Luxury Vs Luxury

Introduction :
The notion of luxury has been present in various other forms. The role was unique in earlier times as it is now. Earlier possessions of raja’s and maharajas were considered to be luxury. Division of social class structure led to this difference where luxury was limited to rich people that is whatever poor people cannot have and elite can this was termed as luxury. During the last 10 years, the luxury sector has undergone drastic change. Barriers that were present earlier has been lowered down due to globalization and social media. Globalization has spread like fire for the growth of fashion industry and market strategies have attracted the consumers significant shifts in cultural values and beliefs, consumer preferences and

Luxury goods are not the necessities but are very much desirable to people which is supported by a share of money income. They are not easily available and affordable for everyone but due to the coming up of competition in market this has been changed. Nowadays, every individual wants to raise their self high and wants to be different from everyone. Since, the times have changed luxury goods have become more affordable for middle class consumers. Whenever we open our social media accounts such as Instagram, snapchats or news on internet or be it the reality shows, it is full of rich people showing off their dresses, bags, accessories etc. Such news put an impact on our inner thinking about our need to look and feel good through rich possessions. Several manufactured goods have become luxury goods as they are designer, durable and better quality. These goods are considered as luxury goods by the consumers because they play a role of status and class for those who showcase or owns them. These items are not necessarily better than less expensive substitutes are purchased with the main purpose of showcasing their wealth. These kinds of goods are object of socio-economic phenomenon which includes watches, jewelleries, designer clothes and accessories, large

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 13.640a 12 .325
Likelihood Ratio 13.984 12 .303
Linear-by-Linear Association .003 1 .965
N of Valid Cases 50

Table 3: Chi-Square Tests-2 (age vs brand preference for suits)
Since the significance value is greater than 0.05, we accept Ho and conclude that there is no relation between age and brand preference for suits Value df Asymp. Sig (2 sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.788 8 .948
Likelihood ratio 3.726 8 .882
Linear-by-linear association .417 1 .520
N of valid cases 50

Table 4: Chi-Square Tests-3 (education vs brand preference for suits) Since the significance value is greater than 0.05, we accept Ho and conclude that there is no relation between education and brand preference for suits. Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 15.183 16 .512
Likelihood Ratio 17.736 16