 |
Branding Laws · Internet Marketing · eMarketing · Internet Advertising · Online Branding |
|
Branding Laws · Internet Marketing · eMarketing · Internet Advertising · Online Branding |
|
Marketing Victorian Shopping Strips
A study into the role of Special Rate and Charge funding and the Marketing
Activities it provides for
Nicole Maslin
Banyule City Council
Po Box 51 Ivanhoe, 3079
Australia, Victoria
Judy Rex
School of Business
Swinburne University of Technology
PO Box 218, Hawthorn 3122
Australia, Victoria
Nicole Maslin
With over 12 years experience in Local government in numerous roles including
Recreation, Youth Work, culture, arts and events, Nicole Maslin is presently the Coordinator
of Economic Development at Banyule City Council in the North East
Suburbs, Melbourne. Nicole has recently completed the final year of her Masters
(Marketing) where she conducted a study into the marketing practises and activities of
shopping strips in Victoria, which will be the focus of her presentation.
Judy Rex
Judy Rex is a lecturer in the School of Business at Swinburne University of
Technology. Judy has recently completed her Masters by Research, which involved
researching the decision-making factors that affected the purchasing process for large
users of electricity when choosing their electricity supply company. Judy also has an
interest in other areas or marketing such as education, retailing, eMarketing and the
marketing of mature brands, and has published papers on these topics. Before,
working at Swinburne, Judy worked as a research director for the Roy Morgan
Research Centre for 18
ABSTRACT
The viability and vitality of traditional shopping strips are increasingly dependent on
their ability to strategically plan, develop and position themselves to compete on their
environment. In the last 15 years an increasing number of Victorian shopping strips
have been reliant upon the collection of Special Rates and Charges by Local
Government to fund their marketing and business development activities. Industry
practitioners have relied on anecdotal evidence to hail the success and debate the
problems, however there had been no formal investigation into how the funding was
was being expended and what was actually being achieved.
In order to obtain the information required for this research a self-completion
questionnaire was mailed to the Centre Co-ordinator of each of the 75 Shopping
Strips funded through special/rates and charges in Victoria. A 49% return rate ensured
a good representation of the total number of shopping strips funded through Special
Rates and Charges in Victoria.
The findings from this exploratory research indicated that the special rate and charge
funding was fundamental for the marketing activities of shopping strips in the sample.
The study showed that the funding was primarily used to pay for the strip coordinators’
salaries and the implementation of promotion campaigns to collectively
market the shopping strip. While many co-ordinators found the funds to be
insufficient in providing for the total marketing and broader business/physical
development activities, most co-ordinators appeared to be making the best use of the
limited funds they had, and many rated the effectiveness of the funds for facilitating
their marketing activities highly. These activities largely involved the collective
promotion of the shopping strips through a variety of tools in an effort to brand the
strip and build place equity.
The marketing activities OF THE STRIPS were driven by an objective to target the
local community and service their needs. Most shopping strips undertook some
degree of marketing planning, however there was a far greater focus on the
implementation of the marketing mix elements as opposed to strategic analysis of the
some of the important inputs; such as competitor, industry and customer analysis and
assessment of internal capabilities. This research draws on these findings along with
best practice management practises to discuss the issues and limitations that many
Victorian Shopping Strips are facing in their effort to position their shopping strips
successfully in today’s environment.
INTRODUCTION
In Australia, shopping environments are largely provided in three distinctive
locations: central business districts and/or city centres, shopping strips, and shopping
centres and/or malls, all of which compete for market share. There is no doubt that
the evolution of the shopping centre or mall has challenged traditional retail formats
due to the ‘immediate and dramatic’ impact on traditional shopping strips and Central
Business Districts (Reimers and Clulow 2002, p. 15). Samli (1989, p. 62) suggested
‘that the shopping centre is retailing’s answer to changing consumer needs as well as
to the dispersion of the population’. He identified four features that made shopping
centres superior to down towns, which included accessibility, modern and wellplanned
facilities, plentiful parking and coordinated merchandising and promotion.
As Merrilees and Miller (1996, p. 182) pointed out ‘Most Australian shopping strips
suffered at the hands of shopping centres over the 1965-85 period’.
Current trends both in Australia and overseas indicate that the consumer is no longer
satisfied with the ‘be everything to everyone appeal’ and convenience benefits that the
shopping centre or mall has boasted. ‘Much as you saw people shift from downtown
shopping to the malls 50 years ago, people are shifting from the malls to power strips’
(Seckler 2002, p.3). The ‘2002 How America Shops Macro Trends study’ by
Liebmann (2003) discussed the growing needs for consumers of the emotional
benefits of shopping rather than just the practical benefits. ‘Their favourite venues
were those that combined the functional attributes of cleanliness and convenience
with the emotional attributes of a good place to spend browsing. These were places
where they are willing to spend some of their precious time because there was a sense
of adventure, newness and innovation’ (Liebmann 2003, p. 48).
This shift in American consumer preference was echoed in Australia, as between
1996 and 2001 Australians’ preference for shopping centres reduced from 78% to
56% (Honeywill 2001). Today’s consumers are seeking what Merrilees and Miller
(1996) labeled the ‘total shopping experience’ where the merchandise is the core
component of the shopping offer.
Honeywill ( 2001) calls it the ‘urge for the edge’ – the demand for individuality and
authenticity that drives the consumer to avoid contrived and artificial shopping
environments. This shift in trend has benefited many retail shopping strips, many of
which can offer a uniqueness and sense of community that many shopping centres
find hard to replicate.
The sheer size of many shopping centres and their ‘bigger is better’ philosophy can
inconvenience many consumers given the increased time it can now take to shop and
the difficulty in actually locating what you want to buy. The convenience factor is a
powerful one, as suggested by Reimers and Clulow (2002) who traced the rise and fall
of both shopping strips and shopping centres to the consumers’ desire for a
convenient location.
For Local and State governments, it is the economic value and role of shopping strips
that is of particular importance, and their policies and regulations can have
considerable influence over a shopping strips’ existence and future. ‘A successful
local shopping strip or town centre is a critical component of a thriving local
economy. The more consumers spend within a community the more likely the
economy will expand and grow’ (Choe, Pitman and Collins 1997, p. 365). Therefore,
strategies to improve the viability and vitality of local shopping strips are increasingly
important for government. ‘Government sets new directions for retail development
and in particular the future of town centres’ (Tomalin and Pal 1994, p. 55).
In addition many shopping strips require an attractive proposition to attract customers
from outside their local area in order to compete and prosper. This requires the
shopping strips to adopt a marketing orientation which can be particularly difficult for
neighbourhood type strips given their limited budgets, diverse range of stakeholders,
fragmented ownership and complex organisational structures.
A number of models have been developed for the regeneration of shopping strips,
town centres, city centres, down towns, commercial centres and business districts.
While the models are as diverse as their activities and purposes, what is consistent in
all of them is the reliance on partnerships (between private and public sectors) and the
recognition of the important role retail environments have in improving the shopping
environment and wider local area. Implicit also is the generation of funds that allow
these entities to effectively and efficiently function.
The idea of collecting funds for the improvement of Shopping Districts was first
developed in the USA. Business Improvement Districts (BIDS) and Business
Improvement Areas (BIA) emerged in the early 1970’s to combat the decline of
commercial districts.
In Australia, Victoria’s Local Government Act (1989) provided for local councils to
declare a special rate or charge and to specify the wards, groups or users for which the
special rate or charge was declared. These funds are collected by Council and
administered to the Traders or Business Association who are responsible for
expenditure of the funds under the guidance of Council. This allowed local councils to
declare an annual levy or charge on each property within the shopping district or
shopping strip. Traditionally these charges had been collected for the construction of
roads and civil works, however more recently these schemes have become a
significant method for traditional strips to raise funds for the purpose of marketing
and business development.
While there has been a lot of anecdotal evidence hailing the effectiveness of Special
Rates and Charges, there is not a great deal of empirical evidence which relates the
marketing and promotions that have resulted from the this funding. Nor has their
been a deeper examination of the actual marketing activities and processes that this
funding has stimulated. Therefore, this research was designed to gain a greater
understanding of the role and use of Special Rate and Charge Funding to gain an
insight into the marketing structures, activities and processes that are being
undertaken by Victorian Shopping Strips.
METHODOLOGY
In order to obtain the information required for this research a self-completion
questionnaire was mailed to the Centre Co-ordinator of each of the 75 Shopping
Strips funded through special/rates and charges in Victoria. Self-administered
questionaries were used, as there was a great deal of information to be obtained from
the respondents who were geographically dispersed (Bourque and Fielder 2002). It
was felt that this methodology would give the respondents the opportunity to consider
their responses and to gather data and information from other sources such as budgets,
reports, files and plans. An initial list of contacts for the co-ordinators was sourced
from Central Business Centres Victoria (CBCV), and to complete this list an e-mail
was sent to each Local Council’s Economic Development Officer in Victoria
requesting contact details of the relevant shopping strip co-ordinators. One week after
the initial mail out, a reminder letter was sent to all participants. A 49% return rate
ensured a good representation of the total number of shopping strips funded through
Special Rates and Charges in Victoria, with about three quarters of the surveys
coming from suburban strips, about one quarter from inner city strips, and one survey
from the country.
FINDINGS
Reason for Introduction
To understand why the Special Rate/Charge was introduced the co-ordinators were
provided with a list of reasons and asked to select the three that were most applicable
to their shopping strip. As the primary purpose of this funding was for marketing and
business development, it was no great surprise that having money to market the strip
was given as the major reason for instigation of the special rate and/or charge. About
one half of the co-ordinators said it was introduced because of the threat of
competition or because of pressure from traders; about one third said it was instigated
by Council to reduce vacancies or because other shopping strips had them. It was
interesting that shopping strips with less than 100 properties identified the threat of
competition higher than those shopping strips with 100 plus properties.
Funds Raised
The survey indicated that the amount of funds raised per annum varied greatly
according to the size of the strip. On average, shopping strips were collecting about
$74,000 per annum from the Special Rate or Charge. However, this varied from
about $16,000 to $230,000. The Shopping strips with over 100 properties were
raising at least $50,000 pa, while no strips with less than100 properties were raising
less than $50,000 per annum. The following graph highlights the difference between
the large and smaller strips in terms of the amounts raised and therefore the amounts
they had available to spend.
Amount Raised
$110-$230,000
$76-$109,000
$51-$75,000
$26 - $50,000
$16 -$25, 000
Percent
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
No of Properties
Under 100 Properties
100 Plus Properties
65% of the shopping strip co-ordinators indicated that the money collected from the
special rate/charge was their only source of funding. The remaining 35% said they
had received additional financial support and their Local Council was the main source
of this additional funding.
Sufficiency & Effectiveness of Funds
Respondents were asked to indicate on a scale of 1 to 10 how sufficient the funds
were, with 1 being totally insufficient, through to 5 being neither sufficient nor
insufficient, up to 10 being more than sufficient. Not surprisingly, the strips with over
100 properties reported greater percentages of sufficiency than those with fewer than
100 properties, who generally reported that the funds were not sufficient. However,
despite this, the majority of the shopping centre co-ordinators, both from large and
smaller strips indicated that the special rate and charge was effective in facilitating the
marketing activities of the shopping strip, when asked to rate effectiveness on a scale
of 1 to 10.
No of Properties
Under 100 Properties 100 Plus Properties
ME
AN
9
8
7
6
5
4
OVERALL
EFFECTIVENESS -MARKETING
SUFFICENCY FUNDS
Budget Activities
When asked what they were spending their budget on, the two biggest expenditure
items for the Victorian shopping strips were co-ordinators’ wages or contracts, and
promotion implementation. Nearly half of those surveyed indicated that
implementation of promotion activities accounted for 60%-70 % of the total budget
expenditure. The co-ordinators’ salary was the next biggest expenditure item, with
about half of those surveyed indicating that the co-ordinator salary/wages accounted
for up to one quarter of the total budget. Combined, these two budget items were
responsible for between 80 to 90% of most shopping strips’ total budget expenditure.
Approximately two thirds of the shopping centre co-ordinators attributed no actual
expenditure to marketing planning activities, which included market research and the
contracting of professional services. Likewise two thirds of respondents indicated no
expenditure for maintenance.
Marketing Planning
The majority of shopping strips were working with an annual marketing plan (92%)
with approximately three quarters having a business plan (73%). In order to explore
the actual marketing planning processes the Co-ordinators were presented with a 11
step Marketing planning framework (Macdonald, 1989) and asked to indicate the
degree to which their shopping strip addresses each step in planning for their
marketing
The following table identifies the responses to this question.
Marketing Planning Process
Process Addressed in Great
and Moderate
Amount of Detail
Addressed in small and
minimal amount of
detail.
Financial Plan/Budget 95% 3%
Marketing Strategies 89% 8%
Marketing Objectives 85% 30%
SWOT Analysis 81% 16%
Competition Analysis 78% 13%
Evaluation 64% 32%
Customer Analysis 62% 35%
Measurement 62% 35%
Assessment of Internal Capabilities 56% 40%
Analysis of Industry Trends 54% 38%
Setting broad goals objectives for the
strip
49% 49%
The results indicated that a far greater percentage of Shopping strips were addressing
the output orientated marketing objectives and strategies in more detail as compared
to some of the inputs such as analysis of industry trends and competition. There was
also far less focus on setting broader objective s and evaluation.
Marketing Objectives
To understand the role of marketing the respondents were provided with a list of 11
choices of objectives, and asked to choose the three that best described their key
marketing objectives. Attracting local customers and servicing their needs as the
most common objective reflects the community/suburban location of the majority of
the shopping strips in the sample.. The following table illustrates the percentages of
responses for each of the objectives.
Three Key Objectives of Marketing
OBJECTIVE % of CASES
To attract local customers and service their needs 81%
To increase profit for retailers 54%
To build a sense of community and place 49%
To build relationships with our customers and develop
customer loyalty
38%
To re-inforce image and reputation 34%
To attract visitors 27%
To increase foot traffic 16%
To reduce property vacancies 5%
To promote entertaining environment 3%
What is being Achieved?
Respondents were asked the following open ended question “if you had to identify
one or two key elements/activities that the Special Rate and Charge program had
enabled the shopping strip to achieve what would this be?’
One third of those surveyed did not respond to this question. Of those that did Image
and branding (57%) and implementation of promotional activities (47%) were those
most frequently identified. The following comments provide a sample of responses to
this open-ended question.
• “Lifted overall image an business confidence”
• “Created an image and branding”
• “Produced a directory of services and branded the centre”
• “Major branding campaign with launch of website, directory, street banners, t-shirts and other
marketing materials”
• “Consistent branding and corporate and community relationships
• ‘Being able to promote image and variety”
• “Build a sense of community and loyalty with our customers”
• “Engage in seasonal promotions and street festival”
• ‘Undertake major marketing strategy and business planning process”
• “Employment of Centre Co-ordinator”
Promotional Tools
Given the focus on the implementation of promotional activities respondents were
asked to identify their use of certain promotional tools in the last 12 months and rank
their importance to their marketing. The table below demonstrates the results.
Tools Used & Importance of Tools for Marketing
Activity % of Responses
Use of
% of responses
Importance of
Newspaper Advertising 86% 47%
Community Newsletters 78% 40%
Street Festival 70% 50%
Direct Mail 62% 37%
Business Directory 54% 33%
Signs and Banners 54% 30%
Website 43% 20%
Coupons 32% 10%
Radio Advertising 16% 10%
Other 18% 10%
Branding
All but one of the shopping strips indicated they their shopping strip was physically
branded. The following table indicates the methods by which the Shopping Strips
were branded.
Method % of Cases
Logo on all communications 89%
Banners and signage in the shopping strip 75%
Brochures /Flyers and Directories 72%
Website 50%
In store Promotions 42%
Brand Merchandise 12%
Other 11%
Strip not branded 1%
In order to explore branding further respondents were asked to describe what their
image their brand was aiming to communicate.
One third of the shopping centre co-ordinators did not respond to this question and
those that did 35% described how the centre was physically branded rather than what
the actual brand was aiming to communicate.
Target Markets
Most of the sopping strips identified their local community as their key target market.
The results indicated that there was not a great deal of analysis or information
obtained about the segments within the local markets and when there was,
demographic information was mainly used. The shopping strips relied on Councils
and Census data for customer information and there did not appear to be a great deal
of customer information shared amongst businesses within the shopping strips.
DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS
The emergence of shopping centres has presented serious marketing challenges for
many shopping strips and the establishment of funding through Special Rates and
Charges has enabled the shopping strips to respond to this competition by having
money to market their strip. Overall, the research findings showed that for most
shopping strips, the special rate and charge funding was instigated for marketing
purposes, and that it was their only source of annual funding. The importance of this
funding was highlighted by the fact that the funding was primarily used to pay for the
strip co-ordinators’ salaries and the implementation of promotion campaigns.
Wells ( 1991 ) emphasised the need for development and management and promotion
as a response to the increasing pressures faced by Town Centres in the UK.
Many co-ordinators found the funds to be insufficient in providing for the total
marketing and broader business development activities, particularly the smaller strips
with fewer than 100 properties. This insufficiency may relate to the capacity of the
funds to provide for other activities beyond marketing, such as business development,
public advocacy and physical improvements. Despite this most co-ordinators
appeared to be making the best use of the limited funds they had to implement their
promotion strategies, and many rated the effectiveness of the funds for this purpose
highly. Given this it was important to explore the foundations from which the strips’
were developing these promotions, hence the exploration of their marketing planning.
The study identified that the majority of shopping strips were working with an annual
marketing plan. To explore the processes in this planning a framework provided by
McDonald (1989) was used to assess the degree to which each phase in the process
was being addressed.
The analysis indicated that the shopping strips were addressing most of these phases,
however some were getting far more attention than others. For example almost all the
centre co-ordinators indicated that they addressed the actual marketing strategies in a
great amount of detail, whereas only half addressed the assessment of internal
capabilities, analysis of industry trends and the setting of broad objectives for the
shopping strip. This would suggest that they have tended to be more focused on the
what Jain (2000) terms ‘tactical planning’ which concentrates more on the marketing
mix ingredients and the requirements for actioning these. Simkin (1996) also alluded
to the basic nature of many organisations marketing planning, ‘most marketing
planning activity is very basic, founded on little or no marketing intelligence or
formal marketing research’ (Simkin,1996 p. 381).
It would appear that the findings from this study supports Simkins’ (1996) comments
with many of the shopping strips having indicated a far less emphasis on the external
and internal inputs that contribute to the marketing plan process. This however is not
a criticism of their processes, there needs to be recognition that for many shopping
strips the cost and time factors associated with undertaking this strategic analysis
maybe preventing them from addressing these factors in more detail.
The analysis indicated that the main objective of the shopping strip marketing was to
attract local customers and services their needs. The importance of this objective is
highlighted by Choe et al (1997 p.365) with the following comment ‘ As retailers
aggressively seek to attract consumers from greater distances, the survival of the local
community retailers depends on their ability to keep their customers from shopping
outside their local market.’ The majority of the shopping strips in this study were
largely serving local catchments, and therefore there is a significant reliance on the
locals to support these shopping strips. A study by Choe et al (1997) concluded that
the more positive the residents’ attitudes towards the business in their own
community, the less income they will spend outside their own community. This
would support why so many of the Victorian shopping strips identified building a
sense of place and community as another important marketing objective.
A key output of the marketing planing process is the actual outputs and activities that
the planning has been able to achieve. Over two thirds of those surveyed were able to
specifically identify key marketing achievements for their shopping strips. Over half
of these respondents related these achievements to the ability to develop and promote
a collective image to brand the Shopping strip.
Gopal (2003) identified the building of brand and place equity as a key activity of
Business Improvement Districts in the US. In Victoria promotion plays a key role in
the shopping strips marketing mix and the strips are using a variety of tools to make
their customers aware of what they had on offer. Given that the strips’ identified the a
key objective of their marketing was to attract and service local customers it’s no
surprise that newspaper advertising was identified as the most frequently used and
important promotional tool. ‘Local newspapers are fast becoming the most effective
medium for raising brand awareness’ (Rogers 2002) and they are particularly
effective for shopping strips that often share the same catchment as that of the local
paper. The promotional tool that was ranked the most important was festivals which
is interesting given that festivals traditionally do not stimulate spending. Parsons
(2003, p 77) determined that entertainment based promotions were very strong on
increasing a return visit but weak on spending motivation.
Most of shopping strips surveyed were physically branded with logos, banners and
signage. Despite the Centre Co-ordinators indicating a frequent use of branding, very
few could convey the actual image that the brand was aiming to communicate,
preferring to focus on how the strip was physically banded rather than what the
message or point of difference the brand was carrying. There was a greater tendency
to generically brand the shopping strip rather than offer a specific point of difference.
Xiao as citied in (Bennett & Koudelova, 2001) criticisers’ city marketers for using the
same images and phrases regardless of the City or destination being promoted. He
argued that uniqueness should be emphasised in marketing communications. This
‘sameness’ factor could be placing some shopping strips at a disadvantage, given their
branding is not communicating a differentiation from all the other shopping strips.
Consumer trends are indicating a preference for uniqueness and interesting and
engaging shopping experiences, which many shopping strips are strongly positioned
to deliver.
However many of the Victorian shopping strips’ may be perhaps selling themselves
short by not communicating this through their branding and associated promotional
activities.
Inherent in successful branding is the identification of target markets to ensure that
the message the brand is conveying is appealing and being pitched to the right
customers. The results from this study indicated that only half provided a description
of their target markets. This inability to describe their target markets maybe
impacting on the level of market orientation the shopping strip has. Of those shopping
strips that did identify target markets, the local community was identified which is a
fairly general target group. Some strips were a little more specific segmenting by
demographics, for example over 25’s or seniors, but generally the shopping strips did
not provide specific details of their market segments.
It would appear that the shopping strips were mainly relying on demographics to
segment their markets. ‘Numerous researchers have asserted that demographics are
not the best way of looking at markets’ (Samil, 1989, p 137). An understanding of
consumer behaviour to help segment the market as (Merrileess & Miller, 1996 )
suggested is particularly attractive in the retail environment as it gets to the hearts and
minds of why people shop.
IN SUMMARY
There is no doubt that the funding for marketing and promotions that has been
provided through the Local Government legislation over the last 10 years in Victoria
has benefited many shopping strips, however there are issues and challenges which
question how sustainable this current model will be for the future. The diagram
below was developed by Gopal, ( 2003) to illustrate a system of activities for the
sustainable development of Business Improvement Districts in the US. Examination
of this model in light of the Victorian Study findings provides a useful tool to
highlight some of the issues that Victorian Shopping Strips are currently faced with.
Victorian Experience & Constraints
Tier 1
�� Focus on marketing not the physical environment, not a great deal of integration
�� Divergent stakeholders responsibilities and interests makes it difficult to agree on
what the ‘environment should look like
�� Non integration and co-ordination of assets and infrastructure.
Tier 2
�� Difficulty in influencing the retail mix
�� Limited focus on improving the ‘product offer’ ( business development )
�� Marketing capacity and sophistication limited by $$
�� Co-operation required between stakeholders in marketing the entire ‘place’
�� Limited focus on the how to brand as opposed to the why and what
Tier 3
�� Not great commitment to measuring performance
�� Lack of indicators and difficulty in measuring performance.
�� Long term commitment required from stakeholders
Fundamental to overcoming the Victorian issues identified for each of the activities in
Gopal’s (2003) tier model is the improved relationship between all stakeholders and a
more strategic integration of broader elements of the shopping strip environment. It is
the authors’ belief that this cannot be truly achieved with the current financial
framework which focuses mainly on a co-ordinated approach to marketing of the
shopping strip.
The findings of this study support that special rates and charges have largely been
successful in marketing Victorian shopping strips, however if stakeholders wish to
attempt to address these other broader issues then some re-thinking and restructuring
of the current model maybe required. How alternative models may work or be
structured would require a commitment from all stakeholders, particularly local
government who may need to lead the investigation and feasibility of any change.
While the limitations of this research are dominated by the small scale of the research,
both in terms of geography and sample size, there is no doubt that the insights gained
have provided an interesting insight into the issues facing shopping strips as they
strive to market themselves in an increasingly crowded and competitive market place.
Further Details
This paper discusses just one component of the results of the study. Other areas that
were explored included; funding structures and limitations, organisation structures
management and committee roles and responsibilities and barriers to effective
marketing. For further information please contact author, Nicole Maslin.
REFERENCES
Bourque, L.B. and Fielder, E.P., 2002. How to conduct self-administered and Mail Surveys,
2nd Edn, Sage Publications, USA
Choe, S.T., Pitman, G.A., and Collins, F.D., 1997. Proactive retail Strategies based on
consumer attitudes towards community, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, 25, 365-380.
Gopal D, 2003, ‘Promoting Retail to Revitalize Downtown’s: An examination of the Business
Improvement District Idea, Department of urban studies and Planning , Massachusetts
Institute of Technology,p 46
Honeywill, R., 2001. Hip Strips the New Hit, The Age, September 29th, 3.
Liebmann, W., 2003. The end of Retailing as we know it, Shopping Centre World, 32 (2), 48.
McDonald, M 1989, Marketing Plans , Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann
Merrilees, B. and Miller, D., 1996. Retailing Management A Best Practice Approach, RMIT
Press, Collingwood, Australia.
Reimers, V. and Clulow, C., 2002. Retail fortune: does it favour the brave or the convenient?
International Journal of Customer Relationship Management, 5 (1), 15.
Rogers R, 2002, Local Papers Brand Appeal, Marketing Week , June 27th 2002. pp32.
Samli, A C, 1989. Retail Marketing Strategy Planning Implementation and Control,
Greenwood Press, Inc, USA.
Seckler, V., 2002. The New Consumer: Shopping Crossroads of Mass and Class, Fairfield
Publications Inc, New York.
Simkin, L 1996 , People and Processes in Marketing Planning: The benefits of Controlling
Implementation., Journal of Management, Vol,12 p 375-390
Tomalin, C. and Pal, J., 1994. Local Authority Responses to Retail Change, International
Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 22 (6), 51-56.
Wells, 1991, Town Centre Management: A Future for the High Street, Geographical papers
No 109 p 24, Reading, University Reading.