06 85_2 Susilowati:tipska.qxd 65 Etty Susilowati*, Mohammad Guntur Ardhita Putra Budiluhur University, Faculty of Economics and Business, International Business and Management Studies, Indonesia Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2020/25(2) Smartphone Brand Loyalty and Consumer Heterogeneity DOI: 10.7595/management.fon.2020.0007 Abstract: 1. Introduction Nowadays, marketing is a very important aspect of a company’s life, without proper marketing strategies of which companies will not be able to enter and maintain the product life cycles. Currently, the marketers face high challenges to take up the appropriate marketing strategies due to a high variety of the products, high customer expectations and rapid industrial growths. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. is a South Korean multi- national electronics company headquartered in Suwon, South Korea. It is the flagship division of the Samsung Group, which accounts for 70% of the group’s revenue in 2012 (Klimes, 2019). It is the world’s second largest information technology company by revenue, after Apple Inc. (Forbes, 2019). Samsung Electronics has as- sembled sales networks in 80 countries and employs around 370,000 people (SHAMS, 2016). Data indicated that in 2015 and 2014, Samsung smartphones had the highest shipment volume and market share com- pared to competitors’ brands such as Apple, Huawei, Lenovo, and Xiaomi. The shipment volumes reached the value of 324.8 million units in 2015, which was higher than Apple (231.5 million units), Huawei (106.6 mil- lion units), Lenovo (74 million units), and Xiaomi (70.8 million units). The market share of Samsung in 2015 reached the value of 22.7 %, which was higher than Apple (16.2%), Huawei (7.4%), Lenovo (5.2%), and Xi- aomi (4.9%). The same condition also applied in 2014 where Samsung still led both in shipment volumes and market share in comparison with the other four brands (IDC, 2016). The high popularity of Samsung smart * Corresponding author: Etty Susilowati, e-mail: ettysslwt@gmail.com Research Question: The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of sales promotion and advertisement on brand association and brand loyalty of Samsung smartphones via the analysis of gender and age as moderating variables. Mo- tivation: The motivation for this study emerges from the fact that the effect of sales promotion and advertisement on brand loyalty have not considered the effects of consumer heterogeneity such as age and gender. Idea: The core idea of this study is to verify the effect of monetary promotion, non-monetary promotion, perceived advertising, and individual atti- tude towards brand association and brand loyalty through the moderate effects of age and gender. Data: This research was carried out in South Jakarta, Indonesia by employing a simple random sampling method and questionnaires distrib- uted to 100 respondents. Tools: Data were analyzed by using Partial Least Square Structural Equation (PLS-SEM) method and the SmartPLS 3.0 software. The PLS-SEM was performed with a two-step approach by analyzing the outer and inner model, afterwards followed by a multi-group analysis to analyze moderating effects of both variables of gender and age. Findings: The findings indicate that non-monetary promotion and individual attitude towards advertising significantly af- fect brand association while brand association significantly affects brand loyalty. Gender and age-specific analyses indi- cate that gender differences significantly moderate the influence of individual attitude towards advertising on brand association and age differences significantly moderate the effect of monetary promotion on brand association. Moreover, women, men, younger and older consumers behave differently towards sales promotion. Contribution: This study con- tributes to the literature by adding empirical evidences in terms of how different consumers respond to sales promotion and advertising as well as further effects on brand association and brand loyalty. Keywords: sales promotion, advertisement, brand association, brand loyalty, age, gender JEL Classification: M31, M37 phones in Indonesia is not separated from the role of sales promotion and advertising conducted by the com- pany. The company claims to control 50% of the smartphone market share in Indonesia. A majority of their consumers are loyal consumers (Wardani, 2019). Some marketing strategies undertaken by this company to maintain its market share, including conducting market research, developing related business ecosystems such as providing operator services and developing applications, as well as building partnerships with retail business partners to distribute its products (Arum, 2013). Previous studies have proven positive relationships between sales promotion and advertisement on brand association and brand loyalty (Valette-Florence, Guizani, & Merunka, 2011; Buil, De Chernatony, & Martínez, 2013; Boyland, & Halford, 2013). In this study, we examine the effect of sales promotion and advertisement on brand associations and brand loyalty of Sam- sung smartphones through an analysis of gender and age as moderating variables. This is because the two variables have been verified to significantly affect consumer behavior in the prior studies (Verhaeghen, Mar- coen, & Goossens, 1993; Loo, 2000; Finucane, Slovic, Hibbard, Peters, Mertz, & MacGregor, 2002; Strough, Cheng, & Swenson (2002); Ellen, Hess Thomas, Daniel, & Corinne, 2007; Bruine de Bruin, Parker, & Fis- chhoff, 2007; Sun, Fang, & Lim, 2012; Huang & Benyoucef, 2017). Prior studies have not considered the ef- fects that resulted from consumer heterogeneity (age and gender). Therefore, this study contributes to the literature in adding empirical evidence to how male and female consumers as well as younger and the older groups respond to sales promotions and advertisements offered by companies and the effects on creating brand associations and brand loyalty. The remaining part of this study is organized as follows: we will explain the literature review, the hypotheses development, and the proposed structural model in the next section. In the third section, we will further explain the sampling, measurements and data analysis, followed by the find- ings and discussion in the fourth section and finally with the conclusions of the study. 2. Literature Review This section will briefly describe the variables used in this study based on the theories and previous stud- ies. It is used as the rationalization for the hypothesis development and the structural model. The variables are monetary and non-monetary sales promotion, perceived advertising, brand associations, brand loyalty, as well as gender and age as moderating variables. 2.1 Sales promotion Sales promotion is one of the five aspects of the promotional mix which the other four aspects are adver- tising, personal selling, direct marketing and publicity or public relations (Rowley, 1998). Sales promotion can be undertaken in the form of product display, contest, voucher, free product, gift, discount price, and rebate (Tellis, 1998). All these tools are used to increase product sales in the short run (Kotler & Amstrong, 1997; Kotler & Amstrong, 2008) while sales promotion is proved to increase demand and positively affect consumer purchasing behavior (Greenleaf & Lehmann, 1995; Laroche, Kim, & Zhou, 1996; Thomas & Menon, 2007; Santini, Sampaio, Perin, & Vieira, (2015); Luxton & Brito, 2015). On the contrary, this variable proved to have positive and negative effects on brand equity. Monetary sales promotion such as discounts or coupons is proved to negatively affect brand equity (Yoo, Donthu, & Lee, 2000). This is because most con- sumers set the price as one indicator of product quality. Providing discounts or coupons will result in price reductions and decline the consumers’ perceptions of product quality (Agarwal & Teas, 2002; DelVecchio, Henard, & Freling, 2006). Non-monetary sales promotion, however, has the opposite effect in which the pro- vision of free products and gifts proves to increase the brand’s product equity (Chu & Keh, 2006; Palazón and Delgado-Ballester, 2009; Buil et al., 2013). According to the above explanations, the hypotheses that will be tested in this study are: Hypothesis 1. Monetary promotion has a negative effect on brand association Hypothesis 2. Non-monetary promotion has a positive effect on brand association 2.2 Advertising Advertising is a form of non-personal marketing communication that gives information about products and services or ideas through various media such as newspapers, magazines, television, radio, outdoor adver- tising, or online media such as search results, blogs, or websites (Bovee, 1992). Advertising is differentiated from public relations in that an advertiser usually pays for and has control over the message. It is differenti- ated from personal selling in that the message is non-personal, i.e., not directed to a particular individual. Advertising is communicated through various mass media. Previous studies have been carried out to ana- 66 Etty Susilowati, Mohammad Guntur Ardhita Putra 2020/25(2) lyze a broader impact of these variables on attracting consumers’ attention (Nettelhorst & Brannon, 2012), increasing sales (Kotler & Amstrong, 2010; Akanbi & Adeyeye, 2011), and affecting consumer attitudes to- wards products (Jeong & Jang, 2016 ; Shareef et al., 2017; Stroup & Branstetter, 2018), whereas according to Hasan (2010) and Goodrich (2014), the gender difference also serves as a moderating role in influenc- ing consumer behavioral intention. To examine the effect of advertising on brand equity, Buil et al. (2013) uti- lizes perceived advertising and individual attitudes towards advertising. Perceived advertising is the consumer’s perception of how much advertising the company is doing. The more advertising applied, the more inheriting a brand in the minds of consumers. Meanwhile, the consumer’s perception of the attributes and brand quality of products affects the individual attitudes towards advertising (Buil et al., 2013). Accord- ing to the above explanations, the hypotheses that will be tested in this study are: Hypothesis 3. Perceived advertising has a positive effect on brand association Hypothesis 4. Individual attitude towards advertising has a positive effect on brand association 2.3 Brand associations and brand loyalty Brand association and brand loyalty are elements of the brand equity. These two variables are the two high- est dimensions of brand equity (Aaker, 2009). Brand association is a collection of information and impres- sions attached to a consumer’s memory of a particular brand (Aaker, 2009) while brand loyalty is the commitment of consumers to make a consistent purchase of a particular brand of product or service with- out being affected by the influence of a competitor’s brand (Oliver, 2014). Brand equity is a set of branded assets that can subtract the value provided by the products or services to companies and customers (Aaker, 2009). Brand association and brand loyalty have significantly affected brand equity (Yoo, et al., 2000). Brand association is also sometimes considered as brand awareness (Yoo et al., 2000). The positive relationship of brand association and brand loyalty has been proven by Keller & Lehmann (2003), Pappu, Quester, & Cooksey, (2005), & Buil et al., 2013). In addition, there is a positive relationship between sales promotion, advertisement and brand equity (Valette-Florence et al., 2011; Buil et al., 2013; Boyland, & Halford, 2013). The results of prior studies indicate a positive relationship of sales promotion and advertising on brand eq- uity. According to the above explanations, the hypothesis that will be tested in this study is: Hypothesis 5. Brand association has a positive effect on brand loyalty 2.4 Gender and age considerations Gender and age have been proven to affect consumer purchasing decisions (Sun et al., 2012; Huang & Beny- oucef, 2017). When purchasing, women tend to access all information related to the product or service they want to buy, whereas males only access some of the information that is perceived as trustworthy and im- portant (Yang & Chen, 2010). In addition, females are more affected by others and environments than males (Tamres, Janicki, & Helgeson, 2002). Mazumdar & Papatla (1995), Harmon & Hill (2003), and Kwon & Kwon (2007) prove that women are affected by the type of promotion that affects transactional prices such as coupons, but more likely to be affected by the type of promotion affecting acquisition values such as rebates and non-monetary promotions. Besides, females are affected by more verbal than visual advertisements (Pu- trevu, 2014). In addition to gender, another factor that significantly affects purchasing decisions is consumer age. Some research suggests that the ability of consumers to make rational decisions is diminished in the older group (Verhaeghen et al.,1993; Loo, 2000; Ellen et al., 2007) while other studies suggest that the older group make more rational and intuitive decisions than the younger group (Bruine de Bruin et al., 2007). Also, the older group is more likely to delegate decisions than the younger group (Finucane et al., 2002; Strough et al., 2002). According to the above explanations, the hypotheses that will be tested are: Hypothesis 6a. The effect of monetary promotion on brand association is moderated by gender Hypothesis 6b. The effect of non-monetary promotion on brand association is moderated by gender Hypothesis 6c. The effect of perceived advertising on brand association is moderated by gender Hypothesis 6d. The effect of individual attitude on brand association is moderated by gender Hypothesis 6e. The effect of brand association on brand loyalty is moderated by gender Hypothesis 7a. The effect of monetary promotion on brand association is moderated by age Hypothesis 7b. The effect of non-monetary promotion on brand association is moderated by age Hypothesis 7c. The effect of perceived advertising on brand association is moderated by age Hypothesis 7d. The effect of individual attitude on brand association is moderated by age Hypothesis 7e. The effect of brand association on brand loyalty is moderated by age 67 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2020/25(2) 3. Methodology 3.1 Sampling and measurements Questionnaires with five-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree) were distributed to 130 smartphone owners in South Jakarta, Indonesia. The samples were selected through random sampling method and the questionnaires were distributed by using google forms from August until December 2018. Sales promotions are segmented into monetary and non-monetary promotions following Buil et al. (2013). Monetary promotions consist of price discounts (X1, X2, X3) and cashbacks (X4, X5, X6) while non-mone- tary promotions consist of free items (X7, X8) and gifts (X9). In addition, advertising is segmented into per- ceived advertising and individual attitudes (Buil et al., 2013). Perceived advertising consists of varieties of online advertising (X10) and advertising media (X11) while individual attitudes consist of the capabilities of commercial TV smartphones to be remembered by consumers (X12), the ability of the smartphone company promoting the advantages of the smartphones in television advertising (X13), and the uniqueness of smart- phone advertising (X14). Brand association is measured through the credibility of Samsung company (X15), the clear image of the type person who uses the brand (X16), whether the brand has a personality and is in- teresting (X17). Finally, brand loyalty is measured through the willingness of consumers to buy Samsung smartphones (X18), the brand as consumers’ first choices, and the superiority of the brand compared to other brands, whether Samsung smartphones are the first consumer choice (X19), whether consumer prefers Samsung smartphones to other brands (X20) (Keller & Lehmann, 2003; Pappu et al., 2005; Buil et al., 2013). More information can be found in Appendix A.1. The structural model is shown in Figure 1 below. Note: —- moderating effects Figure 1: The structural model 3.2 Data Analysis Data analysis was performed by using Partial Least Square Structural Equation (PLS-SEM) method and the SmartPLS 3.0 software. The use of this method is selected precisely because of the relatively small number of respondents causing covariance-based SEM analysis not possible to be applied. The PLS-SEM analysis was per- formed with a two-step approach by analyzing the outer model (evaluation of measurement model) and followed by analyzing the inner model (Yamin & Kurniawan, 2011). First, the PLS-SEM analysis is performed on all data sets, followed by a multi-group analysis to analyze moderating effects of both variables of gender and age. 4. Findings 4.1 Respondents characteristics In this study, we distributed questionnaires to 130 respondents. However, only 100 data were used since 30 respondents did not have any experience in using a Samsung Smartphone. The respondents sample con- sisted of university students (51%), employees (26%), high school students (18%), and others (5%) in South 68 Etty Susilowati, Mohammad Guntur Ardhita Putra 2020/25(2) Monetary promotions Individual attitudes Non-Monetary promotions Perceived advertising X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X8 X6 X7 X14 X9 X10 X11 X12 X13 Brand associations Brand Loyalty X15 X16 X17 X19 X20 X18 Gender Age Jakarta. As many as 52% of respondents were women, while the other 48% were men. Based on age, 57% were aged 21 to 30, 40% were aged less than 20, and 3% were aged 31 to 40. As many as 56% earn less than Rp 1,500,000, 25% between Rp 1,500,000 to Rp 2,500,000, 10% between Rp 2,500,000 to Rp 3,500,000, 6% between Rp 3,500,000 to Rp 4,500,000, and 3% more than Rp 4,500,000. 4.2 PLS-SEM results The first analysis of PLS-SEM is an outer model analysis that is by evaluating the measurement model (Yamin & Kurniawan, 2011). This evaluation is performed by looking at the result of convergent and discriminant va- lidity. The result indicates that convergent validity has been attained. All values of factor loadings are > 0.50 and t-statistics are > 2.0. Moreover, the value of composite reliability and cronbach’s alpha of all latent vari- ables are > 0.70. Finally, the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) value of all indicators are > 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) (Table 1). Table 1: Results of measurement model Note: *** p<0.01; **p<0.05; *p<0.10 Source: processed data The next evaluation is to assess discriminant validity by looking at the cross loadings of each manifest vari- able with the latent variables. The model is deduced to have good discriminant validity when the correlation between the manifest variable is higher against the latent variables in comparison with the other latent vari- ables (Yamin & Kurniawan, 2011). Table 2 summed up that the condition has been attained. 69 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2020/25(2) Latent variables Manifest variables Standardized regression coefficients Average Variance Extracted (AVE) Composite reliability Cronbach’s Alpha Rho A Monetary promotion X1 0.769*** 0.525 0.868 0.818 0.831 X2 0.636*** X3 0.736*** X4 0.719*** X5 0.739*** X6 0.739*** Non-monetary promotion X7 0.798*** 0.723 0.887 0.813 0.848 X8 0.872*** X9 0.879*** Perceived advertising X10 0.928*** 0.748 0.855 0.679 0.790 X11 0.796*** Individual attitude towards advertising X12 0.883*** 0.710 0.880 0.796 0.812 X13 0.781*** X14 0.860*** Brand association X15 0.935*** 0.816 0.930 0.887 0.901 X16 0.863*** X17 0.911*** Brand loyalty X18 0.895*** 0.748 0.878 0.790 0.800 X19 0.856*** X20 0.764*** Table 2: Cross loadings results Source: processed data The second analysis of PLS-SEM is the inner model analysis by evaluating the structural model (Yamin & Kur- niawan, 2011). This evaluation is performed by looking at the path coefficients, R-square values, and multi- collinearity between variables. Non-monetary promotion and individual attitude towards advertising significantly affect brand associations (coef. = 0.370; p-value= 0.05 and coef. = 0.207; p-value= 0.05, respectively). There- fore, hypotheses 2 and 4 are statistically supported. Non-monetary promotion has a greater effect on brand association than individual attitude towards advertising. In contrast, monetary promotion and perceived ad- vertising do not significantly affect brand association. Furthermore, brand association significantly affects brand loyalty (coef. = 0.843; p-value= 0.01). Therefore hypothesis 5 is statistically supported (Table 3). The R-square values indicates that the value of brand association is 40.1 % and the brand loyalty is 71.1 %. According to Latan & Ramli (2013), the values above 0.40 and 0.75 denote moderate and strong models, respectively. The result of Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values all variables are < 3 indicate the absence of multicollinearity. Table 3: Path coefficients Source: processed data Notes: *** p<0.01; **p<0.05; *p<0.10 70 Etty Susilowati, Mohammad Guntur Ardhita Putra 2020/25(2) Monetary promotion Non-monetary promotion Perceived advertising Individual attitudes towards advertising Brand association Brand loyalty X1 0.769 0.391 0.333 0.309 0.432 0.408 X2 0.636 0.236 0.261 0.184 0.253 0.292 X3 0.736 0.423 0.201 0.123 0.315 0.352 X4 0.719 0.555 0.195 0.312 0.333 0.395 X5 0.739 0.570 0.272 0.418 0.355 0.415 X6 0.739 0.586 0.285 0.319 0.333 0.392 X7 0.457 0.798 0.222 0.262 0.345 0.318 X8 0.539 0.872 0.156 0.174 0.449 0.417 X9 0.615 0.879 0.317 0.335 0.547 0.499 X10 0.382 0.285 0.928 0.620 0.420 0.455 X11 0.207 0.180 0.796 0.340 0.258 0.261 X12 0.367 0.290 0.457 0.883 0.374 0.438 X13 0.188 0.247 0.445 0.781 0.318 0.332 X14 0.406 0.240 0.563 0.860 0.425 0.415 X15 0.436 0.542 0.366 0.452 0.935 0.805 X16 0.394 0.424 0.327 0.304 0.863 0.647 X17 0.449 0.488 0.408 0.438 0.911 0.815 X18 0.504 0.492 0.448 0.547 0.776 0.895 X19 0.338 0.385 0.259 0.326 0.693 0.856 X20 0.473 0.364 0.382 0.297 0.650 0.764 Structural path Direct effect Indirect effect Total effect Monetary promotion -> Brand association 0.102 - 0.102 Monetary promotion -> Brand loyalty - 0.086 0.086 Non-monetary promotion -> Brand association 0.370 - 0.370** Non-monetary promotion -> Brand loyalty - 0.312 0.312** Perceived advertising -> Brand association 0.147 - 0.147 Perceived advertising -> Brand loyalty - 0.124 0.124 Individual attitude towards advertising -> Brand association 0.207 - 0.207** Individual attitude towards advertising -> Brand loyalty - 0.175 0.175** Brand association -> Brand loyalty 0.843 - 0.843*** The relationship of all variables is presented in Figure 2 below. Figure 2: Structural result of PLS-SEM 4.3 Moderating effects analyses To capture the moderating effects of gender and age, Partial Least Square Multi Group Analysis (PLS-MGA) was applied to the dataset following Henseler, Ringle, & Sinkovics (2009) and Hew, Badaruddin, & Moorthy (2017). As proposed by Hew et al. (2017), 5000 bootstrapping samples were used for robust group com- parison results. The results of PLS-MGA with gender as moderating variable are summed up in Table 4. Gender differences are judged as significant if P-value > 0.90 (Hew et al., 2017). Gender differences signif- icantly moderate the effect of individual attitude towards advertising on brand association while the effect is relatively higher in women (coef. = 0.374; p-value= 0.05 and coef.= 0.048; p-value= 0.05, respectively). Therefore, hypothesis 6d is supported. The R-square values of brand associations and brand loyalty are 45.8 % and 73.7 %, respectively. Table 4: PLS-MGA results of gender as a moderating variable Source: processed data Notes: *** p<0.01; **p<0.05; *p<0.10 Furthermore, the result of PLS-MGA with age as a moderating variable is summed up in Table 5. Consumer age is segmented into two; less than and over 20 years of age. The age differences significantly moderate the influence of monetary promotion on brand association in which the effect of monetary promotion is pos- itive for the the older group (coef.= 0.072; p-value= 0.01 and coef.= 0.424; p-value= 0.01, respectively). Be- 71 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2020/25(2) 0.102 0.370 0.207** 0.935 0.863 0.911 0.769 0.843*** 0.895 0.856 0.764 0.798 0.872 0.879 0.928 0.796 0.883 0.781 0.860 0.769 0.636 0.736 0.719 0.739 0.739 Monetary promotion Individual attitude Non-Monetary promotion Perceived advertising X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X8 X6 X7 X14 X9 X10 X11 X12 X13 Brand associations Brand Loyalty X15 X16 X17 X19 X20 X18 Hypotheses Paths Men Women Path coef.- differences P- Value H6a Monetary promotion -> Brand association -0.015 0.027 0.041 0.563 H6b Non-Monetary promotion -> Brand association 0.623*** 0.311** 0.313 0.102 H6c Perceived advertising -> Brand association 0.242** 0.188 0.054 0.420 H6d Individual attitude -> Brand association 0.048 0.374** 0.326 0.935 H6e Brand association -> Brand loyalty 0.850*** 0.858*** 0.008 0.575 sides, age differences also significantly moderate the effect of individual attitude towards advertising on brand association while the negative effects are found in the older group (coef.= 0.290; p-value= 0.10) and positive in the younger group (coef.= 0.249; p-value= 0.10). Hence hypotheses 7a and 7d are statistically supported. The R-square values of brand association and brand loyalty are 43 % and 72.3 %, respectively. Table 5: PLS-MGA results of age as a moderating variable Source: processed data Notes: *** p<0.01; **p<0.05; *p<0.10 5. Discussion According to the empirical analysis results, it is proved that non-monetary promotion and individual attitude towards advertising significantly affect brand association of Samsung smartphones. Non-monetary promo- tion has a positive effect on brand association. The result has supported Chu & Keh (2006), Palazón & Del- gado-Ballester (2009), as well as Buil et al. (2013). In contrast, monetary promotion has no significant effect on brand association. Individual attitude towards advertising also has a positive effect on brand association of Samsung smartphones. The result has supported Buil et al. (2013) and Kotler & Keller (2007). There are three key factors to consider, namely 1) the quality of the advertised message, 2) the way the message is delivered, and 3) the frequency of the message delivered. To that end, a more qualified, creative and at- tractive advertisement will influence consumers and brand association (Moorthy & Hawkins, 2005; Keller, Parameswaran, & Jacob, 2011). Perceived advertising including media and frequency of advertising does not significantly affect brand association of Samsung smartphones. The empirical results also indicate that brand association has a positive effect on brand loyalty. The result has supported Keller & Lehmann (2003), Pappu et al. (2005), & Buil et al. (2013). Furthermore, the result of empirical analysis by incorporating gender as moderating variable indicates that, from the five hypotheses tested, only the effect of individual attitude towards advertising towards brand as- sociation is moderated by the differences between men and women (hypothesis 6d) while individual attitude towards advertising has no effect against brand association in men. Moreover, the results obtained by using age as a moderating variable indicate that the differences of consumer age only moderate the effect of mon- etary promotions on brand associations (hypothesis 7a) while in younger consumers the effect of monetary promotion is not significant to brand association. In addition, consumer age differences also moderate the effect of individual attitude towards advertising on brand association (hypothesis 7d) in which the effect of individual attitude is not significant to younger consumers. Overall results indicate that gender and age differences do not moderate the effect of sales promotion and advertising on brand association nor the effect of brand association on brand loyalty. Women, men, younger and older consumers behave differently towards sales promotion and advertising as suggested by Hew et al. (2017). Men are more affected by non-monetary promotion than women. Conversely, although the result is not significant at p-value 0.10, the difference in coefficient of monetary promotion indicates that women are more affected by this type of promotion while the coefficient is negative in men. The results are consis- tent with Mazumdar & Papatla (1995) and Harmon & Hill (2003) that women are more affected by monetary promotions, including coupons. The plausible explanation is due to the role of women as the person re- sponsible for the family financially, so that they tend to spend the money with full consideration. However, Harmon & Hill (2003) prove that the effect of non-monetary promotion may differ on the type of pro- motions provided. For example, rebates are more gender neutral than coupons. More rebates are given for non-grocery products. In this study, the monetary effect covers price reduction, cashback (rebates) and we 72 Etty Susilowati, Mohammad Guntur Ardhita Putra 2020/25(2) Hypotheses Paths Age < 20 Age > 20 Path coef.- differences P-Value H7a Monetary promotion -> Brand association -0.072 0.424*** 0.495 0.951 H7b Non-Monetary promotion -> Brand association 0.492* 0.383** 0.109 0.388 H7c Perceived advertising -> Brand association 0.133 0.286 0.153 0.707 H7d Individual attitude towards advertising -> Brand association 0.249 -0.290* 0.539 0.034 H7e Brand association -> Brand loyalty 0.857*** 0.862*** 0.004 0.549 surprisingly find that women tend to be more affected by this kind of monetary promotions. Non-monetary in this study includes additional items and gifts. Kwon & Kwon (2007) further mentions that women and men respond differently to certain types of promotions as they refer to female and masculine identity. Female identity is more easily affected by transaction value, whereas masculine identity is more affected by acqui- sition utility. Therefore, men are more affected by rebates and non-monetary promotions than women. Furthermore, empirical analysis indicates that the younger group is more affected by non-monetary pro- motions than the older group. In contrast, monetary promotions only affect the older group. Lambert-Pan- draud, Laurent, & Lapersonne (2005) suggest that the older group is more loyal to brands than the younger group. It causes the younger group to be more price sensitive than older consumers. In addition, the older group tends to have higher income (Lee, 1997). However, surprisingly in this study, we find the opposite – that non-monetary promotion highly affects the younger group. It is because the younger group in this study includes consumers less than 20 years old and most of consumers at this age level are high school and uni- versity students who have not made their own income. This consumer group uses their parents’ money to make purchases. Therefore, they are more non price elastic in comparison with older consumers. This study provides information to the smartphone managers of the powerful effect of non-monetary pro- motions and individual attitudes in shaping brand associations that will ultimately shape consumer loyalty. The effect of promotion in the form of free items and gifts on consumer brand equity is relatively higher than on monetary promotions such as discounts, rebates, or coupons. In addition, the effect of ad quality and its creativity is higher than either the media employed or the frequency of advertising given. The results of this study will be useful for managers in determining the appropriate type of promotions based on consumers’ gender and ages. Men are more influenced by non-monetary promotions while women are otherwise. REFERENCES [1] Aaker, D. A. (2009). Managing brand equity. Simon and Schuster. [2] Agarwal, S., & Teas, R. K. (2002). Cross-national applicability of a perceived quality model. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 11(4), 213-236. [3] Akanbi, P. A., & Adeyeye, T. C. (2011). The association between advertising and sales volume: a case study of nigerian bottling company plc. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sci- ences, 2(2), 117-123. [4] Arum, N. S. (2013). Ini 4 strategi Samsung pertahankan posisi no.1. Retrieved from: https://industri.bis- nis.com/read/20131003/105/166841/ini-4-strategi-samsung-pertahankan-posisi-no1 (5 September 2019). [5] Bovée, C.L. 1992. Contemporary advertising. William F. Arens. [6] Boyland, E. J., & Halford, J. C. (2013). Television advertising and branding. Effects on eating behaviour and food preferences in children. Appetite, 62, 236-241. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2012.01.032 [7] Bruine de Bruin, W., Parker, A. M., & Fischhoff, B. (2007). Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. Journal of personality and social psychology, 92(5), 938. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.938 [8] Buil, I., De Chernatony, L., & Martínez, E. (2013). Examining the role of advertising and sales promotions in brand equity creation. Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 115-122. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.030 [9] Chu, S., & Keh, H. T. (2006). Brand value creation: Analysis of the interbrand-business week brand value rankings. Marketing Letters, 17(4), 323-331. DOI: 10.1007/s11002-006-9407-6 73 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2020/25(2) tIn this study, we examine the relationship between sales promotion and advertising to brand association and brand loy- alty by taking into consideration gender and age as moderating variables. The empirical results indicate that non-mone- tary promotion and individual attitude towards advertising significantly affect brand association. Brand association significantly affects brand loyalty. Gender and age-specific analysis indicates that gender differences only significantly moderate the effect of individual attitude towards advertising on brand association while age differences only significantly moderate the effect of monetary promotion on brand association. Separate analyses indicate that women, men, younger and older consumers behave differently towards sales promotions and advertising, that men and the older groups are more affected by non-monetary promotions while women and the younger groups are more affected by non-monetary pro- motions. The limitations of this study are in terms of a relatively small number of samples. Using large samples for further research is strongly recommended to gain broader representation in each gender and age group. Conclusion [10] DelVecchio, D., Henard, D. H., & Freling, T. H. (2006). The effect of sales promotion on post-promotion brand preference: A meta-analysis. Journal of retailing, 82(3), 203-213. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretai.2005.10.001 [11] Ellen, P., Hess Thomas, M., Daniel, V., & Corinne, A. (2007). Adult age differences in dual information processes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(1), 1-23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00025.x [12] Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50. DOI: 10.2307/3151312 [13] Finucane, M. L., Slovic, P., Hibbard, J. H., Peters, E., Mertz, C. K., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). Aging and decision-making competence: An analysis of comprehension and consistency skills in older versus younger adults considering health-plan options. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(2), 141-164. DOI: 10.1002/bdm.407 [14] Forbes. (2019). The largest technology companies In 2019: Apple reigns as smartphones slip and cloud services thrive. Retrieved from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanponciano/2019/05/15/worlds- largest-tech-companies-2019/#3d33ebe2734f (4 September 2019). [15] Goodrich, K. (2014). The gender gap: Brain-processing differences between the sexes shape atti- tudes about online advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 54(1), 32-43. DOI: 10.2501/JAR-54-1- 032-043 [16] Greenleaf, E.A., & Lehmann, D.R. (1995). Reasons for substantial delay in consumer decision making. J. Consum. Res. 22, 186–199, September. [17] Harmon, S. K., & Jeanne Hill, C. (2003). Gender and coupon use. Journal of Product & Brand Man- agement, 12(3), 166-179. DOI: 10.1108/10610420310476924 [18] Hasan, B. (2010). Exploring gender differences in online shopping attitude. Computers in Human Be- havior, 26(4), 597-601. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.12.012 [19] Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In New challenges to international marketing (pp. 277-319). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. [20] Hew, J. J., Badaruddin, M. N. B. A., & Moorthy, M. K. (2017). Crafting a smartphone repurchase deci- sion making process: Do brand attachment and gender matter?. Telematics and Informatics, 34(4), 34- 56. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2016.12.009 [21] Huang, Z., & Benyoucef, M. (2017). The effects of social commerce design on consumer purchase de- cision-making: An empirical study. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 25, 40-58. DOI: 10.1016/j.elerap.2017.08.003 [22] IDC. (2016). Smartphone vendor. Retrieved from: https://www.idc.com/promo/smartphone-market- share/vendor (31 May 2018). [23] Jeong, E., & Jang, S. S. (2016). Imagine yourself being healthy: The mental simulation effect of adver- tisements on healthy menu promotion. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 53, 81-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.11.005 [24] Keller, K. L., & Lehmann, D. R. (2003). How do brands create value?. Marketing management, 12(3), 26- 26. [25] Keller, K. L., Parameswaran, M. G., & Jacob, I. (2011). Strategic brand management: Building, measur- ing, and managing brand equity. Pearson Education India. [26] Klimes. (2019). Samsung electronics. Retrieved from: http://www.klimes.eu/products/passive-compo- nents/samsung-electronics-4.html (4 September 2019). [27] Kotler, P & Armstrong, G. (1997). Marketing an introduction. New Jersey: Prentice Hall International 4th edition. [28] Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2007). Marketing management 12. Vyd, Praha. [29] Kotler, P., & Armstrong. (2008). Principles of Marketing 12th edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. [30] Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2010). Principles of marketing. Pearson education. [31] Kwon, K. N., & Kwon, Y. J. (2007). Demographics in sales promotion proneness: a socio-cultural ap- proach. ACR North American Advances. [32] Lambert-Pandraud, R., Laurent, G., & Lapersonne, E. (2005). Repeat purchasing of new automobiles by older consumers: Empirical evidence and interpretations. Journal of Marketing,69(2), 97-113. [33] Laroche, M., Kim, C., & Zhou, L. (1996). Brand familiarity and confidence as determinants of purchase intention: An empirical test in a multiple brand context. Journal of business Research, 37(2), 115-120. [34] Latan, H., & Ramli, N. A. (2013). The results of partial least squares-structural equation modelling analy- ses (PLS-SEM). Retrieved from SSRN 2364191. [35] Lee, R. A. (1997). The youth bias in advertising. American Demographics, 19(1), 46–49. [36] Loo, R. (2000). A psychometric evaluation of the general decision-making style inventory. Personality and individual differences, 29(5), 895-905. DOI: 10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00241-X [37] Luxton, S., & Brito, P. Q. (2015). The Role of Sales Promotion: A Multi-Cultural Comparison between Aus- tralia and Portugal. In Proceedings of the 1998 Multicultural Marketing Conference (pp. 121-126). Springer, Cham. 74 Etty Susilowati, Mohammad Guntur Ardhita Putra 2020/25(2) [38] Mazumdar, T., & Papatla, P. (1995). Gender difference in price and promotion response. Pricing Strat- egy & Practice, 3(1), 21. [39] Moorthy, S., & Hawkins, S. A. (2005). Advertising repetition and quality perception. Journal of Business Research, 58(3), 354-360. DOI: 10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00108-5 [40] Nettelhorst, S. C., & Brannon, L. A. (2012). The effect of advertisement choice on attention. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 683-687. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.015 [41] Oliver, R. L. (2014). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. Routledge. [42] Palazon, M., & Delgado-Ballester, E. (2009). Effectiveness of price discounts and premium promo- tions. Psychology & Marketing, 26(12), 1108-1129. DOI: 10.1002/mar.20315 [43] Pappu, R., Quester, P. G., & Cooksey, R. W. (2005). Consumer-based brand equity: improving the meas- urement–empirical evidence. Journal of Product & Brand Management,14(3), 143-154. DOI: 10.1108/10610420510601012 [44] Putrevu, S. (2014). Effects of mood and elaboration on processing and evaluation of goal-framed ap- peals. Psychology & Marketing, 31(2), 134-146. DOI: 10.1002/mar.20682 [45] Rowley,J. (1998). Promotion and Marketing Communications in the Information. Library Review, 47(8), 383-387. DOI: 10.1108/00242539810239543 [46] Santini, F. D. O., Sampaio, C. H., Perin, M. G., & Vieira, V. A. (2015). An analysis of the influence of dis- count sales promotion in consumer buying intent and the moderating effects of attractiveness. Revista de Administração (São Paulo), 50(4), 416-431. DOI: 10.5700/rausp1210 [47] SHAMS. (2016). Samsung Company. Retrieved from: http://www.shams.co.com/en/partner-compa- nies/samsung-company/ (4 April 2018). [48] Strough, J., Cheng, S., & Swenson, L. M. (2002). Preferences for collaborative and individual everyday problem solving in later adulthood. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26(1), 26-35. DOI: 10.1080/01650250143000337 [49] Stroup, A. M., & Branstetter, S. A. (2018). Effect of e-cigarette advertisement exposure on intention to use e-cigarettes in adolescents. Addictive behaviors, 82, 1-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.02.021 [50] Sun, Y., Fang, Y., & Lim, K. H. (2012). Understanding sustained participation in transactional virtual com- munities. Decision Support Systems, 53(1), 12-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2011.10.006 [51] Tamres, L. K., Janicki, D., & Helgeson, V. S. (2002). Sex differences in coping behavior: A meta-analytic review and an examination of relative coping. Personality and social psychology review, 6(1), 2-30. DOI: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0601_1 [52] Tellis, G. J. (1998). Advertising and sales promotion strategy. Prentice Hall. [53] Thomas, M., & Menon, G. (2007). When internal reference prices and price expectations diverge: The role of confidence. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(3), 401-409. [54] Valette-Florence, P., Guizani, H., & Merunka, D. (2011). The impact of brand personality and sales pro- motions on brand equity. Journal of Business Research, 64(1), 24-28. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.09.015 [55] Verhaeghen, P., Marcoen, A., & Goossens, L. (1993). Facts and fiction about memory aging: A quanti- tative integration of research findings. Journal of gerontology, 48(4), 157-171. DOI: 10.1093/geronj/48.4.p157 [56] Wardani, A. S. (2019). Samsung Kuasai 66 Persen Pasar Smartphone Premium di Indonesia. Retrieved from: https://www.liputan6.com/tekno/read/4043558/samsung-kuasai-66-persen-pasar-smartphone- premium-di-indonesia (4 September 2019). [57] Yamin, S., & Kurniawan, H. (2011). Generasi Baru Mengolah Data Penelitian dengan Partial Least Square Path Modeling Aplikasi dengan Software XLSTAT, SmartPLS, dan Visual PLS. Jakarta: Salemba Infotek. [58] Yang, J. C., & Chen, S. Y. (2010). Effects of gender differences and spatial abilities within a digital pen- tominoes game. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1220-1233. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.019 [59] Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lee, S. (2000). An examination of selected marketing mix elements and brand equity. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 28(2), 195-211. DOI: 10.1177/0092070300282002 Received: 2018-11-13 Revision requested: 2019-03-27 Revised: 2019-06-20 (3 revisions) Accepted: 2020-02-27 75 Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies 2020/25(2) 76 Etty Susilowati, Mohammad Guntur Ardhita Putra 2020/25(2) Etty Susilowati Budiluhur University, Faculty of Economics and Business, International Business and Management Studies, Indonesia e-mail: ettysslwt@gmail.com Etty Susilowati is a lecturer with a PhD in strategic management. Since 2017, she has been employed at the Faculty of Economics and Business, Budiluhur University, Indonesia. Her area of expertise is strategic and financial management. Besides, she has years of experience as a director and senior specialist in the fields of marketing, financing, and business in various private and state-owned companies in Indonesia. Mohammad Guntur Ardhita Putra Budiluhur University, Faculty of Economics and Business, International Business and Management Studies, Indonesia e-mail: gunturardhita216@gmail.com Mohammad Guntur Ardhita Putra is a student of International Business and Management Studies at the Faculty of Economics and Business, Budiluhur University, Indonesia. Appendix A Table A.1: Variable measurements Latent variables Labels Manifest variables Monetary promotion (Buil et al., 2013) X1 Samsung lowered its product price over time X2 Samsung gives a promotional price for a certain period of time X3 Samsung often gives price reduction X4 Samsung provides cashback X5 Cashback is satisfactory X6 Cashback is one of the advantages of all kind of Samsung promotions Non-Monetary promotion (Buil et al., 2013) X7 Samsung gives additional items for each purchase X8 Samsung gives free gifts for each purchase X9 Free gifts and additional items are very interesting Perceived advertising (Buil et al., 2013) X10 Samsung provides a variety of online advertising X11 Samsung uses online internet as its advertising medium Individual attitude towards advertising (Buil et al., 2013) X12 Samsung tv commercial is memorable X13 Samsung shows the advantages of its smartphones in television advertising X14 Samsung television advertising has a unique concept Brand association (Keller & Lehmann, 2003; Pappu et al., 2005; Buil et al., 2013) X15 Samsung company has a credibility X16 I have a clear image of the type of person who use Samsung products X17 Samsung has a personality and is interesting Brand loyalty (Keller & Lehmann, 2003; Pappu et al., 2005; Buil et al., 2013) X18 I always want to purchase a new type of Samsung smartphone X19 Samsung becomes my first choice X20 I prefer Samsung to other brands About the Authors << /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /All /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Warning /CompatibilityLevel 1.4 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.0000 /ColorConversionStrategy /LeaveColorUnchanged /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams false /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize true /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments false /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 300 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 300 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (None) /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped /False /CreateJDFFile false /Description << /ARA /BGR /CHS /CHT /CZE /DAN /DEU /ESP /ETI /FRA /GRE /HEB /HRV /HUN /ITA /JPN /KOR /LTH /LVI /NLD (Gebruik deze instellingen om Adobe PDF-documenten te maken voor kwaliteitsafdrukken op desktopprinters en proofers. De gemaakte PDF-documenten kunnen worden geopend met Acrobat en Adobe Reader 5.0 en hoger.) /NOR /POL /PTB /RUM /RUS /SKY /SLV /SUO /SVE /TUR /UKR /ENU (Use these settings to create Adobe PDF documents for quality printing on desktop printers and proofers. Created PDF documents can be opened with Acrobat and Adobe Reader 5.0 and later.) >> /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ << /AsReaderSpreads false /CropImagesToFrames true /ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue /FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false /IncludeGuidesGrids false /IncludeNonPrinting false /IncludeSlug false /Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (4.0) ] /OmitPlacedBitmaps false /OmitPlacedEPS false /OmitPlacedPDF false /SimulateOverprint /Legacy >> << /AddBleedMarks false /AddColorBars false /AddCropMarks false /AddPageInfo false /AddRegMarks false /ConvertColors /NoConversion /DestinationProfileName () /DestinationProfileSelector /NA /Downsample16BitImages true /FlattenerPreset << /PresetSelector /MediumResolution >> /FormElements false /GenerateStructure true /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles true /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /NA /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged /UntaggedRGBHandling /LeaveUntagged /UseDocumentBleed false >> ] >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [623.622 850.394] >> setpagedevice