Celsius Uamerica 3642

DETUROPE – THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM
Vol. 11 Issue 1 2019 ISSN 1821-2506
Original scientific paper
IMPORTANCE OF MARKETING COMUNICATION TOOLS WITH

REGARDS TO THE COMPETITIVENESS OF MINI-BREWERIES
Monika BŘEZINOVÁa, Ladislav SKOŘEPAa

a
University of South Bohemia, Faculty of Agriculture, Studentská 1668, 370 05 České Budějovice, Czech
Republic.
Cite this article: Březinová, M., Skořepa, L. (2019). Importance of Marketing Comunication Tools with
regards to the Competitiveness of Mini-Breweries. Deturope, 11(1), 149-163.
Abstract
In accordance with the general world trend, a new form of breweries expands in the Czech beer market –
mini-breweries. More than 220 new mini- breweries have been established in the period 2013-2016. This
tendency does not let up. As the number of mini-breweries increases, we can inspect a strengthening
competing pressure in this sector. Mini-breweries are supposed to start to really compete within among
themselves and fight for customers. The data collection was done in January 2017 by means of an electronic
survey on all population of mini-breweries (350 companies registered by December 31, 2017). The response
rate was 41%. The aim of the paper is, by means of the descriptive statistics methods, to find out, what
marketing tools the small breweries’ managers or proprietors consider as most important with regards to
the competitiveness of their business. The collected data were analysed by means of one-way classification
according to the defined segmentation criteria. Most of respondents consider a good reputation (89%),
recommendation of current clients (85%), and own website (60%) to be most important communication
tools.
Keywords: mini-brewery, local, marketing, communication, promotion
INTRODUCTION
In present days, the Czech beer market experience establishing of a new form of breweries –
mini-breweries. The increase of the number very strong in recent years not only in the Czech
Republic (Theuvsen, 2005; Ellis & Bosworth, 2015; Colen, 2016; Chlebicka, Fałkowski, &
Lichota, 2018). Emerging mini-breweries represent an important factor of the economic
development of regions or even rural areas (Ellis & Bosworth, 2015) and of their business
activity. By the end of 2016, 350 mini-breweries operated in the Czech Republic, and some of
them have already firmly established, with a progressively increasing volume of the beer
produced and number of staff and they are extending their activity. Other mini-breweries do
not intend and seek to increase their production even because of their short existence or due to
their initial objective. Researchers show two main reasons for establishing a mini-brewery
(Cabras, 2016). The first reason is a pure enthusiasm for bear and an intention to brew a beer
according to meet requirements of themselves for taste and quality. The latter are particularly
149
Březinová, M., Skořepa, L.
caused by a volume of undesirable matters in beer. According to Belakova (2017), undesirable

matters were revealed in 83% of beer samples from retail shops in the Czech Republic. The
volume of such matters was inconsiderable, nevertheless. The second reason is a business plan.
Similarly to other quickly growing markets (of more than 10% annually), the mini-brewery
market is attractive for many investors, who observe an important boom in this sector. The
paper deals with a perceived importance of marketing tools by proprietors or managers, in
connection with building a market position and competing for clients.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUNDS
Small and middle enterprises play a strong role in world economy (Beck, Demirguc-Kunt, &
Levine, 2005; Lukács, 2005) and so they do in case of a regional economy and regional
development. They are considered an important engine for economic growth in terms of both
employment and gross domestic product (Bocconcelli et al., 2018).
Marketing communication is a term used to encompass every aspect of the visual, written,
spoken or sensory interaction between a business and its market or markets (Cooper and Lane,
1997: 133)
It is mostly about a commercial communication, the objective of which is, based on the
transmitted information, to influence cognitive, motivational and decision-making processes of
those who we should address in accordance with our intentions (Vysekalová & Komárková,
2002)
Marketing communication in SMEs has its limitations issuing from the size of the enterprise
and consequently from problems, such a lack of budget or lack of human resoursces. Some
theories (Schmid, 2014) mention also limited information sources and experience.
Several theoretical bases could be used to systemize marketing communication techniques
and tools, for instance a part of 4P as adopted by Kotler (2003) – communication mix – that in
his conception comprises advertising, direct marketing, personal selling, public relations and
sales promotion. Another is approach is represented by De Pelsmacker’s (2001) marketing
communication tools – advertising, sales promotion, sponsorship, public relations, personal
selling, direct marketing, point-of-purchase communications, exhibitions and fairs and internet.
All the above-mentioned techniques and tools are used in the brewery industry. Their
employment depends always on the particular situation. One of the most important factors that
influence constitution of the communication mix is the size of the brewery, or more precisely
its financial power, then specifics of the administered segment of customers (Castilione, 2011).
150
From that point of view, we can distinguish a mass marketing communication that use mass
communication tools and focus as big number of potential customers as possible. It is used by
large industrial breweries. A targeted marketing communication use personal communication
channels and focus a particular group of customers. This marketing communication serves to
mini-breweries (Kotler, 2003). Industrial breweries that realize an expensive TV-advertisement
lived a decrease of the volume of beer produced of 5% in 2015 and then again of 10% in 2016
(the expansion of mini-breweries could be a reason of this situation). On the contrary, some
regional breweries decreased considerably their budget for a classic communication and yet
they increased their volume of beer produced. For instance, the brewery Svijany used the word-
of-mouth method and it increased its volume of beer produced twofold in 2013 (Kozák, 2014).
Mini-breweries are newcomers in the Czech beer market and they communicate with their
customers particularly through their product – beer. Their main assets are uniqueness and
localness (Toro, 2014). The word-of-mouth communications predominates in their promotion,
and the information spreads thanks to satisfied visitors to breweries and funs of unconventional
beers (Stoklasek, 2013) spread it. This phenomenon has an overlap – similarly to the wine
tourism – the beer tourism (Duda, 2013; Kraftchick, 2014). A number of mini-breweries
provide accommodation and catering services (Kozák, Bartók, & Honzková, 2017). and help
thus strengthen tourism in the area and then further support local economies.
As already mentioned above, the most important factor influencing the mini-breweries’
choice of marketing tools, is their budget (George, 2013). This is why mini-breweries mostly
do not use the mass communication tools and channels (such expenditures would be very
probably inefficient considering the target groups of customers). They use, however, personal,
targeted marketing channels, such as regional press, social media or other more appropriate and
less expensive ways to address regional or even local markets.
A very common approach also is to become a member in organisations that associate mini-
breweries, for instance Association of small breweries, Club of small breweries, Czech-
Moravian union of mini-breweries, etc. These associations organize common meetings and
events through which they spread awareness of small breweries among potential customers and
contribute this way to increasing customers’ interest in the products of small breweries (Kozák,
2013).
Products of mini-breweries could mostly be considered as local or regional product. They
usually influence local economy within their action radius, using local source (particularly
manpower, but also some materials or ingredients), so they could be considered as an activation
151
of indigenous resources that can be a take-off point of long-term development (Káposzta, Ritter,
& Kassa, 2015). Their production could also issue from local traditional procedures, to respond
to the local taste specifics of consumers or else to contribute to the sense of belonging of
inhabitants, and to strengthen their relation to their place of living, which was a longterm
phenomenon in the traditional beer regions (which the Czech Republic historically is). Thus the
small breweries could satisfy the recently increasing consumer demand for local products. The
emergence of the boom of mini-breweries is then also encompassed with global trends – the
search for “local” (Chlebicka, Fałkowski, & Lichota, 2018; Nezdei, & Alpek, 2018; Pícha, &
Skořepa, 2018). “Localness” should be communicated by means of the surveyed tools as it
could be a strengthening element when attracting consumers (Pícha, Skořepa, & Navrátil, 2013;
Pícha, Navrátil, & Švec, 2018). The aim of the paper is, by means of the descriptive statistics
methods, to find out, what marketing tools the small breweries’ managers or proprietors
consider as most important with regards to the competitiveness of their business.
Hypotheses
Hypothesis 1: minibreweries use rather money-extensive communication tools

Hypothesis 2: minibreweries put the main emphasis on local media in their marketing
communications
METHODS
Data collection
Method of electronic questionnaire survey was adopted to collect the data. The survey took
place in January 2017. We addressed all population (350 mini-breweries), i.e. all mini-
breweries that were registred at that moment in the Czech Republic. The response rate was 41%
(145 mini-breweries). The geographical structure of the surveyed sample could be seen at the
Fig. 1).
Figure 1 Geographical structure of surveyed mini-breweries
152
Source: own research
Data analysis
Descriptive statistical methods were used to analyse the collected data – absolute frequency and
contingency tables. The results are presented by means of graphs and tables. The particular
results were assessed according to the following segmentation criteria – year of company
formation, location (inside of the town, at the periphery of the town, out of the town) and
existence of the own restaurant or pub.
Results and discussion
Fig. 2 shows the proprietors’ evaluation of particular marketing communiction tools in

relation to the competitiveness of their mini-breweries. The proprietors perceive a good
name/reputation of the brewery as most important (89%); the second most important is a
recommendation of existing customers (85%) that is spread through word-of-mouth (WoM).
The WoM technique do not require any costs to disseminate information – it is based on a
quality product that costumers recommend among themselves. Further important marketing
communication tools are social networks (53%) and their own website (60%) that represent
other “low-cost” tools. They are followed by drinking glasses (39%), labels (42%) and brewery
signs or restaurant signs (34%). These tools that help to identify the product are indispensable
in the brewery sector. Another identified important factor are excursions (32%) that aim for one
153
thing to get visitors acquainted with the production in the particular brewery, with ingredients,
with the types of beers and for another thing of course to offer the possibility to taste the beers.
Taste and testing are an important element of so called sensory marketing (Géci, Nagyová, &
Rybanská, 2017). Generally, we can conclude that proprietors do not perceive the marketing
communication tools as strongly important for their competitiveness in the contrast to the
quality and taste of the product. The exception is the good name of the brewery and
recommendation of existing customers that are perceived as important by 90% of surveyed
breweries.
Figure 2 Importance of marketing communication tools in relation to the competitiveness of

the brewery
Website of other subjects (for example of a city)

Social networks
Brewery´s renown
Excursions
Cultural events organisation
Local clubs sponsorship
Offering discounts
Posters
Billboards
Own website
Banners on the internet
Advertisement in TV (regional stations)
Advertisement in TV (state stations)
Advertisement in radio (regional stations)
Advertisement in radio (state broadcast)
Advertisement in news (regional news, magazines)
Advertisement in news (state news, magazines)
Recommendation of current customers
Consumer promotional competitions
Paid tasting
Free tasting
Signboards
Drinking glasses
Tablechloths
Beermats
Labels
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Not important Less important Important Very important
154
Further results according to the segmentation criteria are presented in subsequent parts of the
paper in fig. 3 to 9. The answers “not important” and “less important” were grouped and so
were even the items “important” and “very important”.
Figure 3 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries with their
own restaurant or pub
Social networks
Brewery´s renown
Excursions
Offering discounts
Posters
Billboards
Own website
Paid tasting
Free tasting
Signboards
Drinking glasses
Tablechloths
Beermats
Labels
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Not important / Less important Important / Very important
We have identified no important differences in perception of importance of particular marketing

communication tools for breweries’ competitiveness according to the existence of their own
restaurant/pub. Fig. 3 and 4 show that there are no significant differences between perception
of importance of marketing communication tools by proprietors of mini-breweries with their
own restaurant and without their own restaurant, even in case of those tools were we have
supposed substantial differences, such as drinking glasses or table cloths. Drinking glasses are
important or very important for 75% breweries with their own restaurant and for 82% breweries
155
without their own restaurant; table cloths are important or very important for 11% breweries
with their own restaurant and for 25% breweries without their own restaurant. The higher
importance for breweries without their own restaurant is surprising. We can assume that those
tools serve in this case as presents or promotional items. The assumption was confirmed in case
of importance of beermats (70% for breweries with their own restaurant, whereas 31% for
breweries without their own restaurant). Even in this case the breweries without their own
restaurant probably use the tool as a promotional item or a present, particularly for collectors.
Figure 4 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries without

their own restaurant or pub
Social networks
Brewery´s renown
Excursions
Offering discounts
Posters
Billboards
Own website
Paid tasting
Free tasting
Signboards
Drinking glasses
Tablechloths
Beermats
Labels
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Further, we have found significant differences in perception of the importance of particular

marketing communication tools according to the duration of the company. All mini-breweries
that came into existence before the year 2000 perceive the importance or even strong
importance of social networks, good name of the brewery, excursions, cultural events, their
own website, recommendation of existing customers, drinking glasses and labels (Fig. 5). 75%
of those breweries have mentioned sponsorship, posters, paid degustation, brewery signs or
156
restaurant signs, and beermats. In case of the mini-breweries originating before the year 2000,
there is no marketing communication tool that is not important for at least 25% of them. 21 out
of 26 surveyed marketing tools are important or very important for at least 50% of this group
of breweries.
Figure 5 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries operating

already before the year 2000
Good name of the brewery, recommendation from current customers and labels are important
or very important for 100% of mini-breweries that were established from 2001 to 2010 (Fig. 6).
Social networks and cultural events are important for 90% of them; their own website is
important for 80% of this group, excursions only for 40% and sponsorship only for 20% of
157
these mini-breweries. On the other hand, billboards and tablecloths are perceived as not
important at all.
Figure 6 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries

established in the period from 2001 to 2010
Social networks
Brewery´s renown
Excursions
Offering discounts
Posters
Billboards
Own website
Paid tasting
Free tasting
Signboards
Drinking glasses
Tablechloths
Beermats
Labels
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
As for the last groups of surveyed breweries, more than 70% of them perceive as important or
very important following marketing communication tools: social networks, good name of the
brewery, excursions, organizing of cultural events, their own websites, recommendation from
current customers, drinking glasses and labels. The perceptions and opinions of this third group
of respondents is somehow in between the first two groups. The second group – breweries
issued from the period 2001-2010 – perceives the least number of marketing and tools as
important or very important, whereas the first group – breweries that came into existence before
158
the year 2000 found most of the marketing communications tools as important or very
important.
Figure 7 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries

established in the period from 2011 to 2016
Social networks
Brewery´s renown
Excursions
Offering discounts
Posters
Billboards
Own website
Paid tasting
Free tasting
Signboards
Drinking glasses
Tablechloths
Beermats
Labels
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
For reasons of clarity, we have divided the surveyed breweries into two groups according to the
place of operation of the breweries (Fig. 8). First group comprises mini-breweries located in
the center or in the periphery of towns and the second group represents mini-breweries located
out of the towns. Presented results were also merged from four to two groups of answers (not
important and less important vs. Important and very important).
159
Figure 8 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries located

in the center or in the periphery of the towns
Social networks
Excursions
Posters
Own website
Paid tasting
Signboards
Tablechloths
Labels
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
The most significant differences in the perception of importance of particular marketing

communication tools occurred in case of offering discounts. This tool is very important or
important for 30% of mini-breweries located in the center or periphery of the towns but less
important or unimportant for all (100% mini-breweries located out of the towns and villages
(Fig. 8, Fig. 9). Another tools with differently perceived importance was billboard that is
unimportant for 55% of mini-breweries located in the center or in the periphery of the towns,
but for all (100%) mini-breweries located out of the towns. On the other hand, own website is
important for almost all mini-breweries – 100% of mini-breweries located out of the town and
90% mini-breweries located in the center or in the periphery of the towns.
Regional/local radios are also important for a considerable number of mini-breweries located
out of the town (60%) compared to the group of mini-breweries in the town centers and
peripheries (35%). On the contrary, regional/local press is important for a more of mini-
breweries in the town centers and peripheries (58%) then breweries out of the town (40%).
Offering discounts, billboards, regional press and tablecloths are generally more important for
breweries located in town center or town periphery (Fig. 8) whereas good name of the brewery,
own website, regional radios, national press, recommendation from current customers, paid
degustations and beermats are important for majority of breweries located of the town (Fig. 9).
160
Figure 9 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries located

out of the towns or villages

Social networks
Brewery´s renown
Excursions
Offering discounts
Posters
Billboards
Own website
Paid tasting
Free tasting
Signboards
Drinking glasses
Tablechloths
Beermats
Labels
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CONCLUSIONS
We can confirm that the small breweries prefer the money-extensive communication tools, like
support to a positive word of mouth or their own websites. On the other hand, we cannot confirm
our presumptions that they will, as a local player, put more emphasis on local media compared
to national media. Observing the development in the beer industry and especially in the segment
of mini-breweries, we can assume that the competitive pressure will continue to grow. Owners
of mini-breweries will be supposed to spend more money for promotion, if they want to
161
maintain or even increase the volume of beer produced. We can anticipate it at least based on
the incredible increase of the number of mini-breweries in the Czech Republic in last two or
three years. Given the financial possibilities of microbreweries, it is necessary to choose
marketing tools that are meaningful and bring the effect of the money spent, whether in the
form of greater turnover or profit. The most important factor will still be the quality and taste
of the product itself, and in this context, the marketing tools that are most often used by
microbreweries and are important or very important to microbreweries in terms of their
competitiveness, as demonstrated by the presented. Tools that can be recommended on this
basis are: microbrewery referrals and microbrewery reputation (WoM), internet-based
microbrewery presentations, social networking and custom websites, on-site marketing tools,
glasses, labels and mats. However, precisely in the period of increasing of competitive pressure
in microbreweries, it will be necessary to support these tools by others, which are not currently
important for microbreweries and are not used as abundantly as previous ones. Microbrewery
owners should consider using local media, such as local radio and television stations, as well
as presenting the brewery on websites of other entities such as the city where the microbrewery
has its headquarters, sports and other local organizations and, last but not least, microbreweries
(valid only for microbreweries with their own restaurant) should pick up the function of cultural
centers of municipalities where joint actions of local citizens will be realized. Future research
activity could focus the potential of mini-breweries or micro-breweries with their own
restaurant to attract consumers by trying to play a role of a cultural center, especially in rural
areas.
REFERENCES
Beck, T., Demirguc-Kunt, A., & Levine, R. (2005). SMEs, growth, and poverty: cross-country
evidence. Journal of economic growth, 10(3), 199-229.
Beláková, S., Wawroszova, S., Benešová, K. (2017). The Occurrence of Mycotoxins in Beers
from Retail Shops. Kvasný průmysl. 63(6), 293-297.
Bocconcelli, R., Cioppi, M., Fortezza, F., Francioni, B., Pagano, A., Savelli, E., & Splendiani,
S. (2018). SMEs and marketing: a systematic literature review. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 20(2), 227-254.
Cabras, I. (2016). Beer, brewing, and business history. Business History. 58(5), 609-624.
Castilione, C., & Grochová, L. (2011). The demand for beer in the view of past consumption
and advertising in the Czech Republic. Agric.-econ.-Czech. 57(12), 2011, 589-599.
Chlebicka, A., Fałkowski, J., & Lichota, J. (2018). From Macro to Micro: The Change of
Trendsetters in the Polish Beer Market. In Economic Perspectives on Craft Beer. Cham,
Palgrave Macmillan. 295-319.
Cooper, J., & Lane, P. (1999). Marketingové plánování – praktická příručka manažera. Praha:
Grada Publishing, 1999.
162
Colen, L. (2016). Economic Growth, Globalisation and Beer Consumption. Journal of

Agricultural Economics. 67(1), 186-207.
Cortese, D. (2017). The art of craft beer in a traditional wine nation: A preliminary study in a
model area(Article). Quality - Access to Success. 18(161), 149-156.
De Pelsmacker, P., Geuens, M., & Van den Bergh, J. (2001). Marketing communications.
Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
Duda-Gromada, K. (2013). Beer tourism in Poland, Prace i Studia Geograficzne, 52, 63-84.
Ellis, V., & Bosworth, G. (2015). Supporting rural entrepreneurship in the UK microbrewery
sector. British Food Journal, 117(11), 2724-2738.
Géci, A., Nagyová, Ľ., & Rybanská, J. (2017). Impact of sensory marketing on consumer´ s
buying behaviour. Potravinarstvo Slovak Journal of Food Sciences, 11(1), 709-117.
George, L. M. (2013). National television and the market for local producz: The case of beer.
Journal of industrial economics. 57(1), 85-111.
Káposzta, J, Ritter, K. & Kassa, Z. (2015). Examination of the territorial significance of Pálinka
as a Hungaricum. Tér és Társadalom, 29(4), 139-153
Kotler, P., Amstrong, G. (2003). Marketing, 6. vydání, Grada, 2003.
Kozák, V., Bartók, O., & Honzková, I. (2017). Application of Destination Management for
Rožnov Brewery and Rožnov Beer Spa Productivity Increase. ICFE 2017 - The 4th
International Conference on Finance and Economics, 376-384.
Kozák, V., Kozáková, V. (2013). Změny v českém pivovarství na přelomu tisíciletí. Zlín:
VeRBuM.
Kozák, V., Kozáková V. (2014). Televizní reklamy českých pivovarů a jejich vnímání. Zlín:
VeRBuM.
Kraftchick, J.F. (2014). Understanding beer tourist motivation. Tourism Management
Perspectives. 12, 41-47.
Lukács, E. (2005). The economic role of SMEs in world economy, especially in
Europe. European integration studies, 4(1), 3-12.
Pelsmacker, P. de, Geuens, M., Van der Bergh, J. (2003) Marketingová komunikace. Grada
Publishing a.s., 2003
Nezdei, C., & Alpek, B. L. (2018). Examining customer groups through the example of Balaton
Resort Area marketplaces. TER ES TARSADALOM, 32(1), 145-160.
Pícha, K., Navrátil, J., & Švec, R. (2018). Preference to local food vs. Preference to “national”
and regional food. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 24(2), 125-145.
Pícha, K., & Skořepa, L. (2018). Preference to Food with a Regional Brand. Calitatea, 19(162),
134-139.
Pícha, K., Skořepa, L., & Navrátil, J. (2013). Assessment of the results of the strategic
orientation on regional and local products in food retail. Acta universitatis agriculturae
et silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 61(4), 1061-1068.
Schmid, S. (2014). The Global Brewery Industry. Markets, Strategies, and Rivalries Journal of
International Management, 20(4), 478-480,
Theuvsen, L. (2005). Electronic Commerce Readiness in the Food Industry: Development and
Application of an Assessment Tool. In Proceedings of the EFITA/WCCA 2005 Joint
Conference. Vila Real (pp. 559-566).
Toro-Gonzáles, D. (2014). Beer snobs do exist: Estimation of beer demand by type, Journal of
Agricultural and Resource Economics, 39(2), 174-187.
Vysekalová, J., & Komárková, R. (2002). Psychologie reklamy: 2. rozšířené a aktualizované
vydání, Praha: Grada Publishing.
163

Celsius Uamerica 3642

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Celsius Uamerica 3642

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Celsius Uamerica 3642

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DETUROPE – THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM

Vol. 11 Issue 1 2019 ISSN 1821-2506

Original scientific paper

IMPORTANCE OF MARKETING COMUNICATION TOOLS WITH

Monika BŘEZINOVÁa, Ladislav SKOŘEPAa

Keywords: mini-brewery, local, marketing, communication, promotion

caused by a volume of undesirable matters in beer. According to Belakova (2017), undesirable

Hypothesis 1: minibreweries use rather money-extensive communication tools

Figure 1 Geographical structure of surveyed mini-breweries

Source: own research

Results and discussion

Fig. 2 shows the proprietors’ evaluation of particular marketing communiction tools in

Figure 2 Importance of marketing communication tools in relation to the competitiveness of

Website of other subjects (for example of a city)

Not important Less important Important Very important

Source: own research

Not important / Less important Important / Very important

Source: own research

We have identified no important differences in perception of importance of particular marketing

Figure 4 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries without

Not important / Less important Important / Very important

Source: own research

Further, we have found significant differences in perception of the importance of particular

Figure 5 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries operating

Source: own research

Figure 6 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries

Not important / Less important Important / Very important

Source: own research

Figure 7 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries

Not important / Less important Important / Very important

Source: own research

Figure 8 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries located

Not important / Less important Important / Very important

Source: own research

The most significant differences in the perception of importance of particular marketing

Figure 9 Importance of particular marketing communication tools for mini-breweries located

Website of other subjects (for example of a city)

Not important / Less important Important / Very important

Source: own research

Colen, L. (2016). Economic Growth, Globalisation and Beer Consumption. Journal of

You might also like