialised technologies like social media and website solutions [33]. Digital marketing capability involves fusing marketing strategy with technology, making it vital in building Brand Equity. As such, fashion brands must prioritise online presence by improving consumer experience, SEO, and engagement for greater impact [34].
[35,36] have identified six stages of marketing capability, ranging from null to excellence. At the lowest level, an organisation lacks a website or any social media presence. In the second stage, the organisation gains mentions on social media through other consumers, even if it does not have a website or use any social media platforms [37]. The presence of a brand in the search engine results page (SERP), as noted by [38], can be considered a significant achievement, even if the brand does not have a website or social media presence. However, possessing a simple blog-style website can be deemed a higher maturity level, indicating a more established online presence. Moving further up the maturity ladder, the fourth level is achieved when a brand has a website and profiles on various social media platforms. As outlined by [39], the fifth level of marketing maturity is characterised by a mobile-friendly website with forms that allow consumers to request information and price quotes. Finally, the pinnacle of online marketing maturity is attained when businesses have the ability to conduct online commercial transactions using e-commerce capabilities, as suggested by [40].
[41] assert that modern technologies have revolutionised social interactions and influenced consumers' purchasing behaviour, particularly in the retail industry, such as fashion design. In addition, a successful online presence can also strengthen brand credibility [42]. Fashion brands with a significant online presence are more likely to be perceived as relevant by consumers. As such, it is critical for these brands to clearly differentiate themselves from their competitors [43]. Achieving this requires a focus on consumers' sensory and emotional experiences in the digital context [44]. Therefore, the digital realm plays a pivotal role in establishing the differentiation and relevance of Brand Strength.
Developing a digital marketing strategy that can help establish a strong brand presence is crucial. A high level of digital presence can increase brand awareness among consumers in technological environments. Digital channels can create a more positive experience for consumers and ultimately influence the consumer's emotional response towards the brand [45] [46]. The level of digital presence determines the brand's awareness stature. Moreover, a robust digital presence can impact the brand's esteem, which includes brand loyalty, consumer knowledge, perceptions, and experiences towards the brand [47]. Therefore, the digital level determines the brand's esteem stature as well. Based on this, the following hypotheses are put forward:
H1: The digital level determines Brand Equity.
H1a: The digital level determines the brand's awareness.
H1b: The digital level determines the estimation of the brand.
H1c: The digital level determines the brand's relevance.
H1d: The digital level determines the brand's differentiation.
The role of social media in marketing is significant [48]. Social media is not only considered a reliable source of information but also an effective channel for generating Brand Equity , as demonstrated by the increased brand visibility, engagement, and interactions on these platforms, which, in turn, can improve a brand's perception, loyalty, and other benefits [49] [34]. Moreover, social media plays a vital role in creating favourable connections between brands and consumers, enhancing Brand Equity [50]. Brands with a strong presence across social networks are more likely to increase their Brand Equity.
Research has shown that social media platforms can effectively boost a brand's awareness among its followers [51,52,53]. To achieve this, it is crucial for social networks to create high-quality content that appears authentic to consumers [54]. Additionally, leveraging influencer marketing can be an effective social media strategy to increase brand awareness [55]. Furthermore, enhancing a brand's reputation on social media can be achieved by growing its follower base, increasing engagement rates, and fostering positive interactions.
On the other hand, a brand's relevance is determined by the level of importance consumers place on it. Social media plays a crucial role in enhancing relevance and improving a brand's quality, trust, and loyalty [56,57]. Social marketers must engage consumers in their marketing strategies to achieve this, ensuring active interaction between the content and their followers. This includes "likes," comments, replies, shares, and other forms of engagement [58]. However, it is essential to note that positive interactions have the greatest impact.
Moreover, social media platforms are significant tools for highlighting, distinguishing, and communicating the unique attributes of a brand. This allows for differentiation from competitors and enables consumers to compare and contrast brands. Therefore, it is essential to use various platforms to communicate the brand while maintaining brand consistency through a strong brand identity and image [59] [60]. On this basis, the following hypotheses are put forward:
H2: The number of social media platforms used determines Brand Equity.
H2a: The number of social media platforms used determines the brand's awareness.
H2b: The number of social media platforms used determines the estimation of the brand.
H2c: The number of social media platforms used determines the brand's relevance.
H2d: The number of social media platforms used determines the brand's differentiation.
Content marketing quality is a crucial precursor to success online, as it encompasses how brands utilise various content formats and multimedia elements [61]. From posts and live streams to videos, infographics, and newsletters, the internet offers a wide range of content formats to choose from. However, it is not the quantity of content that matters most but rather the quality of consumer engagement and behaviour [62]. Therefore, it is essential to have diverse and attractive content formats, which can help establish an effective strategy for increasing brand awareness [61,63]. By adapting the content format style to the brand's target audience in online channels, engagement can be increased [64]. Ultimately, a variety of content can boost the relevance of the brand image, strengthening the brand's connection with its consumers [65].
Content format variability is crucial in establishing Brand Equity as it generates differentiation, enhances engagement, and drives loyalty [66]. The ability of consumers to evaluate the value and position of the brand image in their minds can be improved, which ultimately contributes to enhancing brand estimation and overall consumer experience in the online context [67]. Marketing format content is paramount as it enables brands to connect emotionally with their consumers through effective format management. On this basis, the following hypotheses are put forward:
H3: Content format variety used determines Brand Equity.
H3a: Content format variety determines the brand's awareness.
H3b: Content format variety determines the estimation of the brand.
H3c: Content format variety determines the brand's relevance.
H3d: Content format variety determines the brand's differentiation.
In the realm of Brand Equity, product positioning plays a crucial role as consumers' perception of brands varies and is dependent on the fashion industry's product diversification [68]. According to [69], brand loyalty and engagement are rooted in brand image and perception. Hence, a creative and innovative fashion collection can contribute to enhancing brand reach and engagement [70]. The variety of product lines a brand offers can also impact brand awareness, as consumers are more likely to associate the clothes, patterns, designs, and accessories with the brand.
In the fashion industry market, a wide range of product lines exist, and segmenting their management is crucial. The most prominent are the haute couture, ready-to-wear (prêt-a-porter), and mass market or fast fashion segments. In the case of the latter, the Canary fashion designers' product lines manifest as ceremony, swimwear, ready-to-wear, and accessories. Therefore, offering a diverse range of products can improve the brand's relevance, awareness, and perception.
The classification of fashion products is based on the design and production strategies employed by companies and the way in which these products appeal to consumers. In this regard, high-quality products are more likely to evoke positive emotional responses from consumers, enhancing Brand Equity [71]. Product line diversity plays a significant role in this regard, enabling brands to differentiate themselves from their competitors and innovate in response to changing consumer needs [72]. By catering to a diverse range of lifestyle and consumption preferences, fashion brands can effectively communicate their unique value proposition to consumers [73]. Based on this, the following hypotheses are put forward:
H4: Diversity of product lines determines Brand Equity .
H4a: Diversity of product lines determines the brand's awareness.
H4b: Diversity of product lines determines the estimation of the brand.
H4c: Diversity of product lines determines the brand's relevance.
H4d: Diversity of product lines determines the brand's differentiation.
According to [74], a brand that exhibits a high level of digital maturity tends to be perceived in a favourable and positive light by consumers. This, in turn, significantly influences consumers, resulting in the development of strong Brand Equity [75]. The digital maturity of a brand is based on various factors, such as its online presence and technological capabilities [76]. Furthermore, the number of social media platforms utilised by a brand is critical in establishing a solid connection with the audience, thereby boosting its online presence and Brand Equity [77,78,79].
Therefore, the number of social media will be able to determine the Brand Equity and the online presence [80]. The variety of content formats, including videos, infographics, and reels, among others, is also crucial in enhancing brand awareness and offering an enjoyable experience to consumers [81]. The utilisation of such attractive content can significantly influence the development of Brand Equity. Finally, brand loyalty can be fostered by satisfying consumer needs through diverse product lines [82]. Thus, the greater the number of product lines a brand offers, the more significant its influence on Brand Equity. Based on these findings, we propose a conceptual model, as illustrated in Figure 1.

3. Methodology

We developed a comprehensive database sampling framework to conduct a survey that aligns with our stated objectives. Our sampling framework comprises 129 fashion designers hailing from the Canary Islands. Although we initially set a theoretical sample size of 100 fashion designers, this number increased during our fieldwork. Our sample units were selected using a simple random procedure, which employed a probabilistic method to gather data from fashion designers affiliated with five different official networking platforms, namely Moda Cálida, Isla Bonita, Tenerife Moda, Moda Lanzarote, and Moda Fuerteventura, which are funded by The Canary Islands government, as well as independent new fashion creators from the same region. We assumed a 7% sampling error and established a reliability interval of 95.5%, Table 01.
To gather and collate information about the universe of new fashion designers, we recruited 100 students of a market research course for tourism from the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, who were instructed to extract the necessary metrics from the sampling units' websites after being assigned one different designer to each student and survey taker. These students collected and tabulated metrics in April 2023, operating from the computer classroom of the Faculty of Business, Economics, and Tourism, under the careful supervision of authors and lecturers to ensure that all operations were well-coordinated. Following the gathering session, the authors meticulously scrutinised the database, detecting and resolving internal inconsistencies, missing values, and omitted responses.
The database boasts eleven distinct dimensions. Upon analysis, it has come to light that the variables within the said database can be broadly classified into four distinct categories concerning the dimensions of Brand Equity . This classification has been duly illustrated in Figure 2 for reference and clarity.
Upon collecting identification information for the new fashion designers, our team proceeded to extract the remaining metrics using specialised software, as presented in Table 02. The measurement indicators on the dimensions of Brand Equity were extracted from diverse software tools, except social media metrics, which were extracted manually.
Table 03 presents specific information related to the research study. The table contains dichotomous variables that indicate the existence or absence of various product lines and content formats. Additionally, the table shows a variable that provides details about fashion platforms. This variable has six values associated with each new fashion designer platform, which connects to a different island. Furthermore, the table exhibits variables for social media platforms, which gather information about the designers’ community and network management. Finally, the table includes a variable that describes each new fashion designer’s digital marketing maturity level. This variable has six dimensions, which provide a comprehensive overview of the digital development stage achieved by each designer. In addition, there are some variables regarding the classification details of the fashion designers, such as their names, fashion brands, contact numbers, email addresses, product line diversity and URLs.
New variables have been generated changing the original values, which will be used in a subsequent statistical analysis. In order to make meaningful comparisons, we had to tandardize the values or carry out basic calculations like adding and subtracting. Furthermore, this also involved transforming the initial 88 variables into 20 new ones listed in Table 04.
It is essential to mention that we conducted a Delphi survey, in which we interviewed five digital marketers who have experience in the new fashion designers’ market, Table 05. Our objective was to gather their opinions about the significance of the variables needed, Table 06, to calculate Brand Equity in the Canary Islands marketplace. Our approach involved weighing every variable within the awareness, estimate, relevance, and differentiation dimensions. This will enable us to develop a tool to evaluate the new fashion designers’ marketplace.

3. Results

The section on the analysis of results is divided into four headings that respond to the research questions formulated in the introduction.
RQ1: How can we adapt the Brand Equity model to the online marketplace?
In this study, we have explored the possibility of measuring Brand Equity dimensions by drawing a logical equivalence between traditional brick-and-mortar indicators and digital metrics. Our review of literature suggests that brand awareness can be represented by traffic and social media reach, while brand estimate can be evaluated based on online metrics such as backlinks, visit length, pages view, rebounce, and social media likes. Brand relevance may be judged by examining DA and social media engagement, while content originality and social media comments can indicate the level of brand differentiation in digital marketing. We carefully considered these equivalences during preliminary transformations, as reflected in Table 04. Our results demonstrate that Brand Equity dimensions can indeed be adapted to the online context, owing to the logical similarities between offline and online indicators. Moreover, we have successfully formulated the total market Brand Equity value, as presented in Table 07and 09.
As part of our research, we employed a Delphi survey, engaging five experts to evaluate the significance of each dimension and variable in measuring online Brand Equity for emerging fashion designers in the Canary Islands, as presented in Table 08. The results of the survey, presented in Table 5, detail the experts' responses regarding the cruciality of every brand dimension. Based on the survey findings, we identified four primary dimensions for calculating Brand Equity value: awareness, estimate, differentiation, and relevance, as shown in Table 09.
Our analysis indicates that web traffic and TikTok reach are the most significant variables for the awareness category, while page views and visit length are crucial for the estimate category. Furthermore, unique content stands out as a critical variable concerning differentiation. Finally, our study reveals that DA is the most vital variable for relevance.
It is assumed that assigning a monetary value to every variable weighing its importance will lead to the calculation of the Brand Equity for the Canary Islands’ new fashion designer marketplace.
RQ2: What are the antecedents of Brand Stature in the online market?
In order to test Hypotheses 1a, 2a, 3a, and 4a, we conducted two linear regression analyses, with the independent variables being the postulated antecedents of brand stature. As depicted in Table 10, the results suggest that brand awareness is solely predicted by the number of social media profiles the new fashion designer possesses. However, we found no evidence to support the notion that product line diversity, content format diversity, and maturity level significantly affect brand awareness.
In order to test hypotheses 1b, 2b, 3b, and 4b, as presented in Table 11, a linear regression analysis was conducted to investigate the association between the dimensions of the estimate and the corresponding precursors that determine them. However, the analysis results indicate that none of the precursors exhibits a statistically significant impact, implying that neither social networks, digital maturity level, product lines diversity, nor content format variety influence the Brand Stature concerning the estimate dimension.
RQ3: What are the antecedents of Brand Strength in the online market?
In order to test Hypotheses 1c, 2c, 3c, and 4c, we conducted a linear regression analysis to assess the relevance within Brand Strength, as presented in Table 12. Our findings indicate that the maturity level of a new fashion designer is significantly relevant to Brand Strength. However, no discernible influence was observed from social media, content formats, or product line diversity. These results suggest that while social media, content formats, and product line diversity may be important factors in other areas of the fashion industry, they do not seem to impact Brand Strength in this context significantly.
In order to examine Hypotheses 1d, 2d, 3d, and 4d, as evidenced by the data in Table 13, we conducted a linear regression analysis to differentiate within Brand Strength. We found that a higher number of social media profiles for the new fashion designer is positively associated with greater Brand Strength due to the differentiation value. However, no statistically significant correlation was found between product line diversity, content format variety, or digital maturity level.
Our findings indicate that the number of social media profiles is a significant factor in determining Brand Strength.
RQ4:What are the antecedents of Brand Equity in the online market?
In order to rigorously examine and quantify the determinants of Brand Equity , we conducted a linear regression analysis to test Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4. The independent variables used for the analysis were consistent with those presented in Table 14. Our findings revealed that digital maturity level had a statistically significant effect on Brand Equity . However, contrary to our original expectations, we could not establish causal links between social media, product lines, content format diversities, and Brand Equity .
Table 15 shows that 16 hypotheses were rejected, while 4 were verified.

4. Discussion

This research aimed to assess the online Brand Equity of the fashion designers' network in the Canary Islands. Our approach relied on web data analysis to measure Brand Equity, which is recognised as a crucial factor in achieving online competitiveness [83] [84]. The online Brand Equity of fashion designers in the Canary Islands was evaluated using four dimensions: estimation, awareness, relevance, and differentiation. These dimensions have been extensively documented in academic literature and are widely acknowledged as necessary in assessing Brand Equity [13] [14]. It should be noted that a Delphi study was conducted to reinforce the significance of specific dimensions of Brand Equity. Experts' endorsement of these dimensions provides theoretical validation of their importance in the context of fashion designers in the Canary Islands.
Strong brand awareness is crucial for fashion brands since it improves the attitude towards the brand [85]. According to our research, the number of social media profiles determines brand awareness for fashion design. This finding is consistent with the current theoretical knowledge of social media's impact on online Brand Equity [86] [87] [88]. Regression analysis has also shown that having more social media profiles significantly impacts brand differentiation. With over half of the world's population (4.89 billion) using social media, it is clear that social media provides vast opportunities for raising brand awareness and differentiation [89].
Therefore, it is reasonable for fashion designers to have more social media profiles. Ideally, a fashion designer should have a presence on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn, Pinterest, WhatsApp, YouTube, and Vimeo. The implication for marketers in the fashion industry is not to be limited to a few social media platforms if aiming to strengthen online Brand Equity. However, the study found that the diversity in product lines, content format, and digital level did not significantly impact brand awareness and differentiation. This provides a better understanding of what can be improved and what does not have an impact.
We have analysed various factors, including the number of social media profiles, product line diversity, content format, and digital level. However, we found no significant impact on the brand estimate dimension. Unfortunately, the existing research also does not provide a conclusive answer on the factors determining brand estimate. Hence, this aspect needs further investigation.
Most research on online Brand Equity needs to address the crucial question of what factors contribute to Brand Strength, which is essential for businesses to stand out in the market [82]. Our findings suggest that fashion designers seeking to enhance their Brand Strength and equity must focus on improving their digital maturity level. In the fashion industry in the Canary Islands, digital maturity is a crucial factor in developing Brand Equity. Therefore, fashion designers should improve their digital presence and build websites that facilitate commercial transactions, representing the highest level of digital maturity.
The study found no evidence of social media, content formats, or product line diversity affecting Brand Strength or overall equity. As a result, we recommend further examination of the factors that determine Brand Strength and overall Brand Equity.
Our research suggests that the multidimensional Brand Equity model fully adapts to the online marketplace. Our study has also confirmed that a unique combination of specific metrics after the transformation procedure is sufficient to reveal every dimension of Brand Equity. Although these metrics are typically accessible, established Brand Equity measurement methods have not utilised them. Additionally, specialised software packages such as Semrush, Moz, Siteliner, and Mediatoolkit are ideal for extracting web data. Our study contributes to the existing literature by proposing a new Brand Equity measurement strategy based on quantitative data, ensuring objectivity. Research has yet to study online Brand Equity as a multidimensional construct using data explicitly extracted from the web. The suggested Brand Equity measurement framework can be incorporated into Brand Equity monitoring systems.

5. Conclusions

This research contributes to the literature by attempting to adapt and apply the traditional Brand Equity model to the online context. Specifically, the study endeavours to unravel the mechanisms through which Brand Equity is shaped and reinforced in online contexts, thereby providing an alternative interpretation of the traditional brick-and-mortar model.
The present study investigated the antecedents of Brand Equity in the digital realm, focusing on the fashion industry in the Canary Islands. Through a mixed-methods approach, the findings suggest that the number of social media profiles significantly increases brand awareness while the digital maturity level enhances relevance. Notably, the study reveals that Brand Stature and strength have distinct antecedents. Contrary to expectations, there was no evidence that product line diversity or content format variety influences Brand Equity. Nevertheless, experts identified specific variables within each dimension, providing a more nuanced understanding of critical factors that drive Brand Equity in the digital landscape.
Furthermore, the Delphi study highlights that not all metrics are equally important, with web traffic and TikTok reach identified as crucial for awareness. In practical terms, these findings imply that online Brand Equity must be managed by embracing digital transformation and considering the dimensions of digital capability. Social media emerges as a critical tool to increase brand awareness and differentiation, with experts recommending creating a wide range of social media profiles to gain visibility and uniqueness. Unique content and domain authority are also identified as critical factors for differentiation and relevance, respectively.
The results of this study have significant implications for marketers and fashion designers in the Canary Islands, providing clear guidelines for the practical measurement of Brand Equity. By prioritising specific metrics and dimensions, decision-making and resource allocation can be informed by quantitative measures of Brand Equity. Furthermore, the Delphi experts developed a proposal to assign a monetary value to each variable, which can be used to quantify Brand Equity and inform strategic decisions. Ultimately, this research enhances our understanding of the antecedents of Brand Equity in the digital landscape and contributes to developing practical methodologies for measuring and improving Brand Equity.
Further research opportunities arise from the unexpected results. Additionally, it's important to note that quality, rather than quantity, is vital to improving Brand Equity through content marketing. The study found no significant relationship between the variety of content formats and Brand Equity, indicating that the quality of content may be more important than the quantity. This result highlights the need for a greater focus on content marketing quality. The lack of relationship between product line diversity and Brand Equity is also surprising and requires further investigation to identify the factors contributing to this dissociation. Understanding these factors will help improve brand perception and enhance Brand Equity management strategies for content marketing and product diversity.
The study has several limitations. Firstly, the reliability of the web analytics and monitoring tools used in this research has not yet been tested. Secondly, the study's scoping nature means that contextual interviews and surveys were not conducted, making it challenging to fully comprehend the metrics and/or results.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.D-M. and M.A-M.; methodology, G.D-M. and M.A-M..; software, G.D-M.; validation, G.D-M..; formal analysis, G.D-M..; investigation, G.D. and M.A-M.; resources, G.D-M. and M.A-M..; data curation, G.D-M..; writing—original draft preparation, G.D-M.,M.A-M. and N. V-V.; writing—review and editing, G.D-M.,M.A-M. and N. V-V.; supervision, G.D-M..; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding

Data Availability Statement

MDPI Research Data Policies

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Konopik, J. , Jahn, C.,Schuster, T., Hossbach, N. & Pflaum, A. Mastering the digital transformation through organisational capabilities: A conceptual framework. Digital Business 2022, 2, 100019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Warbung, C. , Wowor, M., Walean, R. & Mandagi, D. The Impact of Social Media Marketing on Beauty Clinic Brand Equity : the Case of Zap Manado. International Journal of Professional Business Review 2023, 8, 01–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Barman, H. Web Analytics Metrics for Internet Business Models. 2013. Impact of IT Applications in Accounting and Finance. Global Publishing House (India).
  4. Khan, B.M. Operationalising Young and Rubicam's BAV™ as a consumer-based Brand Equity measure. Journal for International Business and Entrepreneurship Development 2009, 4, 314–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Yoo, B. & Donthu, N. Developing and validating a multidimensional consumer-based Brand Equity scale. Journal of Business Research 2001, 52, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
  6. Chen, Y. How blockchain adoption affects supply chain sustainability in the fashion industry: a systematic review and case studies. 2023. International Transactions in Operational Research. 0. 1-29. [CrossRef]
  7. Briggs, R. & Hollis, N. Advertising on the web: Is there response before click-through? Journal of Advertising Research 1997, 37, 33–46. [Google Scholar]
  8. Godey, B. , Manthiou, A., Pederzoli, D., Rokka, J., Aiello, G., Donvito, R. & Singh, R. Social media marketing efforts of luxury brands: Influence on Brand Equity and consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research 2016, 69, 5833–5841. [Google Scholar]
  9. Forero, M. & Duque, E. Evolución y caracterización de los modelos de Brand Equity . Suma Negocios. 2014, 5, 158–168. [Google Scholar]
  10. Srivastava, R. , & Shocker, A. Brand Equity : A perspective on its meaning and measurement. 1991. MSI Report 91-124. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
  11. Keller, K. L. Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing 1993, 57, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Faircloth, J. , Capella, L. & Alford, B. The Effect of Brand Attitude and Brand Image on Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice. 2001, 9, 61–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chernatony, L.D. Integrated brand building using brand taxonomies. Journal of Product and Brand Management 1997, 6, 56–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Redhil, D. Brand research and the global conundrum. Design Management Journal (Former Series) 1999, 10, 75–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Davic, N. , Vinhas, R. & Hair, F. Towards a unified theory of Brand Equity : conceptualisations, taxonomy and avenues for future research. Journal of Product & Brand Management 2015, 24, 3–17. [Google Scholar]
  16. Dwivedi, Y. K. , Ismagilova, E., Hughes, D. L., Carlson, J., Filieri, R., Jacobson, J., Jain, V., Karjaluoto, H., Kefi, H., Krishen, A. S., Kumar, V., Rahman, M. M., Raman, R., Rauschnabel, P. A., Rowley, J., Salo, J., Tran, G. A., & Wang, Y. Setting the future of digital and social media marketing research: Perspectives and Research Propositions. International Journal of Information Management 2021, 59, 102168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gaitniece, E. Digital Marketing Performance Evaluation Methods. CBU International Conference Proceedings 2018, 6, 135–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Barreda, A. A. , Bilgihan, A., Nusair, K.; & Okumus, F. Generating brand awareness in online social networks. Computers in Human Behavior 2015, 50, 600–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Makrides, A. , Vrontis, D., & Christofi, M. The gold rush of digital marketing: Assessing prospects of building brand awareness overseas. Business. Perspectives and Research 2019, 8, 4–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Drivas, I. C.; Sakas, D. P. , & Giannakopoulos, G.A. Display advertising and brand awareness in search engines: Predicting the engagement of branded search traffic visitors. Business Intelligence and Modelling. [CrossRef]
  21. Ratra, K. , & Neelam, N. Brand awareness quotient: digital marketing and consumer engagement. 2018. Digital Marketing and Consumer Engagement: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, 460–473. [CrossRef]
  22. De Oliveira, M.O. , Silveira, C.S. & Luce, F.B. Brand Equity estimation model. Journal of Business Research 2015, 68, 2560–2568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kincl, T. , & Štrach, P. Measuring website quality: asymmetric effect of user satisfaction. Behaviour & Information Technology 2012, 31, 647–657. [Google Scholar]
  24. Kamerer, D. Reconsidering bounce rate in web analytics. Journal of Digital & Social Media Marketing 2020, 8, 58–67. [Google Scholar]
  25. Ramal, C. & García, N. El valor percibido y lealtad de marca de consumidores en su intención de compra en E-commerce de supermercados. 2023. Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC).
  26. De Paula, E & Chaves, S. Identity, positioning, brand image and Brand Equity comparison: a vision about quality in brand management. Independent Journal Of Management & Production 2017, 8, 1246–1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Domain authority: What is it and how is it calculated. Moz. 2023. https://moz.com/learn/seo/domain-authority.
  28. Wies, S. , Bleier, A. & Edeling, A. Finding Goldilocks Influencers: How Follower Count Drives Social Media Engagement. Journal of Marketing, 2023; 87, 383–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mosarrat, F. Brand Elements Lead to Brand Equity : Differentiate or Die. Information Management and Business Review. 4 2012, 223-233.
  30. Oliveira-Castro, J.; Foxall, G.; James, V.; Pohl, R. ,. Dias, M. & Chang, S. Consumer-based Brand Equity and brand performance. The Service Industries Journal 2008, 28, 445–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. 7 Types of Social Media Interactions (and How To Handle Them). Hootsuite. 2023. https://blog.hootsuite.com/social-media-interaction/.
  32. Da Silva, J.; Gastaud, A. & Brinkhues, R. Digital Capabilities as Key to Digital Business Performance. 2017. Twenty-third Americas Conference on Information Systems, Boston.
  33. Herhausen, D. , Miočević, D. , Morgan, R. E., & Kleijnen, M.H.P. The digital marketing capabilities gap. Industrial Marketing Management 2020, 90, 276–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Shawky, R. .The Role of Trust in Understanding the Impact of SocialMedia Marketing on Brand Equity and Brand Loyalty. Journal of Relationship Marketing 2020, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chaffey, D. & Chadwick, F. Digital marketing, implementation, and practice. 2016. (193). Pearson.
  36. Quelch, J. & Klein, L. The internet and international marketing. 1996. Sloan Management Review, 61-75.
  37. Hu, M. , Chen, J., Chen, Q., & He, W. It pays off to be authentic: An examination of direct versus indirect brand mentions on social media. Journal of Business Research 2020, 117, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Nwala, A. , Weigle, M. & Nelson, M. Using Micro-Collections in Social Media to Generate Seeds for Web Archive Collections. ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL), 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Doss, D. , Henley, R., McElreath, D., Mallory, S., Gokaraju, B., Tesiero, R., Hong, Q. & Taylor, L. The Capability Maturity Model Integrated as a Market Engineering Maturity Model. 2021. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology (IJSSMET) 12. [CrossRef]
  40. Li, L. , Lin, J., Turel, O., Liu, P., & Luo, X. The impact of e-commerce capabilities on agricultural firms' performance gains: The mediating role of organisational agility. Industrial Management and Data Systems. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  41. Thangavel, P. , Pathak, P., & Chandra, B. Consumer decision-making style of gen Z: A generational cohort analysis. Global Business Review 2022, 23, 710–728. [Google Scholar]
  42. Paun, G. Building a brand: why a strong digital presence matters. 2023. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2020/07/02/building-a-brand-why-a-strong-digital-presence-matters/?sh=266a24a149f2.
  43. Dumitriu, D. , Militaru, G., Deselnicu, D. C., Niculescu, A., & Popescu, M. A. M. A perspective over modern SMEs: Managing Brand Equity, growth and sustainability through digital marketing tools and techniques. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2111. [Google Scholar]
  44. Pina, R. , & Dias, Á. The influence of brand experiences on consumer-based Brand Equity. Journal of brand Management 2021, 28, 99–115. [Google Scholar]
  45. Alamsyah, D. P.; Ratnapuri, C. I.; Aryanto, R. , & Othman, N.A. Digital marketing: Implementation of digital advertising preference to support brand awareness. Academy of Strategic Management Journal 2021, 20, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  46. Ahmadi, A. , & Ataei, A. Emotional attachment: a bridge between brand reputation and brand advocacy. 2022. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration. [CrossRef]
  47. Pereira, P. E. J. , Ardigó, C. M., & Limberger, P.F. Brand reputation and relationship with customer loyalty in the retail pharmacy sector: A case study. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios 2021, 23, 557–570.
  48. Zeeshan, S. & Hussain, I. Social Media Marketing and Brand Equity : A Literature Review. Journal of Marketing Management 2017, 16, 47–64. [Google Scholar]
  49. Karamian, H.; Nadoushan, M. & Nadoushan, A. Do Social Media Marketing Activities Increase Brand Equity ? International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences 2015, 4.
  50. Husain, R. , Ahmad, A., & Khan, B.M. The role of status consumption and Brand Equity : A comparative study of the marketing of Indian luxury brands by traditional and social-media. Global Business and Organizational Excellence 2022, 41, 48–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Albanna, H.; Alalwan, A. A. , & Al-Emran, M. An integrated model for using social media applications in non-profit organisations. International journal of information management 2022, 63, 102452. [Google Scholar]
  52. Ghahramani, A. , de Courten, M., & Prokofieva, M. The potential of social media in health promotion beyond creating awareness: an integrative review. BMC Public Health 2022, 22, 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  53. Philips, V. Digital Marketing in nonprofits organization: essential techniques for the new era. 2022. School of Leadership and Education Sciences: Faculty Scholarship. 35. https://digital.sandiego.
  54. Cho, H., Cannon, J., Lopez, R., & Li, W. Social media literacy: a conceptual framework. New media & society 2022,14614448211068530.
  55. López, C. Marketing de influencers para mejorar la notoriedad de marca: el caso de olivares vivos. <bold>2022</bold>. Organización de Empresas, Marketing y Sociología. Universidad de Jaén. https://hdl.handle.net/10953.1/17784.
  56. Heng Wei, L.; Chuan Huat, O. , & Arumugam, P.V. Social media communication with intensified pandemic fears: evaluating the relative impact of consumer-and firm-generated content on brand loyalty. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration 2023, 15, 161–187. [Google Scholar]
  57. Chou, S. , Chen, C. W., & Wong, M. When social media meets low-cost airlines: Will customer engagement increase customer loyalty? Research in Transportation Business & Management 2023, 47, 100945. [Google Scholar]
  58. Ameen, N. , Cheah, J. H., & Kumar, S. It's all part of the customer journey: The impact of augmented reality, chatbots, and social media on the body image and self-esteem of Generation Z female consumers. Psychology & Marketing 2022, 39, 2110–2129. [Google Scholar]
  59. Czarnecka, M. , Kinelski, G., Stefańska, M., Grzesiak, M., & Budka, B. Social media engagement in shaping green energy business models. Energies 2022, 15, 1727. [Google Scholar]
  60. Park, C. I. , & Namkung, Y. The effects of instagram marketing activities on customer-based Brand Equity in the coffee industry. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1657. [Google Scholar]
  61. Cuevas-Molano, E. , Matosas-López, L., & Bernal-Bravo, C. Factors Increasing Consumer Engagement of Branded Content in Instagram. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 143531–143548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Shahbaznezhad, H. , Dolan, R. & Rashidirad, M. The Role of Social Media Content Format and Platform in Users’ Engagement Behavior. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 2022; 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Gurjar, P., Kaurav, R. P. S., & Thakur, K.S. Content marketing: Concepts and its relevance in the tourism industry. 2019. In Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Digital Strategies for Organizational Success.
  64. Hase, V. , Boczek, K., & Scharkow, M. Adapting to affordances and audiences? A cross-platform, multi-modal analysis of the platformization of news on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter. Digital Journalism 2023, 11, 1499–1520. [Google Scholar]
  65. Llorente-Barroso, C. , Kolotouchkina, O., & Ferreira, I. E-WOM as an Asset of Branded Content Strategies: A Conceptual Approach to the Role of Consumers in Building Brand Equity. 2023. In Handbook of Research on the Future of Advertising and Brands in the New Entertainment Landscape. (367-383). IGI Global.
  66. Margarida, A. & Ramalho, D. The impact of involvement on engagement with brand posts. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing. 2019, 13, 277–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Upadhyay, Y. , Paul, J., & Baber, R. Effect of online social media marketing efforts on customer response. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 2022, 21, 554–571. [Google Scholar]
  68. Caniato, F. , Crippa, L., Pero, M., Sianesi, A. & Spina, G. Production Planning & Control. 2015, 26, 706–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Khoa, B. The Antecedents of Relationship Marketing and Customer Loyalty: A Case of the Designed Fashion Product. Journal of Asian Finance Economics. Journal of Asian Finance Economics 2020, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Romão, M. T. , Moro, S., Rita, P., & Ramos, P. Leveraging a luxury fashion brand through social media. European Research on Management and Business Economics 2019, 25, 15–22. [Google Scholar]
  71. Rodrigues, C. , & Rodrigues, P. Brand love matters to Millennials: the relevance of mystery, sensuality and intimacy to neo-luxury brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management 2019, 28, 830–848. [Google Scholar]
  72. Karimkhan, F. Ethics in Fashion and Gucci's Blackface Sweater; Will the Fashion Industry Finally Learn from Its Mistakes? Journal of Media Ethics 2023, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zhou, C.; Wang, Q. , Kaner, J. ; & Lv, Y. Wooden door preferences based on lifestyle theory and consumer behaviour theory. BioResources 2023, 18, 1616. [Google Scholar]
  74. Mettler, T. , & Pinto, R. Evolutionary paths and influencing factors towards digital maturity: An analysis of the status quo in Swiss hospitals. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2018, 133, 104–117. [Google Scholar]
  75. Laaber, F. , Florack, A., Koch, T., & Hubert, M. Digital maturity: Development and validation of the Digital Maturity Inventory (DIMI). Computers in Human Behavior 2023, 143, 107709. [Google Scholar]
  76. Rossmann, A. Digital maturity: conceptualisation and measurement model. 2018. Thirty Ninth International Conference on Information Systems, San Francisco 2018.
  77. Ab Hamid, N. R. , Akhir, R. M., & Cheng, A. Y. Social media: an emerging dimension of marketing communication. Journal of Management and Marketing Research 2013, 12, 1. [Google Scholar]
  78. Nichifor, E. , & Brătucu, G. How The Digital Maturity Level Is Shaping The Connected Consumer Future? Journal of Smart Economic Growth 2021, 6, 19–39. [Google Scholar]
  79. Chen, Y. , Sherren, K., Smit, M., & Lee, K.Y. Using social media images as data in social science research. New Media & Society 2023, 25, 849–871. [Google Scholar]
  80. Dash, A. Social Media for Wineries: Building a Strong Online Presence. 2023. https://osf.io/uh9ad/download.
  81. Dabbous, A. , & Barakat, K. A. Bridging the online offline gap: Assessing the impact of brands' social network content quality on brand awareness and purchase intention. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 2020, 53, 101966. [Google Scholar]
  82. Hariani, M. , & Sinambela, E. A. The Effect of Price Perception, Service Quality, and Product Diversity on Superindo Customer Loyalty in Surabaya. Journal of Science, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  83. Baniyani, A. , Ahmadi, M. H., Motamedi, M., & Gholami, M. Providing a model for Brand Strength in banking industry using yazd city banks. Asia Pacific Management Review 2021, 26, 78–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Christodoulides, G. , De Chernatony, L., Furrer, O., Shiu, E., & Abimbola, T. Conceptualising and Measuring the Equity of Online Brands. Journal of Marketing Management, 2006; 22, 799–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Foroudi, P. Influence of brand signature, brand awareness, brand attitude, brand reputation on hotel industry's brand performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management 2019, 76, 271–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Dülek, B. , & Saydan, R. The impact of social media advertisement awareness on brand awareness, brand image, brand attitude and brand loyalty: A research on university students. International Journal of Contemporary Economics and Administrative Sciences 2019, 9, 470–494. [Google Scholar]
  87. Gupta, A. K. , & Srivastava, V. Modelling the impact of social media marketing for apparel brands: Evidence from India. International Journal of Internet Marketing and Advertising, 2023; 18, 242–262. [Google Scholar]
  88. Heidari, S. , Zarei, M., Daneshfar, A., & Dokhanian, S. Increasing Sales Through Social Media Marketing: The Role of Customer Brand Attachment, Brand Trust, and Brand Equity. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 2023; 14, 224–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Statista. Number of social media users worldwide from 2017 to 2027(in billions). <bold>2023</bold>. https://www.statista.com/statistics/278414/number-of-worldwide-social-network-users/.
Preprints 108291 g001
Figure 1. Conceptual model.
Figure 1. Conceptual model.
Preprints 108291 g001
Preprints 108291 g002
Figure 2. Brand Equity and online metrics.
Figure 2. Brand Equity and online metrics.
Preprints 108291 g002
Table 01. Technical sheet of the research.
Table 01. Technical sheet of the research.
Preprints 108291 i001
Table 02. Description of metrics and software.
Table 02. Description of metrics and software.
Preprints 108291 i002
Table 03. The specific information about the new fashion designers.
Table 03. The specific information about the new fashion designers.
Preprints 108291 i003
Table 04. Transformation of original variables into new ones.
Table 04. Transformation of original variables into new ones.
Preprints 108291 i004
Table 05. Technical sheet of the Delphi research.
Table 05. Technical sheet of the Delphi research.
Preprints 108291 i005
Table 06. Profile of the respondents and their opinion.
Table 06. Profile of the respondents and their opinion.
Preprints 108291 i006
Table 07. Delphi survey descriptive results.
Table 07. Delphi survey descriptive results.
Preprints 108291 i007
Table 08. Expert opinion.
Table 08. Expert opinion.
Preprints 108291 i008
Table 09. Brand Equity formulation for the new fashion industry in the Canary Islands.
Table 09. Brand Equity formulation for the new fashion industry in the Canary Islands.
Preprints 108291 i009
Table 10. Linear regression to explain awareness within brand stature.
Table 10. Linear regression to explain awareness within brand stature.
Preprints 108291 i010
Table 11. Linear regression to explain estimate within brand stature.
Table 11. Linear regression to explain estimate within brand stature.
Preprints 108291 i011
Table 12. Linear regression to explain relevance within Brand Strength.
Table 12. Linear regression to explain relevance within Brand Strength.
Preprints 108291 i012
Table 13. Linear regression to explain differentiation within Brand Strength.
Table 13. Linear regression to explain differentiation within Brand Strength.
Preprints 108291 i013
Table 14. Linear regression to explain Brand Equity.
Table 14. Linear regression to explain Brand Equity.
Preprints 108291 i014
Table 15. Summary of hypotheses testing results.
Table 15. Summary of hypotheses testing results.
Preprints 108291 i015
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated