Antoine Masse's blog

Ryan Abushinov’s “Is this the end of the Blackberry?” (https://blogs.ubc.ca/ryanabushinov/2012/03/11/is-this-the-end-of-the-blackberry/) outlines RIM’s troubles differentiating against its competitors. He argues that Blackberry’s lack of new features is one of the main reasons consumers have recently been picking Iphones and Androids over RIM’s smartphone, and that this could ultimately lead to their downfall.

As a student and a Blackberry owner, I agree that RIM is overall ‘losing’ the smartphone battle. Iphones and Androids are both advertised as fun and creative phones which have overall more appeal than Blackberry’s ‘business’ feel. Young adults make up the largest market for smartphones (they tend to lose/break phones frequently), and that is who the Iphone and Android are successfully targeting. I like my Blackberry, but I realize that as a college student, other smartphones probably would have been better choices.

That being said, it would be foolish to think that Blackberry will discontinue anytime soon. Although Blackberry has been unsuccessful targeting younger adults, they have successfully become the ‘business phone”, the no bullsh*t, made for work smartphone. That is how they are differentiating, and although it might not be the flashiest phone, it is important to have an effective user-friendly smartphone professionals and business people can rely on to complete their everyday tasks. Too many businesses rely on Blackberry for it to end anytime soon. It is also hard to imagine a professional being more effective with an Iphone, there are too many distractions on that thing.

Christina’ blog post Do we really need that much caffeine in life? discusses how Tim Horton’s ‘upgraded’ their cup sizes (ex. old medium is now a small, and there is a new extra large cup), and argues that the new extra large cup is unreasonably big and probably will not catch on in Canada. Although I agree that the new extra large cup, which holds the equivalent of 2 beer bottles, is undoubtedly unhealthy, the fact of the matter is that the product they are selling is coffee, which differs from any other product.

Coffee contains caffeine which is a stimulant millions of Canadians, and almost everybody else in the world, ‘depend’ on  everyday to start and keep up with their days (According Medicinenet.com, 90% of adults drink it daily) . I personally drink coffee rarely, but many of my friends have picked it up recently, and I probably will be drinking it everyday once I land that job that starts early every morning.

Caffeine is a drug, just like tobacco and alcohol, and it is known to create dependence. Many people are dependent on caffeine, but unlike other drugs, it is not looked down upon in society. Like other drugs, a tolerance is also developed from caffeine, meaning that the stimulant effect from coffee is lessened over time if you consume caffeine on a regular basis. This results in people drinking larger amounts of coffee over time.

I am not saying that coffee is unhealthy, or that people should stop drinking coffee. I believe that (almost) nothing is bad if consumed in moderation, but pretty much everything is bad if abused (and a person who drinks coffee everyday is not necessarily abusing it). Just saying that from a business perspective, coffee is an awesome product which can easily be sold in larger quantities (in a recent survey, only 53.75% of the participants claimed that they would not purchase the new Extra Large cup).

Coffee is one of the most consumed beverages in the world, people get addicted to it, and then develop a tolerance for it… Why haven’t they come out with the extra extra large cup yet!?

(Starbucks also recently released a new cup size, called “Trenta”, which holds as much volume as an adult stomach! Although it is for iced drinks only, this shows that there is demand for ridiculously large beverage sizes. http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/01/17/graphic-how-big-exactly-is-starbucks-new-trenta-size/)

Line at the Tim Hortons next to Sauder is worse

Samsung Superbowl Commercials

I recently stumbled upon this very interesting blog post, The Best And Worst Of Super Bowl Marketing Strategy 2012, which gives out awards, such as “biggest winners,” “worst strategy” and “best use of humor,” to several Super Bowl commercials. Scrolling through the article, I was surprised to see Samsung’s Galaxy Note commercial under “Best Strategy”. For the last few years, Apple has had a stranglehold in the smartphone, mp3, and tablet industry, especially from a marketing point of view, and their competitors have had trouble generating any buzz. But after watching Samsung’s Super Bowl commercial, and some of their advertisements leading up to the big game, I strongly believe that Apple finally has a worthy competitor.

Here is part of the blog’s reasoning for awarding Samsung’s commercial “Best Strategy”:

” For months now, Samsung has been running a brilliant series of ads poking fun at all the “iSheep” obediently waiting in line overnight for the latest Apple product with their tagline “the next big thing is already here”. Boosted by their recent announcement of record profits last quarter from strong sales of mobile devices, they are one of the small few mobile devicemakers who offer a viable alternative to the iPhone.”

Apple’s recent marketing campaigns, such as Mac vs. Windows, has really set Apple apart from Windows in the computer and smartphone industry, and none of the Windows manufacturers has had a response up until now. Samsung decided to play Apple’s game, directly comparing their products to Apple’s. Samsung has identified Apple’s weaknesses, and is trying to gain competitive advantage by pinpointing them to their target audience. The commercial is brilliant because it targets Samsung’s potential customers, which include young adults and Iphone users, (Iphone users waiting in line, party atmosphere, familiar song, celebrities) and it also makes their product look a lot more appealing than the Iphone (the setting for the “Samsung party” is in front of Apple stores, the man saying “this feels like detention” when dealing with Apple, and yelling “Freedom!” when referring to Samsung).

A few years ago, Apple made their tagline similar to this: “Windows is boring, Apple if fun.” If this Samsung commercial illustrated their positioning statement as a response to Apple’s tagline, it would go something like this:

To current and future smartphone users, especially those of you who are blinded by Apple products, Samsung’s Galaxy Note is a new smartphone with a sleek design and a very big screen, which provides the most technologically advanced features available, including 4G, unlike over-hyped Apple, which provides a slower 3G phone, and is known for always making their customers wait for their latest product.

“The next big thing is already here”

At first glance, it seems like the European fast food restaurant, Quick, has lost its mind and attempted to make the least edible looking burger possible. The almost released Dark Vador burger, with its dyed jet black buns, is part of a promotional campaign for the re-release of a Star Wars movie in 3-D. There are many different directions Quick could have gone with this promotional campaign, and designing this very unusual looking burger is definitely a gamble. Why would anyone buy a mutated burger when there are 15 other perfectly good looking burgers on the menu to chose from?

After thinking about it for a while, I actually think this is a great idea for Quick to release a burger like this one. Do  I think the Dark Vador burger looks appetizing? No. Would I want to try it? Absolutely. As soon as the release of the Dark Vador burger was announced, the burger has gone viral for its unique look. It has gotten all the attention in the burger world, and even though the critics are not exactly praising the burger for its delicious look, Quick got what they wanted, publicity.

I think the Dark Vador burger will be very successful, whether or not it tastes good. The reason for ‘limited edition burgers’ is to attract new customers who usually eat elsewhere. Limited Edition burgers do not necessarily need to taste amazing, but they must give the people a reason to try them, because the product is short-term oriented. Quick has not only given Star Wars fanatics a reason to come to their restaurant, but anybody who is even a little curious to come try their odd burger. If the buns on this burger were normal, it would have gone unnoticed but the added food coloring has everybody scratching their heads wondering if it tastes good. People will go to Quick to taste this burger knowing that it is only available for a limited time.

Only time will tell if this burger will be successful, but so far it looks like the black buns are a great marketing move.

There are many people who I look up to but there is one particular group of people which currently inspires me the most. That is the Japanese people, especially after the tsunami. Not only are they the most friendly people I have ever met, but the fact that their economy is among the best in the world despite the lack of natural resources in Japan illustrates their effectiveness as workers. The courage and integrity the Japanese people have shown after the tsunami and earthquakes is something everybody should take into account.

Marketing research aids firms to make important decisions for the future based on past and present consumer behaviors. Sometimes good marketing research is the difference between a successful product and a failed product. Nintendo is a good example of a firm who has used marketing research to its advantage. Before they launched the Wii, they were losing market shares to their rivals Sony and Microsoft. Through marketing research they found that their products were only appealing children, which is not a large enough market.

So Nintendo launched the Wii, which has a target market much larger than its predecessor, the GameCube, and its competitors, Xbox and PlayStation. The Wii is not only appealing to younger generations, but also to adults and seniors. Nintendo makes it clear that even adults can have fun playing the Wii as many of their commercials feature parents and seniors enjoying the Wii. The Wii is the first video gaming console to successfully reach such a large market because instead of having the traditional controllers, it had adopted motion detecting ones. This has opened up an entire world full of possibilities for Nintendo, who has launched software other than games, like Wii Fit.

Although many in class argue that $200 million was way too much to invest on the Olympics, and that Bell could have used the money more effectively on something else, I believe that it was necessary for Bell to outbid TELUS.

There are two primary reasons why Bell had to sponsor the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics:

1. To expand their market all over Canada, especially in the West
2. To prevent TELUS from taking over Western Canada

The Olympics take place in Canada only once in a lifetime and it was crucial for Bell to take advantage of this. Furthermore, it was in Western Canada, where Bell wanted to expand their market to compete with TELUS. The Vancouver Olympics allowed Bell to build strong infrastructure in the biggest city in Western Canada. They were also able to install a good marketing base in Vancouver from which they can expand to other parts in the West.

If TELUS had won the bid, they would have blown Bell out of the competition in the West. TELUS already had superior infrastructure and marketing bases in the West before the Olympics. Bell would not have been able to compete with TELUS in the West anytime soon.

The $200 million investment will payoff.

Ford Motor Company was founded in 1903 by Henry Ford. The motor company has seen much success since then, and this is largely due to Henry Ford’s entrepreneurial skills. He fits Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter’s definition of an entrepreneur as he placed emphasis on innovation, such as

• New products
• New production methods
• New markets
• New forms of organization

Ford introduced the Model T automobile in 1908 which revolutionized transportation in America. It was revolutionary because it was available for all of Americans as it was very inexpensive, and it was produced in mass quantities. Henry Ford was also credited for “Fordism” which is mass production of inexpensive goods coupled with high wages for workers. The high wages for workers decreased turnover rate and encouraged the best workers to join Ford. This increased productivity and Ford no longer had to spend much on employee training.

Ford was also able to reach new markets by introducing a franchise system that put a dealership in every city in North America and in major cities around the world. He also had his own labor philosophy which was to keep and hire the best workers available in order to be efficient.

The entrepreneurial skills of Henry Ford has allowed Ford Motors to flourish into one of the biggest firms in the US.

Many people would agree that comparative advertising has more pros than cons, especially in North America,  and that it should be allowed. Although there are some instances when comparative advertising is helpful, I believe that in many cases, it is being used in an abusive way that should be banned.

Here is an example of a Mac advertisement, which has been on TV countless numbers of time, which I believe should not be allowed:

This commercial does not even mention Mac computers until the last second. It is stating that Windows computers have not been reliable ever, throughout the entire commercial.

I do not believe that Mac has the right to claim that Windows has been unreliable in the past. That is for the consumers to decide, not Windows’ direct competitor. Mac is not even stating a fact. Sure, some people have experienced problems with Windows in the past but that does not mean Windows has never been reliable. Also, it is not like a Mac user has never encountered a problem.

Mac also tries to imply that Windows admits having recurrent problems with their PCs which is not true, and misleading to viewers.

I do not believe commercials like these should be allowed because it is communicating to the consumers wrong information about a firm other than the one advertising.

I understand why downloading music for free online is illegal but here is why I believe it should be tolerated.

Downloading music illegally is a side-effect of the internet. The internet makes it too easy to obtain music for free and you cannot blame consumers for taking advantage of it. Sure, artists do not make as much profit through CD sales, but the internet has helped both up-and-coming artists and proven artists, more than it has hurt them.

A countless number of artists have blown up due to the internet. Personally I am not a big fan, but Soulja Boy is the perfect example of an artist who became successful through the internet. Before his catchy song (which became #1 in America) and his dance  “Crank That” hit YouTube, Soulja Boy (who was only 17)  was unknown in the music industry. Now, Soulja Boy is a commercially successful rapper who is a product of the internet.

The internet is the easiest way for artists to share their music, videos, and images and to expand their fan base. Even past artists, such as The Beatles or The Notorious  B.I.G., would not have as big of a fan base right now if it were not for the internet. The internet is now the primary way artists reach out to consumers.

After all, it is the fans who decide what’s hot and what’s not.

88 million views!!