Coming into my first marketing class I really had no idea what to expect. With marketing being a topic that I had never really been introduced to before in a academic way I did not know whether is was going to be something I enjoyed or strongly disliked; being extremely inartistic and having a very little amount of creative skills I was leaning towards strongly dislike – I could not have been more wrong.

After just the first class I new that marketing was going to be one of my favorite classes of the semester, if not the #1. In a small class environment it really allowed me to get everything out of the class that I wanted. The teaching style was perfect for my learning and it allowed me to understand everything. I was able to grasp a great understanding of how marketing really worked; how and why marketers attract the attention of the consumer, and why the consumer is susceptible to so many different forms of advertising.

From a student who plans on pursuing finance, marketing originally seemed like something I would just want to brush of and not really ever care about. However, my marketing class became something that I truly enjoyed – the in class activities, the open discussions, and the way the class was being taught. Looking back, my only regret is that I did not commit myself even more to the class.

From the course I was able to take away a very broad, but very important overview of marketing as a whole – something that I now plan on pursuing even further throughout university.

In their recent blog post, Pei Hsuan Huang talks about the consumers image of the brand Coca-Cola. They quickly explain how the average person, when thinking about the brand, generally only thinks about their mane product of Cola. With soda reaching the maturity stage in the product life cycle, Coca-Cola has had to find new ways to increase their sales. With health issues regarding soda constantly becoming more concerning, bottled water became a go-to product. I agree with Pei that Coke has done a successful job in attaining greater market share by entering not just the soda market, but also being a main competitor in the entire beverage market; not only soda and water, but tea, juice and energy drinks as well.

Just some of the many different products owned by the Coca-Cola brand.

Pei also explains how Coca-Cola is currently successful in marketing to countries outside of North America, namely Japan and Taiwan. By marketing to other places outside of Canada and the US it is showing their understanding that the markets in North America are very mature; by bringing their product to another area it allows them to enter a new market with an product they know has previously been extremely successful.

A can of Coke from Japan

Coca-Cola has been successful in creating a brand that a large percentage of consumers have become loyal to, but have also kept their prices low enough that their brand is still available to the new consumers to try their product without sacrificing a significant amount of money. This allows any one to try the drink – in the hope that they will become a loyal consumer – and also allows the already loyal consumers to continue to buy their product without financial concern.

We all know marketers target teenage girls in their advertisements, but a recent trend in Japan has turned these teen-aged girls into the advertisement themselves. A story by Kate  Randall explains that this isn’t an ordinary type of advertising – companies are now able to buy advertising space on girls legs, and more specifically, their thighs.

Three Japanese girls with paid advertisements on their thighs

As of this past November 1300 girls have already registered their legs for add space – and the number only seems to be growing. In return for the advertisers money, the girls are stamped with a company’s logo or message and must allow the logo to be visible by wearing short shorts or a mini-skirt, and the logo must remain on for eight hours. The girls themselves are then responsible for posting pictures of themselves (along with their new temporary sticker) onto their Facebook, Twitter and/or other social media sites.

This isn’t the first time that companies have advertised on a persons skin. Back in 2007 a man sold advertising space on his face, surprising for prices as low as only $100, and had companies logo’s tattooed onto his face.

Back in 2007, a man – now regretful – sold advertising space on his face

Although the advertisements on the girls thighs are not permanent, it still brings up a moral dilemma of how far is too far. Advertisements on a girls thighs might just cross that line of being too far. Ultimately it the girls choice of whether or not she wants to register and put herself in the position of using her thighs as an advertisement. But with the only guidelines being 18 years old, and having a minimum of 20 connections on social media I personally believe this is a situation that has gone too far.

After 48 years of a shortened name, Hudson Bay Co. has decided to follow through with its statement last year that it will change from its current “The Bay” name and logo and bring back its almost 350 year Canadian Heritage; the new logo will sport the companies original coat of arms, show its 1670 founding date and show the full name “Hudson Bay.”

New Hudson Bay Logo, March 2013

As Canada’s oldest company, previously Hudson Bay had not been recognizing the fact that it is one of the most significant parts of Canada’s heritage; being founded in 1670. It’s new logo will bring new and refreshing life to an old company that is trying to become a powerful brand like it once was.

After being sold to an american owner in 2006, Hudson Bay was in jeopardy of losing any remaining heritage that it had left. As a patriotic Canadian, I am extremely happy with the company’s decision to try and revive some of the company’s lost heritage with its logo change; I believe that the logo change will bring back other patriotic Canadian’s who want to support their country’s heritage.

A Hudson Bay Co. Store in Manson Creek, BC.

As Ms. Brown states in this article by the Globe and Mail, the new logo shows that Hudson Bay is trying to use its age-old roots to try and bring more Canadian’s to its store in a time of low consumer spending.

“It’s classic, and classy,” Ms. Brown said of the new branding. “Connecting to the core of the brand seems like a smart move, particularly right now.”

From a marketing perspective I believe that the logo will give the company a new look and the possibility of looking like the ‘higher-end’ retailer that it is trying to become. The previous logo almost seemed childish to me, and did not come across as a fancy, expensive retailer; I believe the new logo does give Hudson Bay this fancy, expensive look and will improve the company’s business position.

In his recent blog post, Are Businesses Invading Consumer Privacy By Listening to Social Media Conversations? Brian Solis explains that consumers need to make up their mind whether they want companies to ‘listen in’ on their social media conversations or just leave them alone. Solis goes into explaining how many of the consumers have double standards – they don’t want companies to read their conversations, yet they want companies to respond to their negative comments!

Personally I believe that companies following, or listening in on social media conversations is not an invasion of privacy at all. If a consumer is willing to put his/her opinion on the internet for everyone to see, why should the company not be allowed to look at it? By following what consumers say on social media it allows companies to greatly influence how they market their products; knowing exactly how consumers feel in the moment is a major benefit to companies.

Social media users have the ability to set their privacy settings to whatever they would like; making them in full control of who can see their opinions and who can’t. If these consumers do not prevent companies from reading their conversations I believe it is the companies responsibility to read these good and/or bad opinions as it has potential to improve not just the overall marketing environment but the entire product market as well.

People have allowed social media to transform how they interact with their friends, family, and even personal relationships… why should they be able to stop it from making an impact on how a company markets it’s product?

What are your motives behind purchasing “fee range” eggs?

Is it to ensure you are getting the best quality egg’s for you and your family? Or is it for peace of mind that you are improving the chickens quality of life?

It’s shocking to know that according The Humane Society of The United States there is no solid definition that regulates the labeling of eggs as “free range.” When labeling eggs as “free range” company’s are not held accountable for how they treat their hens and the conditions that they provide them with. “Free range” is supposed to mean access to the outdoors, which the hens are not necessarily provided, and when given access to the outdoors there are no regulations as to for how long they are given the access, or as to the quality of the outdoors the hens are given. Piper Hoffman explains that although called “free range” the hens are still forced into horrible living conditions where they do not have the ability to perform natural behaviors like nesting, and companies are still allowed to perform painful mutilations such as debeaking; the hens are forced to live with thousands of others in huge warehouses were they are kept in darkness, never seeing the light of day.

Thousands of hens crammed into large warehouses
(http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/ar-human-14chicks.html)

Companies are then allowed to market these eggs as “free range,” allowing them to charge a much higher price knowing consumers will believe they are making a difference in the fight against animal cruelty. I believe that the government should intervene and introduce a more strict set of laws and regulations that ensure when companies advertise “free range” they are held accountable to chickens quality of life and living standards.

Without new government regulation companies will continue manipulate consumers all over the world by taking advantage of the currently loose definition of “free range.”