I am [insert any synonym for cheap here.] I probably always will be even when I start making the big bucks. So on my recent birthday, I chose to get all the free swag I could get. What do these big chain operations get from me taking away their goods for nada?

Customer relation management (CRM) is a value driven marketing practice of a company. Extents and forms vary, but the main objective aligns: build long-term relations.

I used to go to Starbucks once every few months for coffee dates, never just because I wanted a coffee. I can make that at home for a fraction. Then I registered my Starbucks card because I wanted a free birthday drink. But then they started emailing exclusive reward holder coupons. I began going more frequently. I gained stars; I made it to the green level. Honestly, it really means nothing. I get free refills in store on plain brewed coffee. I am 18 stars away from the Gold Level. Not much more except a free item on every 12^th star and a special gold card. Fancy.

And yet for nothing, I still want to achieve gold. These reward systems work because they allow the consumer to feel elitist, golden. The company cares about your business with them, tapping into our emotional need to feel wanted. Starbucks is able to take the data from my card and specify the emails sent. This past month, I have been drinking more of their lattes. No surprise I got an email for 50% any latte two days ago.

Through the combination of data collection and rewards systems, Starbucks took a thrifty UBC student and turned her into a regular weekly customer for the long run. “Mom, it’s not my fault. It’s the CRM!” Think she will buy that excuse?

Birthday well spent, eh?

No, this is not about taxpayer money going towards the Queen. I wrote that last year.

The past weeks of CUS and AMS elections have come with a bombardment of campaigning. I noticed a larger trend of endorsements this year. Though the student politicians weren’t endorsed by companies like PepsiCo and KPMG, they went after the most relevant reference group: student leaders. AMS/CUS types, JDC West competitors, and so on. My friend put my name down even though I have no fancy title. They may not have world domination (yet), but at this level many endorsers may have influenced the voting results.

Social factors in consumer behaviour have significant direct and indirect effects on our shopping list. There is one specific global leader that has affected women’s wants for wedding dresses with sleeves, beige pumps, and knee length dresses. (And nose surgery!)

Her engagement photos were taken wearing a white Reiss dress. The style was not available for purchase at the time but was then re-released, selling almost one per minute! There does seem to be correlation between sales and her outfits.

But why does she need to be trendy?

Her current title causes controversy. To counter, she creates a brand that people admire and want to be: classy, elegant, royalty. I had my miniskirts in high school, but now I see knee length dresses and fitted blazers taking over (latter has some Sauder reasoning, too!) It is as if I feel a need to please her though she is not even close to my network. Her effect is that strong in my consumer behaviour.

Designers use her as a reference group and she uses fashion to remain relevant to the public. Win-win. (Make room for maternity wear!)

I don’t even need to type her name; her prominence has become that clear.

Courtesy of Google Images

We witnessed the destruction of Hurricane Sandy. Homes ruined, lives loss. While individuals were doing what they could to help, others saw an advantage to exploit. American Apparel took up an opportunity. But should they have?

There is nothing wrong with a good sale. But the wording of this ad nitpicks at the people affected by the storm. The sale is only for them, apparently they are bored, next 36 hours (what is this supposed to mean? Buy stuff before you get washed away?)

Their actions do not align with the company’s own Code of Ethics:

• Adhere to a high standard of business ethics and not seek competitive advantage through unlawful or unethical business practices.
• Refrain from taking advantage of anyone through manipulation, concealment, abuse of privileged information, misrepresentation of material facts or any other unfair-dealing practice.

They pursued people in a fragile state to make a profit. I doubt people want to shop in that condition, but American Apparel made them feel special by manipulating them to cause opposite shopping behaviour. The creators of this campaign forgot their moral compass. They should have been thinking of corporate social responsibility (donate the sale money at the least.) Like I said, there is nothing wrong with having the sale, but these words are twisted with profit driving thoughts and not genuine care for the situation.

“They crossed the line.” How do we draw the line? Is there a standard social norm or are there various lines? Last year in COMM 101, students wrote a blog post on ethics. Easily, I could have copied my old post here. I feel that is a huge factor with ethics is the ease of doing something considered wrong. I went against self-plagiarism, but am amazed how naturally ethics became involved.