This holiday season, traditional red coca-cola cans will turn white, as part of the new Coca-Cola campaign – Arctic Home.

With a commitment of up to $3 million to raise funds for polar bears and their habitats, this campaign is Coca-Cola’s biggest yet in cooperation with World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

While the special cans are especially attractive and the cause is very appealing, I question Coca-Cola’s intent.  Is it out of concern for corporate social responsibility or merely a marketing gimmick?

        VS 

It could be a mix of both, but I am leaning towards the marketing side.

Yes, the company is making effort to help the iconic animal associated with their ads since 1922, but its donations are incomparable to its revenues.  In the third quarter of 2011, Coca-Cola reported net revenue of $12.2 billion, which implies that the $3 million devoted to the initiative is not even a slight percentage of its earnings per quarter.

If Coca-Cola truly cared about the Arctic environment, they would donate more in conservation efforts.  But at this stage, the project seems to be a marketing tactic that uses WWF’s efforts in the conservation of polar bears to attract attention to the brand.

Maybe Coca-cola has good will, but if one of the corporation’s missions is “to create value and make a difference,” much more could be done to better-reflect their values.

References:
–Arctic Home
–Coca-Cola: Iconic Red Cans Turn White
–Coca-Cola: Press Release Third Quarter Results
–Coca-Cola: Mission Statement & Vision

The death of Steve Jobs was shocking on October 5, 2011, just one day after the release of the iPhone 4S.  Apple’s stocks fell sharply on the 4th, but today, stocks have rebounded to even higher than before.  As one may observe, Steve Jobs’ death has indirectly impacted the sales of the iPhone – many more people are willing to buy it, which caused the stocks to rebound.

What is in-store for Apple’s future in the absence of its legendary CEO?

The company failed drastically when he was kicked out in the 80’s, and excelled shortly after his return.  Would the downfall occur again?  Is this the end of the era of Apple’s revolutionary products?  What does this mean for competitors and investors?

It is too early to conclude.

Obviously there will never be a replacement for Steve Jobs, but his absence does not directly correlate to the failure of the corporation.  People question if Tim Cooks, his appointed CEO, can live up to the standard that the general public holds for Apple, but nobody should judge yet.  The company’s growth over the years was through contributions of numerous employees who still work in their expertise; the fundamentals are still intact.  Therefore, one could argue that Apple still stands a chance for more breakthroughs in the future.

What is your opinion?

References:
–allaboutstevejobs.com
–The impact of Steve Jobs’ death on its stakeholders

Europe’s debt crisis has not improved since its beginning nearly two years ago.  Efforts from the government, such as tax increases, wage cuts, price increases, and pension drops, were highly unpopular.  This was especially true when an emergency property tax was announced in Greece, as well as the suspension of 30,000 public sector staff.

This worsens the case for the lower- and middle-class.  Believing that these matters should be taken to the rich who are able to pay, Greek citizens went on strike on October 5, 2011 causing all public sectors to close.

Obviously, they are in a critical state.  Who are they to resort to?

When businesses see their employees in such a terrible state, would they be able to help?

The protestors’ repeated extreme behaviour such as blocking roads, throwing marble paving slabs at the police, and violating legislations is halting the day-to-day lives of Greeks.  Striking is obviously unhelpful to the economy.

Also, in these days, tourism is the only means that keeps the country from bankruptcy since only tourists have money to spend.  Strikes would negatively impact this industry, which would in turn affect the companies’ sales.  So if people keep striking, and tourists stop coming to buy goods and services, will businesses still keep business as business?

Where do you draw the line between business and politics?

References:
–General strike brings Greece to a standstill as public sector closes down
–Greece strike: Police and protesters clash in Athens
–An ugly Greek tradition

Statistics from the video are displays of the effects that social media has on our lives.  We not only spend hours connecting with people via social networking sites, news stories now come to us this way.

Growth in social media calls for an increased rate at which information is travelled around the world, whether it be about success, embarrassments, or failures.  Is that a good thing?  What about for businesses?

Many companies can now use social networking sites for promotion.  SEO Companies such as PR Design specialize in helping companies move up the list on search engines.  Instantaneous interaction allows updates to be passed on to numerous consumers almost immediately.

Unfortunately, there is always a flip side.  Don’t forget that bad news spreads too, and they attract even more people!  Gossiping is apparent, and reaches even farther.  When this happens, the only thing to do is to wait for the story to die down.

In the context of the business world, little mistakes are easily exaggerated and reproduced; business images are easily affected by rumours and sole opinions.  Businesses can also make up “facts” anonymously to improve their own reputation or to destroy that of others.

Taking these into account, is the use of social media in business beneficial or harmful?  Would SEO be a good tool?

References:
–PR Design

Brand Positioning

Brands should aim to have a clear and distinct position in consumers’ minds in order to be more desirable than competitors, and sometimes, these marketing strategies can even influence our lifestyle and language.

Success

Effective advertising attracts customers, but good brand positioning makes them feel privileged.  From Starbucks cups to Louis Vuitton purses, people are willing to pay higher prices for these luxurious products.  Even though I find this quite crazy, I understand their intentions.

Such appreciation could change the brand name into a daily term too; “Google it” and “Kleenex” have been embedded into our vocabulary and now defines the product category.  I sometimes forget that Kleenexes are actually tissues, and that other search engines are available.  This subconscious loyalty is built from brand image.

Fail

But this customer loyalty can be negatively impacted if the company makes the wrong moves, such as the case with Gap’s new logo.  Their attempts to reposition by implementing a “more contemporary and current” logo was beat down.  Customers (me included) preferred the old logo, which was the icon for Gap for over 20 years.  After much criticism, Gap reverted to the old logo.

Old and New Logo

Despite the importance of evolving the brand after its initial creation, protecting it is crucial as well.  Gap’s is an example of a bad and costly strategy that seeked change without maintaining its grounds.  So, while brands should be shy of being obsolete, any repositioning should be of the brand must only improve its place in the consumer’s mind.

References:
–The Gap’s New Logo
–Bloomberg: Gap Scraps New Logo After Backlash, Revives Blue Box