The Anchoring Principle

The choice of the blog on which I will comment on, was pretty straightforward. My attention was captured by the blog “The Anchoring Principle” edited  on “Influential Marketing blog” on Friday, November 25.

The “Anchoring Principle” refers to the practice of using one high priced product (an anchor), to make everything else seem cheaper by comparison.

This interesting principle did not sound new to me. Indeed, just a few time ago, I read a book entitled “Influence” written by Robert Cialdini, which explains this concept in a more deeply way.Cialdini refers to this concept as the “contrast principle”.

To better understand this principle, a very easy example could be useful: if we lift a light object first and then a heavy object, we will estimate the second object to be heavier than if we had lifted it without first lifting the light one.

In the same way, people tend to have an “anchor” price for their buying experience and judge the products in relation to that anchor. If the “anchor” price is high, they are more willing to pay an higher price and vice-versa.

Thus, under a marketer point of view, it is much more convenient in a shop to keep a few very high priced items, in order to entice customers to buy the apparently “cheap” ones .

Another way to use this principle in a profitable way for salespeople is to present the expensive item first, if a customer asks for two or more products. Indeed, presenting the expensive item first and following it with the unexpensive one will make the second product seem cheaper than what it actually is.

The great advantage of this principle is not only that it works, but also that it is easy to apply and it is pretty undetectable. Marketers are continously seeking for these weapons of influence and unfortunately customers rarely relize they are deeply influenced by these techniques.

The Battle

Reading some of my classmates’ blogs, I found very interesting Kevin’s one “Complete Image Change”.What caught my attention was the advertisement at the bottom of the page “Get a Mac”. The ads present the Mac personality as young and cool. In this commercial, Mac explicitly declare its superiority above any other brands without specifically mentioning any of them. Probably this ad is pretty famous here in Canada, but since I come from Italy, I’ve never seen it before. I found it very interesting, but I asked myself :”Can an advertisement state the brand’s competitive advantage over the entire market or is it also possible to claim a firm’s superiority over other specific brands?” Thinking about it, I’ve noticed that everyday on TV there are some advertisements in which firms reclaim its superiority in the sector. But what if the sector is made up by only two competitors? Does it change anything? What about the battle between Coca-Cola and Pepsi?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muH-zcOYnFc 

Coca-Cola and Pepsi are two big name brands that share a worldwide profitable market and explicitly fights one against the other to gain more share. Some time ago Pepsi aired a set of ads that proclaimed the superiority of Pepsi on Coca-Cola. Let’s watch one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMo6o0BtFG8
I honestly think that this one is a funny advertisement. But is it fair? The commercial does not list any features and characteristics of the two drinks (Coke is more bitter, while Pepsi is sweeter), but it just claims the supremacy of Pepsi. And what about this one?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMo6o0BtFG8
This commercial was banned. My question is: is it fair to ban? And if yes, when? I am really curious about your opinions.
Another well-known example is the battle between Nike and Adidas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TnG7jyfoWI