Sport organizations increasingly seek to integrate cause-related marketing (CrM) into their core revenue models, yet little is known about how mandatory CrM-linked fees embedded in prices influence consumer responses. Drawing on utility theory and partitioned pricing literature, we examine whether consumers derive positive marginal utility from compulsory CrM fees and how price presentation shapes perceptions and purchase intentions of spectator sport tickets. Across four experiments conducted in the United States, we test CrM-linked ticket pricing in professional sport settings. The empirical contexts include National Football League franchises, with CrM initiatives tied to both business-process causes and philanthropic causes. Data collections occurred between 2015 and 2018 and samples consist of potential sport consumers (total N approximate to 1,700 across studies). Using between-subjects experimental designs, we manipulate price presentation (all-inclusive vs. partitioned vs. hybrid pricing), CrM fee magnitude, cause type, and organization - cause familiarity. MANCOVA was used to assess differences in purchase intentions, perceived value, and price fairness, while controlling for age, education, income, and brand ID. Results show consumers prefer higher-priced offers that include a modest, clearly articulated CrM fee over lower-priced offers without such fees. These effects hold even when organization-cause familiarity is low and across different cause types. Theoretically, we extend utility theory and partitioned pricing literature by demonstrating positive marginal utility from ethical fee components in sport contexts. Moreover, we reconcile mixed findings on cause-brand fit by showing strong fan identification can offset low cause familiarity. These insights contribute to cause-related sport management literature and offer practical guidance for sport organizations.
原文链接
分享
引用
