Profiles and Preferences of On-Line Millenial Shoppers in Bulgaria

Loubeau, Patricia R.; Jantzen, Robert; Alexander, Elitsa Article Profiles and Preferences of On-Line Millenial Shoppers in Bulgaria Economic Review: Journal of Economics and Business Provided in Cooperation with: Faculty of Economics, University of Tuzla Suggested Citation: Loubeau, Patricia R.; Jantzen, Robert; Alexander, Elitsa (2014) : Profiles and Preferences of On-Line Millenial Shoppers in Bulgaria, Economic Review: Journal of Economics and Business, ISSN 2303-680X, University of Tuzla, Faculty of Economics, Tuzla, Vol. 12, Iss. 1, pp. 63-79 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/193835 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ . Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 /// * Hagan School of Business, Iona College, USA, [email protected] ** Department of Economics, Iona College, USA, [email protected] *** Institute for Media and Communications Management, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, [email protected] 63 /// PROFILES AND PREFERENCES OF ON-LINE MILLENIAL SHOPPERS IN BULGARIA Patricia R. Loubeau *, Robert Jantzen **, Elitsa Alexander *** ABSTRACT This research seeks to develop a better understanding of the factors affecting on-line purchasing behavior among Generation Y (Gen Y) consumers in Bulgaria. Also called millenials and born between the mid-1970s and late 1990s, this generation is especially active online and will be a dominant influence shaping ecommerce. An empirical study was conducted based on a written survey of a sample consisting of 367 high school and university students in Bulgaria. The most important reason why Bulgarian young people shop online is the pursuit of unique products not locally available, followed by convenience and better pricing, and their favorite category of internet purchases is “Apparel and Accessories.” Bulgarian millennials are using the internet to shop for trendy fashion and to obtain a variety of brands that are unavailable locally. Like other regions of the world, concern about financial transactions security is a major barrier limiting the willingness to shop on-line in Bulgaria. Unlike other markets where online music purchases are growing, high levels of digital piracy in Bulgaria strongly discourage Bulgarian students from purchasing music online. One limitation of this study arises because of its reliance on a convenience sample of students from medium sized cities in Southern Bulgaria. Further research employing stratified random sampling across Bulgaria is needed to assess whether the findings are broadly generalizable for the Gen Y population. Keywords: on-line shopping, Generation Y, consumer behavior, Eastern Europe JEL: D12 1. INTRODUCTION As internet access increases, with more than 1.9 billion users worldwide today (Internet World Stats 2012), the number of on-line purchasers is expected to increase steadily, including a proportionate increase in the number of young adults buying on-line. Consumers, including millenials, are using the web to obtain information on products and to obtain better pricing (Nie and Ebring, 2000), which is propelling globalization and international trade. Nielsen (2008) notes that in the past two years the fraction of the world’s internet users that shop on-line has increased from 40% to over 85%, with half of today’s users making regular purchases at least once a month. Recent research shows that Western Europe leads the world in retail- e-commerce (Business Wire, 2010), with France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom constituting the largest on-line markets (Forrester Research, 2010). The relative import of e-tailing differs significantly within these markets, however, with British consumers being the largest on-line spenders in Europe, tallying a third of all internet purchases (McAdam, 2010). In contrast, internet commerce only represents a small fraction of total retail volume in Italy and Spain (Von Abrams, 2010). Even though the growth rate in internet usage and e-commerce worldwide has been dramatic, wide variation in internet /// . Loubeau R. P., Jantzen R., Alexander E. /// 64 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 penetration rates among countries (Internet World Stats, 2012; Eurostat, 2011) offers the opportunity for substantial future growth. Such growth is expected to particularly come from regions outside of the United States (Brashear et al., 2009). One group of internet users that are especially wired and therefore have a significant influence in the on-line marketplace are Generation Y consumers, also called millennials. This generation, born between the mid-1970s and late 1990s, consists of demanding, highly wired and knowledgeable consumers. Their sheer numbers and spending power are expected to shape the marketplace for decades to come (Morton, 2002; Paul, 2001; Ott, 2011). Sarbu (2008) has described them as the first generation of digital natives, techno-literate and computer able since childhood, who depend on the internet for almost all facets of their daily lives. In short, millennials are the first generation to have grown up in the virtual world of the internet (Apostolov, 2008, p. 151). Since Generation Y shoppers are far more active on-line than previous generations, they are likely to be a dominant factor shaping future e-commerce trends. According to a Pew internet research report, Gen-Y consumers comprise 35% of the internet-using population (Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2010). They also have sizable disposable incomes which they are willing to spend on-line, e.g., US millenials earned $200 billion in 2009 from part- or fulltime jobs and purchased $190 billion worth of goods (Tapscott, 2009). They represent ideal customers, with incomes largely disposable and expenditures resilient to changing business conditions. As teen-specific payment methods became widely available in 2001, teenaged millenials aged 13 to 19 entered the world of e-commerce (Singh, 2002). Starting with prepaid cards, innovation in payment methods which include Splash Plastic, Smart Creds and Dubit, as well as digital wallets has further enhanced the ability of teens to buy on-line. A further payment iteration can be found in BillMyParents, which allows teenagers to select products on-line and forward the bills for parental approval (Anonymous, 2011a). Linking teens to on-line payment methods has been a potent combination fueling teen spending over the Web. Understanding the on-line buying behavior of millennial consumers allows retailers to create initial relationships with them and to build them into lucrative long-lasting brand attachments. With these considerations in mind, this study was designed to analyze the on-line buying behavior of Generation Y consumers in Bulgaria and examine the factors that influence the decision to shop online as well as the type of products purchased. This research extends the work of Brashear et al. (2009), Cahk and Ersoy (2008) and others and addresses the need for a non US-centric view of internet usage by investigating an emergent market segment in Bulgaria, in Eastern Europe for which no prior work has been published. The results of this study should be of value to retailers seeking to understand buying behaviors, educators interested in consumer behavior, and consumer theorists. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Why do consumers use the internet for shopping? Rohm and Swaminathan (2004) have suggested that on-line shoppers can be characterized into four motivational types. Convenience shoppers value the ease of the online transaction, while variety seekers desire greater access to differing products and retailers. Store-oriented buyers are more interested in quickly obtaining products and the social interaction during purchase, while balanced buyers weigh all three. Harris Interactive’s large scale survey (Anonymous, . Profiles and preferences of on-line millenial shoppers in Bulgaria /// Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 65 /// 2012) of US consumers in the busy 2012 Christmas season found that the most important reason for shopping on-line was to obtain better prices (71%), followed by greater convenience (53%), better ability to stay within budget (32%), and the desire to avoid crowds (31%). A similar PriceGrabber survey conducted in 2011 revealed even greater proportions (75%+) citing pricing, convenience and avoiding crowds (Anonymous, 2011b). In earlier studies of US consumers, Ahuja et al. (2003) found smaller fractions (< 25%) citing convenience, better prices and that it saves time, while Brown et al. (2003) found that consumers also shopped on-line in order to obtain greater selection and to maintain their privacy for products they would ordinarily be reluctant to buy instore. Demographic and personal characteristics are also important factors that influence the decision to purchase on the web. Donthu and Garcia (1999) have demonstrated that older consumers and those with higher incomes are more likely to buy on-line than their younger and modest income counterparts. Other researchers have also noted that younger students are less likely to shop on-line and to be able to use credit cards for payment, except when borrowed from an adult (Vahlberg, 2010; Von Abrams, 2010). Swinyard and Smith (2003) have also found that on-line shoppers are wealthier, better educated, and more computer literate. Similarly, Bellman et al. (1999) have shown that consumers with greater internet expertise are more likely to make internet purchases. Some researchers, like Rodgers and Harris (2003), Brown et al. (2003), Slyke et al. (2002) and Teo (2001), have also identified a gender difference in on-line shopping preferences, with males more likely to make e-purchases. Others, however, like Ulbrich et al. (2011), Alreck and Settle (2002), Stafford et al. (2004) and Hernandez, Jimenez and Martin (2011) have failed to find a significant gender differential. Others like Lynch and Beck (2001) and Dellner (2007) have emphasized that browsing and purchasing patterns differ between countries because of differing cultural beliefs, attitudes and perceptions. This may be particularly important for Bulgaria which, unlike well established and developed mass consumer societies such as the UK and the USA, has a more recent engagement with global consumerism. As a post-transition Eastern Bloc country, Bulgaria has a more collectivist heritage and more limited exposure to internet shopping opportunities. Two sources of anxiety, involving the chances of receiving an unsatisfactory product or incurring an unexpected financial loss, have been found to be the major deterrents to ordering on-line. Kiran, Sharma, and Mittal (2008) have identified the former, arising from an inability to physically examine the product first hand prior to purchase, as the most important factor deterring on-line purchases. Others, including Ha and Stoel (2012), Joines et al. (2003), Kolsaker et al. (2003), Liao and Cheung (2001), Vellido et al. (2000), Basso et al. (2001), Callahan and Koenemann (2000) and Spiekermann et al. (2001), have shown that concerns with creditcard fraud and privacy are most important. 3. THE BULGARIAN INTERNET ENVIRONMENT Half (51.0%) of Bulgaria’s population has access to the internet (Internet World Stats, 2012). The EU average (73%) and the rates for other south-eastern European states are considerably higher, with the exception of Albania (49%), Montenegro (50%), Greece (53%) and Romania (44.1%). Bulgarian (and Swedish) young people, however, are among the most frequent internet users in Europe with five in six (83%) teens reporting that they use the internet every day (Livingston et al., 2010). Daily teenager time spent on-line averages three hours on weekdays, four hours /// . Loubeau R. P., Jantzen R., Alexander E. /// 66 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 at weekends and up to five hours on days during school vacations (Bulgarian National Centre for Study of Public Opinion, 2006). Internet use by young Bulgarians has grown rapidly in recent years (from 41.7% in 2004 to 75.1% in 2009) fueled in part by the popularity of internet and computer gaming clubs (National Statistical Institute of Bulgaria, 2009). Although internet shopping is increasing, ecommerce remains underdeveloped in Bulgaria. Bulgarians are among the lowest users of on-line shopping with estimates ranging from 3 to 5% of consumers buying products on the web (Anonymous, 2010; Temelkova, 2008). Bulgaria’s bank card holders, however, are much more likely (79%) to make purchases on-line, and younger buyers between 18 and 24 account for 45% of these purchasers. Internet commerce, although still primarily done on foreign sites, is also being stimulated by the development of local e-tailers and on-line payment systems. Bulgaria, as a developing market economy, will however, continue to lag behind the USA and most of Western Europe because of their relatively low ($12,800 in 2010) per capita income level (Central Intelligence Agency, 2011). Nevertheless, as a post-transition Eastern Bloc country now included in the EU, Bulgaria’s six million potential customers, rising income levels, and increased foreign investment offer enormous e-biz potential. In addition, the speed of adoption of e-commerce services will be an important element of Bulgaria’s integration into the EU community and ensuing economic development. 4. METHODOLOGY Following Zhou et al. (2007), Pavlou (2003), Park et al. (2004), Chen et al. (2002) and Limayen et al. (2008), we posit that the willingness of Bulgarian Gen Y consumers to shop on-line is determined by consumer demographics, computer knowledge, perceived benefits and the perceived risks of internet buying (see Figure 4.1). Reflecting the findings of prior research, our specific expectations regarding demographics are that students who are either male, older, more educated or from higher income households are more likely to make on-line purchases than those female, younger, less educated or from poorer households, respectively. We also expect that students with greater computer knowledge will be more likely to conduct on-line transactions. Perceived benefits include factors that measure the expected benefits of using an on-line system, such as better pricing and convenience. The final category, namely perceived risks, refers to consumers’ assessment of incurring unexpected financial losses or being disappointed in the product after they have purchased it. The propensity to shop on-line is expected to be positively related to perceived benefits and inversely related to risks. The specific hypotheses that the research will test are as follows: H1. Gender impacts on-line shopping behavior, i.e. males are more likely to shop than females. H2. Age is positively related to on-line shopping behavior. H3. Education is positively related to on-line shopping behavior. H4. Income is positively related to on-line shopping behavior. H5. Computer knowledge is positively related to on-line shopping behavior. H6. Perceived benefits are positively related to on-line shopping behavior. H7. Perceived risks are negatively related to on-line shopping behavior. . Profiles and preferences of on-line millenial shoppers in Bulgaria /// Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 67 /// 4.1. The On-line Shopping Survey To study the on-line shopping behavior of millennials in Bulgaria, a survey was designed and administered. Questions for the survey were selected based on the literature review, a review of other surveys, consultations with market researchers and Bulgarian academics, as well as focus groups with students in the targeted age group. The survey included nine questions pertaining to internet use and on-line purchasing behavior. The latter included questions regarding whether the student shops on-line, what products or services are purchased and additional questions relating to the level of computer expertise and motivation for on-line shopping. The on-line shopping categories included products and services, an approach similar to that of the on-line-shopping research companies, Forrester and comScor, both leaders in measuring the digital world. The approach was also consistent with that of Ahuja et al. (2003), Cahk and Ersoy (2008) and Frasier and Henry (2007), who focused on the general on-line purchasing behavior of individual consumers and why they choose to buy or not buy on-line. To distinguish differing computer abilities, students were asked to self-report their level of computer knowledge on a 5-point ordinal rating scale ranging from no knowledge to expert. The survey also included questions regarding age, gender, educational level, and income status. To accommodate disparities in income levels between Bulgaria and the USA/Western Europe, the income categories were defined as much worse off than colleagues, worse off than colleagues, same as colleagues, better off than colleagues, and much better off than colleagues. 4.2. Survey Participants A total of 388 pen and paper surveys were distributed in the late spring/early summer of 2011 to a convenience sample of high school and university students from medium sized cities in Southern Bulgaria. This participant group was chosen because previous studies (including Ozok and Wei, 2010 and Lightner et al., 2002) have shown that students can serve as a representative sample of the e-commerce shopper population. Twenty one surveys were eliminated due to incomplete data, leaving a total of 367 usable surveys. Among these, women (57.8%) and university students (53.4%) slightly outnumbered men (42.2%) and high schoolers (46.6%). Most (80.1%) were between 18-22 years old, with only 15.3% younger and 4.6% older. Three in four (76.3%) reported they had incomes similar to Figure 4.1. Research framework Perceived Risk s P erceived Benefits H6 H7 H1, H2, H3, H4 H5 Consume r Demographics C omputer Knowledge On - line Shopping /// . Loubeau R. P., Jantzen R., Alexander E. /// 68 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 their colleagues, while 6.6% reported lower incomes and 13.1% higher incomes. With respect to computer expertise, two in five (42.8%) felt they had above average computer knowledge, nearly half reported (46.3%) average literacy and only a small fraction (3.3%) felt they had below average computer skills. 4.3. Statistical Method Bivariate and multivariate analyses were utilized to test the hypotheses at the customary p ≤ 0.05*, p ≤ 0.01** and p ≤ 0.005*** significance levels. The analysis included chi-square tests between pairs of categorical variables as well as regression analysis. Specifically, chi-squared analysis was used to assess whether the type of on-line purchase was related to each of the consumer demographic characteristics. Chi-squared analysis was also employed to assess whether the reasons for shopping and not shopping online were significantly related to the demographic traits. Because the decision to shop on-line is a binary categorical (yes/no) outcome, multivariate logit regression analysis was employed to identify the independent factors determining the willingness to shop on-line. According to Wooldridge (2009, pp. 246-250, 575-587), in large samples like ours, the logit method is superior to ordinary least squares (OLS) regression because the latter is likely to generate biased coefficients, heteroskedastic error terms, unreliable coefficient t values and nonsensical predicted probabilities. The specific functional form of the logit regression model is as follows: where is the probability of shopping on-line and is the vector of explanatory variables (including consumer demographics, computer knowledge, perceived outcome and perceived risk factors). Because the logit regression coefficients ( ) show the marginal effects of each explainer on the log of the odds of shopping on-line, their magnitudes are not directly interpretable. Statistically significant logit coefficients do, however, indicate the direction (plus or minus) of influence of each explainer on the propensity to shop on-line. To estimate the logit regression, the decision to shop on-line was coded as a dummy variable, with 1 for shopping and 0 for nonshopping. Among the consumer demographic explainers, gender and education status (university vs. high school student) were also coded as (1, 0) variables. Because the age and income demographics, as well as the computer knowledge variable, were ordered categorical variables, their influence was estimated relative to particular base groups using multiple 1,0 dummy variables. For example, since age was classified as either < 18, 18-22 or > 22, the regression included two 1,0 dummy variables for the 18-22 and > 22 categories and excluded a variable for the < 18 group, thereby making it the comparison base. This regression specification then allows the results to identify whether there were any differences in the propensity to shop on-line between 18-22 year olds and < 18 year olds or between > 22 year olds and those < 18. Since income was similarly classified into three groups, namely worse than peers, same as peers or better than peers, the regression estimated the differences between the latter two groups relative to the worse than peers group. Lastly, the influence of computer knowledge was estimated by contrasting those with average or above average expertise with those who had less than average selfreported ability. Whether students reported that they expected to receive better pricing was also included as a 1,0 dummy variable, as were two variables measuring whether they felt either anxious about financial risk from . Profiles and preferences of on-line millenial shoppers in Bulgaria /// Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 69 /// shopping on-line or being unable to physically examine the product prior to purchase. 5. RESULTS 5.1. Why do Gen Y consumers shop on-line? Seven out of ten (70.6%) students surveyed reported that they had shopped on-line at least once. The majority (62.5%) of these internet shoppers were moderately active, having made one to three purchases in the previous three months. The most cited reason given by 259 Bulgarian students for shopping on-line is the ability to obtain unique products not found in stores (46.3% of the total). Our study shows that Bulgarian students are “variety seekers” using the internet to supplement their buying to obtain brand name products that are still difficult to obtain locally. Like American millennials who “shop for fashion, they shop for trend, and they shop a variety of stores and brands…,” (Ott, 2011), Bulgarian millennials seem to be constantly looking for new trends. According to Hartman et al. (2006), variety seeking may also be connected to their desire to build “cool” identities by being seen using the latest products. The next most important reasons why Bulgarian young people shop on-line are convenience (45.9%) and better pricing (44.4%), followed by the ability to save time shopping (30.9%) and to shop any time of the day (26.3%). Relatively few respondents cited on-line price comparison (13.1%), fewer hassles and crowds (10.8%) and ease of shopping (8.5%) as important factors. While previous research on UK and US young people has shown that price is the biggest draw to online shopping (Singh, 2002; Lueg, 2001, pp. 19, 30, 83), Bulgarian millennials seem to be somewhat less concerned with price. The relatively inelastic response for Bulgarian youth might reflect more limited opportunities for purchasing products locally, especially brand name products. In addition, Bulgarian cultural norms provide young people with generous parental financial support. A typical comment among Bulgarian parents would be “What I did not have as a child (i.e. during socialism), my children should have now.” 5.2. What do Gen Y consumers purchase on-line in Bulgaria? For 259 students who had shopped on-line, the most frequently reported favorite category (54.4%) was “Apparel and Accessories,” followed by “Books and Magazines,” “Computers,” “Air Travel,” and “Health and Beauty” with 38.6%, 35.1%, 32.4% and 30.5% shares respectively. One in four also reported purchasing “Event Tickets,” “Consumer Electronics,” and “Videos,” with smaller fractions reporting either “Music” or “Toy” purchases (8.2% and 2.5%, respectively). These findings about Bulgarian millennials correspond to the recent Gallup research finding that globally millennials, more than any other generational group, acutely respond to changes in fashion by shopping on-line for clothing and accessories (Ott, 2011). The Bulgarian GenYer’s preference for on-line apparel can also be explained by existing price differentials. If we compare Bulgarian prices to Western- European and US prices we note an interesting fact. While consumer prices tend to be significantly higher in Western Europe and the USA compared to Bulgaria, there is one exception, i.e. prices of brand name products (e.g. the products of Levi’s, Nike, Zara and H&M). One summer dress in a chain store (like Zara or H&M), for example, would cost approximately 14% less to buy from a store located in Western Europe (e.g. Germany, Spain or France) than from a store located in Bulgaria (Anonymous, 2011c). The same product would be even less expensive if bought in the USA. This may explain why Bulgarian students buy apparel and accessories on-line when looking for better /// . Loubeau R. P., Jantzen R., Alexander E. /// 70 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 prices. Bulgarian millennials seem to be looking for the right styles at the right price. Of interest to note is the low level of on-line music purchases. This is consistent with the fact that most audio is illegally acquired in Bulgaria. Upon the recommendation of the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), Bulgaria was added to the Special 301 Watch List in 2003 and again in 2005. The estimated level of music piracy in Bulgaria was 83% in 2002 (IIPA, 2003), and Bulgaria’s anti-piracy efforts have continued to be ineffective. In 2012, after street protests by internet activists, Bulgaria became the sixth European country refusing to support the international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). The agreement was meant to toughen intellectual property rights enforcement and toughen the legislation against on-line audio-video piracy and has been signed by Australia, Canada, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, the USA and 22 members of the EU. Bulgaria joins Poland, Cyprus, Estonia, Germany, Netherlands and Slovakia in not signing the convention (Reuters, 2012). Unlike the situation in Bulgaria, legitimate digital music sales have been growing rapidly worldwide and accounted for an estimated 32% of recording company 2012 global revenues, up from 29% in 2010. In some markets more than half of company revenues arise from on-line music sales, including the USA (52%), South Korea (53%) and China (71%) (IFPI, 2012). Despite advancements that have been made on a global scale, digital piracy remains a critical barrier to on-line music sales in Bulgaria. Beken, Janssens and Vandaele (2009) have noted that legal action seems to be able to serve as a last-resort solution, while buying music on-line should be made easier (and more affordable) than stealing music on-line. 5.3. Are there significant demographic differences in what Gen Y purchases online? The types of items Bulgarian Gen Y consumers purchased on-line differed significantly (pvalue < .005) by age, gender, education and income, with the age and education differences largely mirroring one another (see Table 5.1). University students were more likely (37.8%) to purchase air travel tickets on-line than younger high students (5.8%). This would be expected as university students may require air travel to attend school whereas high school students would not. Additionally, high school students cannot use credit cards for paying on-line, except when Table 5.1. On-line purchases by demographics <18 18-22 >22 Male Female High School University < Peers = Peers > Peers < Average Average > Average Computers 26.8% 59.0% 5.6% 37.4% 15.6% 22.2% 27.0% 29.2% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 15.9% 33.0% Music (CDs, MP3 etc.) 14.3% 16.4% 2.8% 10.3% 6.6% 13.5% 3.6% 12.5% 8.9% 4.2% 0.0% 8.2% 8.6% Books & magazines 23.2% 65.6% 9.7% 19.4% 33.0% 19.3% 34.2% 16.7% 26.4% 33.3% 25.0% 24.1% 30.3% Event tickets 8.9% 44.3% 8.3% 18.7% 17.0% 9.4% 25.0% 16.7% 15.0% 31.3% 8.3% 11.8% 23.8% Consumer electronics 10.7% 44.3% 6.9% 27.7% 10.4% 13.5% 21.4% 16.7% 16.1% 29.2% 0.0% 11.8% 24.3% Videos 32.1% 31.1% 6.9% 21.9% 12.7% 20.5% 13.3% 20.8% 16.4% 12.5% 16.7% 14.1% 18.9% Air travel 1.8% 61.5% 11.1% 21.3% 24.1% 5.8% 37.8% 20.8% 20.7% 31.3% 8.3% 20.6% 25.9% Health and beauty 28.6% 46.7% 8.3% 5.8% 33.0% 19.9% 23.0% 4.2% 21.4% 29.2% 16.7% 20.0% 23.2% Apparel & accessories 39.3% 91.0% 11.1% 30.3% 44.3% 36.3% 40.3% 16.7% 37.5% 58.3% 8.3% 35.3% 43.2% Toys 5.4% 4.9% 12.5% 4.5% 0.9% 2.9% 2.0% 29.2% 0.7% 0.0% 8.3% 1.8% 2.7% Other 23.2% 31.1% 4.2% 23.9% 8.0% 17.0% 12.8% 25.0% 13.2% 18.8% 8.3% 12.9% 16.8% p-value of chi-squared < .005*** < .005*** 0.52< .005***< .005*** Age: Gender: Education Status: Income: Computer Knowledge: Note: column percentages do not add to 100% because respondents could purchase from multiple categories. . Profiles and preferences of on-line millenial shoppers in Bulgaria /// Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 77 /// of Service Management. 23(2), pp. 197– 215. 26. Hartman J., Shim S., Barber B. & O’Brien M. (2006). Adolescents’ Utilitarian and Hedonic Web-consumption Behavior: Hierarchical Influence of Personal Values and Innovativeness. Psychology & Marketing. 23(10), pp. 813-839. 27. Hernandez, B., Jimenez, J. & Martin, M. J. (2011). Age, Gender and Income: Do They Really Moderate Online Shopping Behaviour? Online Information Review. 35(1), pp. 113–133. 28. IFPI – International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (2012). Digital Music Report 2012 [Online]. Available from: http://www.ifpi.org/content/ library/DMR2012.pdf [Accessed: 30 January 2013] 29. IIPA (2003). International Intellectual Property Alliance 2003 Special 301 Report BULGARIA [Online]. Available from: http://www.iipa.com/rbc/2003/2003SPE C301BULGARIA.pdf [Accessed: 9 April 2011] 30. Internet World Stats (2012) [Online]. Available from: http://www.internetworldstats.com/euro pa.htm [Accessed: 2 September 2013] 31. Joines, J., Scherer, C. & Scheufele, D. (2003). Exploring Motivations for Consumer Web Use and Their Implications for E-commerce. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 20(2), pp. 90-109. 32. Kiran, R., Sharma, A. & Mittal, K. (2008). Attitudes, Preferences and Profile of Online Buyers in India: Changing Trends. South Asian Journal of Management. Jul- Sep 2008, 15(3), p. 55. 33. Kolsaker, A., Lee-Kelley, L. & Choy, P. (2004). The Reluctant Hong Kong Consumer: Purchasing Travel Online. International Journal of Consumer Studies. 28(3), pp. 295-304. 34. Liao, Z.& Cheung, M. (2001). Internetbased E-shopping and Consumer Attitudes: An Empirical Study. Information & Management. 38(5), pp. 299-306. 35. Lightner, N., Yenisey, M., Ozok, A. A. & Salvendy, G. (2002). Shopping Behavior and Preferences in E-commerce of Turkish and American University Students: Implications from Cross-cultural Design. Behaviour and Information Technology. 21(6), pp. 373–385. 36. Limayem, M., Khalifa, M. and Frini, A. (2000). What Makes Consumers Buy From Internet? A Longitudinal Study of Online Shopping. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans. 30(4), pp. 421-432. 37. Lueg, Jason (2001). American Teenagers and the Internet: A Consideration of Consumer Electronic Commerce from a Consumer Socialization Perspective. Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Management and Marketing, University of Alabama, pp. 19, 30 & 83. 38. Lynch, P. & Beck, J. (2001). Profiles of Internet Buyers in 20 Countries: Evidence for Region-specific Strategies. Journal of International Business Studies. 32(4), pp. 725-748. 39. McAdam, Carrie (2010), Shoppers in UK are Europe’s Top On-line Spenders [Online]. Available from: http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h ome-news/shoppers-in-uk-are-europe-s- top-on-line-spenders-1.1002772 [Accessed: 16 March 2011] /// . Loubeau R. P., Jantzen R., Alexander E. /// 78 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 40. Morton, Linda P. (2002). Targeting Generation Y. Public Relations Quarterly. 47(2), pp. 46-48. 41. National Statistical Institute [of Bulgaria] (2009). Survey on ICT usage in households and by individuals aged between 16 and 74, 17 December 2009 [Online]. Available from: http://www.nsi.bg/EPDOCS/ICT_hh2009_ en.pdf [Accessed: 19 March 2011], p. 2. 42. Nie, N. H. & Erbring, L. (2002). Internet and Society: A Preliminary Report. IT & Society. 1(1), pp. 275-283. 43. Nielsen (2008). Trends in On-line Shopping: A Global Nielsen Consumer Report, February 2008 [Online]. Available from: http://th.nielsen.com/site/documents/Gl obalOn-lineShoppingReportFeb08.pdf [Accessed: 15 March 2011] 44. Ott, B. (2011). What Does the Millennial Generation Want? And How Can Retailers Satisfy the Needs of These Fickle Youngsters? [Online]. Available from: http://institution.gallup.com/gmj/14699 0/Marketing-Tweeters-Facebook- Friends.aspx [Accessed: 4 November 2011], p.12. 45. Ozok, A. &·Wei, J. (2010). An Empirical Comparison of Consumer Usability Preferences in On-line Shopping Using Stationary and Mobile Devices: Results from a College Student Population. Electronic Commerce Research. 10(2), pp. 111–137. 46. Park, J., Lee, D. & Ahn, J., (2004). Riskfocused E-commerce Adoption Model: A Cross-country Study. Journal of Global Information Management. 7(2), pp. 6-30. 47. Paul, P. (2001). Getting Inside Gen Y. American Demographics. 23(9), pp. 42-49. 48. Pavlou, P. (2003). Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce. 7(3), pp. 101-134. 49. Pew Internet and American Life Project (2010). Generations 2010 [Online]. Available from: http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/ Reports/2010/PIP_Generations_and_Tech 10.pdf [Accessed 15 March 2011], p.4. 50. Reuters. (2012). Bulgaria Refuses to Ratify ACTA [Online]. Available from: http://rt.com/news/acta-bulgaria- protesters-ratification-353/ss [Accessed: 15 February, 2012] 51. Rodgers, S. & Harris, M. (2003). Gender and E-commerce: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Advertising Research. 43(3), pp. 322-330. 52. Rohm, A. & Swaminathan, V. (2004). A Typology of On-line Shoppers Based on Shopping Motivations. Journal of Business Research. 57(7), pp. 748-757. 53. Sarbu, M. (2008), Cum Arata Generatia Y, Business Magazin [Online]. Available from: http://www.businessmagazin.ro/opinii/c um-arata-generatia-y-2507667 [Accessed: 3 December 2010] 54. Singh, S. (2002). Paying and Playing on the Net. Marketing Week. 25(22), p. 34. 55. Slyke, C., Comunale, C. & Belanger, F. (2002). Gender Differences in Perceptions of Web-based Shopping. Communications of the ACM. 45(7), pp. 82-86. 56. Spiekermann, S., Grossklags, J. & Berendt, B. (2001). E-privacy in 2nd generation ecommerce: privacy preferences versus actual behavior. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce. Tampa, Florida, pp. 38–47. . Profiles and preferences of on-line millenial shoppers in Bulgaria /// Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XII, Issue 1, May 2014 79 /// 57. Stafford, T., Turan, A. and Raisinghani, M. (2004). International and Cross-cultural Influences on Online Shopping Behavior. Journal of Global Information Management. 7(2), pp. 70-87. 58. Swinyard, William R. & Smith Scott M. (2003). Why People (Don’t) Shop On-line: A Lifestyle of the Internet Consumer. Psychology and Marketing Special Issue. 20(7), pp. 567-597. 59. Tapscott, Don (2009). Grown Up Digital; How the Net Generation is Changing your World. New York: McGraw-Hill, p.188. 60. Temelkova, K. (2008). Bulgarians Don't Shop On-line, Kuneva Makes E-commerce Easier. The Standart [Online]. Available from: http://paper.standartnews.com/en/articl e.php?d=2008-06-23&article=24239 [Accessed: 15 June 2011]. 61. Teo, T. (2001). Demographic and Motivation Variables Associated with Internet Usage Activities. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy. 11(2), pp. 125- 137. 62. Ulbrich, F., Christensen, T., & Stankus, L. (2011). Gender-specific On-line Shopping Preferences. Electronic Commerce Research. 11(2), pp. 181-199. 63. Vahlberg, V. (2010). Fitting Into Their Lives: A Survey of Three Studies About Youth Media Usage [Online]. Available from: http://www.mediamanagementcenter.org /research/fitting.pdf [Accessed: 18 June 2011], p.12. 64. Vellido, A., Lisboa, P. & Meehan, K. (2000). Quantitative Characterization and Prediction of On-line Purchasing Behavior: A Latent Variable Approach. International Journal of Electronic Commerce. 4(4), pp. 83-104. 65. Von Abrams, K. (2010). Retail E-commerce in Western Europe [Online]. Available from: http://www.emarketer.com/Reports/All/ Emarketer_200679.aspx [Accessed 16 March 2011]. 66. Wooldridge, J. (2005). Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach: 4 th edition, Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning, pp. 246-250, 575-587. 67. Zhou, L., Dai, L. & Zhang, D. (2007). Online Shopping Acceptance Model – A Critical Survey of Consumer Factors in Online Shopping. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research. 8(1), pp. 41-62.