When I walked into class the first day and heard about the assignments, I said to myself: “Oh man, not another group project”. In my short time as a Sauder student, I thought I had already been a part of enough groups, especially since I am somewhat of an independent worker. Surprisingly, though, the assignments have shaped not just my team-working ability, but also my comprehension of the subject matter, and have also exposed me to establishing new friendships outside of my norm.

If I had a do over, I would be sure to be aware of the advantages of the course set up, and get involved from day 1. It took me a while to get around to feeling comfortable with the team, which is something I wish I had done early on.

However, maybe the most important thing I have learned, which I can still apply for the final, is to learn the subject matter for my personal learning, and not to simply pass the course. I have always aimed at getting high grades in school, but not always have I established a personal connection with the content. What I have learned is that if you study a subject not to get a good grade, but to TRULY learn it for yourself, not only will you do better, but it will stick around! Too many times have I gotten a good grade, to forget it completely within a month of taking the exam!

This has only been brought to my attention thanks to this reflective post, as well as personal endeavors that have required knowledge learned in university. As it turns out, school work IS used in the real world!

Does a ‘Social Smoker’ Count as a Smoker? The Ontario Ministry of Health sure thinks so, and they have voiced their opinion through a campaign to quit the denial of ‘social smokers’.

Take a look at the following video:

The campaign, which also includes a clip on Social Farting, makes a mockery out of the thousands who deny being smokers, and classify themselves as social smokers. Whether or not it has had a serious effect on the smoking community is unsure, but it has, at the very least, entertainingly gained some buzz around the country.

Personally, I think that the whole ‘Quit the Denial’ campaign has done a great job of taking a different approach to ordinary smoking commercials. Other ‘quit smoking’ ads have always ended up making me feel a little depressed somehow, but I must say that this one may have even gotten a bit of a laugh out of me. In fact, I have shown some friends who claim to be Social Smokers, and even they have consciously admitted to the ridicule of the denial.

While some people humorously accept the campaign, other smokers have not been so open, claiming in several blogs that they do not tolerate people preaching to them about how they should, and should not smoke.

Whatever side you’re on though, after watching it, you can not help but feel a little idiotic the next time you deny being a smoker. And most importantly, do not be surprised if there is a feint farty smell lingering around the next social smoke you DO have.

When people think of Samsung’s ad campaigns, the first that probably comes to mind is the IPhone mockery. Large masses of people line up waiting for the release of an IPhone which they humorously claim has not changed from the previous one. But the truth is that these commercials along with other Samsung concerts, events, and other advertising strategies have been revolutionary in the smartphone market.

With the increasing growth of the smartphone, Samsung has emerged as an expected bestseller for the following year. On Thursday, the Samsung will unveil its Galaxy S IV, the smartphone that will give the IPhone 5 a run for its money. But Samsung’s forecast to be the “first smartphone to outsell the iPhone in a calendar year” does not come without a cost (Adrian Covert, CNN Money).

In fact, Asymco’s Horace Dediu claims that in 2012, Samsung’s marketing budget exceeded that of Apple, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, and Coca-Cola combined!!!
This paid off however, as Samsung’s sales doubled, and reached a leading 30% smartphone market share takeover. The Galaxy S IV’s unveiling and releasing won’t change their strategy, as promotion spending will be heavily relied upon, one that not many competitors can afford. The size of Samsung allows it to rack up these huge costs, and hang around until sales begin to pour in.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/13/technology/mobile/samsung-galaxy-s-iv/index.html?iid=Lead

I recently came across an interesting article that supports the phrase that “any publicity is good publicity”. Despite the large amount of studies that believed to have concluded the fact that bad publicity indeed diminishes sales, a new study published in the Harvard Business Review suggests that for the right product in the right industry, bad publicity can increase sales.

The breakthrough came when the three analysts searched the sales trends of 250 fictional novels published between 2001 and 2003, and compared sales before and after the review of a critic was publicized. While good reviews related to known authors, there was no surprise that sales saw an increase. Neither was it a surprise that poor reviews for known authors caused a decline in sales for the given novel. The true wonder came when unknown authors who were given negative reviews saw a 45% increase in sales.

Overall, what can be taken from this study as well as more relevant examples is that for products whose branding has not reached public recognition (or even acknowledgement), the awareness that is brought towards the product completely overshadows the negative effect of the review. Another key point brought upon by the study that supports the claim is that as product recognition lasts, the critique will eventually subside, and will soon be a long lost memory.

Upon first sight, I was quite baffled by the article. By trying to think of personal examples that would relate to the claim, I didn’t quite understand how it could work out. But after reading through, it brought a few real life examples to mind that I was very intrigued by. The main one relating to an NFL prospect, Manti T’eo, who was accused of making up a story about a fake deceased girlfriend, leading to an awe inspired game performance leading up to the NFL draft. Whether the story was planned or he was the victim of a sick hoax, the truth is that I didn’t know about the player until the story broke out. Now, he is thought by many to be a possible first round draft pick to enter the NFL the following season. I guess negative publicity can pan out for the better.

http://business.financialpost.com/2012/12/12/bad-publicity-can-generate-net-benefit-for-lesser-known-brands-products/?__lsa=38cd-c82d

Growing up as a dedicated and avid NFL fan, I have always been intrigued by the commercials surrounding the Super Bowl. But as I further engage in my business studies, I have grown a whole new interest in the business end of the advertising.

With Super Bowl 47 fast approaching this coming Sunday, the big game isn’t the only thing grabbing the attention of viewers around the world. Jon Swallen, chief research officer at Kantar, believes up to half of the expected 110 million viewers tune in for the commercials alone. The success of Super Bowl ads has increased tremendously over the past decade, and it is evident by the rate at which airtime costs are rising. Up 7% since last year, 2013’s main event has 30-second Super Bowl commercials selling for up to $4 million, and 60-second commercials for $7.5 million.

Over the past years, the market itself has put upward pressure on the prices, as advertisers compete for the limited airtime. The inexistence of pressure set by CBS proves that these advertisers invest steep amounts of money because they truly believe the price is worth the possible benefit. After all, the Super Bowl is the most viewed sporting event in US television.

Take a look at what Volkswagen has planned during their allotted time:

Volkswagen “Get Happy” Commercial

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/01/14/super-bowl-ad-costs-kantar-media/1833807/

Although Lance Armstrong would not initially appear to be a subject of discussion when it comes to the topic of marketing misrepresentation, take a closer look. After all, as The Atlantic Magazine says, Armstrong is no ordinary man; rather he is a ‘marketable brand’. While having battled and overcome testicular cancer, Lance had for so long been portrayed as a sort of super human, inspirational figure. From having racked up a total of seven consecutive Tour de France victories to starting up his Livestrong foundation (which has raised over $470 million dollars for cancer awareness), his accomplishments seem nothing short of amazing. But as the truth of his doping spills over, Armstrong’s entire image has come into doubt.

Lance Armstrong Admits To Doping (Video)

The question that now arises is whether or not his figure can still be saved. Is there still hope for Armstrong to rebrand himself? If so, what would it take? We have previously seen examples of athletes such as Tiger Woods or Mark McGuire who have overcome their wounded public image, and repositioned themselves as some of the ‘greats’ in the world of sports. No case, however, has come close to the extent and deception of Armstrong’s, where even his confession has been put in doubt. Was it sincere? What are his true intentions? As expected though, Lance Armstrong is not the most credible person at the moment, where even his truths appear to be lies. Either way, the way he portrays himself over the next few days will be very important in his battle for public acceptance, and no one knows quite how this will end up.

Link: http://www.calgaryherald.com/sports/Lance+Armstrong+admits+Oprah+Winfrey+interview+doped+Tour+France/7838526/story.html

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!