As are blamed to erode brand equity
As claimed by Kahn and McAlister, brand awareness and brand loyalty are impossible tobe built solely with advertising. While promotions appear to be better at drawingconsumer attention, most research studies, however, have concentrated on pricepromotions only.5 Furthermore, in order to determine if the moderation impact of price ornon-price promotions is greater on the antecedents of brand loyalty such as brand trust,brand reliability, and brand intentions, non-price promotions should be also taken intoaccount.6 Until the late 1900s that scholars began noticing non-price promotion.7 Besides the lack of non-price promotions research, other studies share commondrawbacks. For example, sales promotions tended to be hindered by the deficiency of thetheoretical approach. Promotions was criticized for being too narrow that solely copedwith one type of promotion at a time. Behaviorists were criticized for confining empiricalwork and choosing promotions theoretically.
8 Finally, the long-term effect of promotion activities has been debated for years.9 Thisdebate may be due to the fact that most studies are on price promotions, and while price promotions are blamed to erode brand equity because they emphasize on price10; anduncommitted consumers are mostly economic incentives driven which leads to promotiondriven buying behaviors.11 Empirical studies indicate that promotions indirectly affectbrand loyalty through consumer satisfaction12. However, other researchers believed thatsales promotions would trigger negative impact on brand such as price sensitivity13,brand switching, and lower repeat purchase rates14. The drawbacks and the inconsistencyin previous research findings call for a new empirical study involving both price and non-price promotions on the study of relationship between them and brand loyalty.