Marketing Blog for Comm 296

Rachel Li’s blog post caught my eye (Story of a Traveling Tailor: Indochino). Indochino is a Vancouver-based company, whose value proposition is to provide high quality, custom-made yet affordable apparel for men all over the world. What’s so special about this company is its business model

It is completely based online, so that people around the world can get access to it. Also, it’s affordable prices is made possible by cutting out the middlemen (i.e. layers of companies and people who purchase fabric, manage suppliers and sell their products in retail outlets). Indochino makes their services centered around customers, first by giving them the freedom of choice in the customization of their suits and then ensuring prompt delivery (within 3-4 weeks) to their doorstep, at any location around the world. In addition, Indochino provides after-sales services too. Customers are able to send their apparel for further alteration if they’re not satisfied with it and scan the receipt up to $75 back to Indochino and they will get a refund for their alteration work.

What further impressed me is that Indochino doesn’t have a physical storefront but it’s amazing how much of an online presence they’ve established for themselves in just 6-7 years since its inception. They have a strong presence on Facebook with about 125,000 likes on their page, frequently showcasing their latest promotions, often involving generous free gifts with every purchase like ties, collar pins etc. Their webpage is also tastefully designed and easy to navigate. They feature a myriad of shirt, suit, tie colors and design which is always appealing to variety-loving consumers. They have made their online store available on mobile devices too, matching up with the social trend of shopping on-the-go. Indochino has recently updated their mobile site to make it easier to navigate, change customizations, sizes etc, as well as put full orders through in a hassle-free manner. Finally, Indochino has pop-up stores that travel from city to city to further enhance the awareness of their brand and business model. They have traveled to New York, Portland, Seattle, Calgary, just to name a few.

I think what makes Indochino a company to look out for is not only its unique business model but more importantly, just like super successful brands like Apple and Google, they are customer-oriented. By offering multitudes of choices for customers in customization, design, colors, then making the transaction process efficient and hassle free and finally providing after-sales services too definitely bodes well with customers and customers see value in these services. Indochino’s CEO Kyle Vucko sums it up well. He knows that not having a physical retail store still puts them at a disadvantage and thus, he’s focusing more on “how [Indochino] create a more emotive connection with the brand”, emphasizing the consumer-centeredness and fostering a strong consumer-brand relationship. (-:

At first glance, you might think that this is an advertisement for Coke, however, it turns out to be Pepsi’s advert with a slight jab at its life-long rival. One of the biggest marketing rivalries of all time- Coke vs Pepsi.

Some history about this rivalry:

Coke was first founded, then followed by Pepsi 13 years later with the two having almost similar ingredients. In the earlier days, Coke had a significant head start over Pepsi and was selling millions of gallons when Pepsi just started. Pepsi went bankrupt during WWI while Coke expanded overseas and everybody is just starting to recognize its iconic brand. After that, Pepsi rebounded an started advertising heavily and expanded into the snack market as well with Frito Lay while Coca-Cola remained in the beverage industry. Competition became stiff.

Then came the blind taste test  in 1975 by Pepsi where consumers were blind-folded and asked to taste both Coke and Pepsi and see which one they preferred. Pepsi won the blind taste test because people noted that it was ‘sweeter’.

However, Coke was still the hot favorite among consumers in the following years and even up till now, with Coca-Cola being on the most recognized and iconic brands of the world with PepsiCo barely making it into the top 20 (depending on which ranking you’re looking at, but no matter what, Coca-Cola always triumphs!)

Also, I personally feel that the ultimate winner of the Cola Wars goes to Coke. (-:

“When Read Montague of Baylor College Medicine performed a version of the Pepsi Challenge with subjects hooked up to an fMRI machine, he found something interesting. In blind taste tests, most people preferred Pepsi, and Pepsi was associated with a higher level of activity in an area of the brain known as the ventral putamen, which helps us evaluate different flavors. By contrast, in a nonblind test, Coke was more popular and was also associated with increased activity in the medial prefrontal cortex. Montague’s interpretation: This prefrontal activity represented the higher-thinking functions of the brain associating the soda with ad campaigns and, in effect, overriding the taste buds.” (Source)

These findings are groundbreaking and it says a lot about the influence marketing and media has on the success of a product. Even though Pepsi might taste better because it’s “sweeter” and some people do like their drinks to be sweeter, a quote I came across sums this up pretty well: “And while we want something sweet, we don’t necessarily want that kind of long-term relationship with something too sweet.” Instead, Coca-Cola is more invested in building lifelong customer relationships than PepsiCo is and I think this marketing strategy is WAY more effective. This goes to show that a good product itself is not good enough in today’s society. (-:

American comedian Jimmy Kimmel does it again! He goes on the streets of Hollywood with an iPad, tricking people into thinking that he was holding the newly launched iPhone 5s and he asked them what they thought about it. Much to my amazement, many of them fell for it, most claiming that it “looks good” and some even saying that it “looks smaller” than the current iPhone (which clearly isn’t the case).

Whether or not this was staged, I think it tells us a lot about the cult-like following that Apple has. People are willing to line up for hours just to get their hands on the latest Apple gadget. What ever Apple comes out with, there will always be a group of ‘yes men’ that will loyally support them. Does effective marketing have anything to do with this?

Apple markets itself as a very ‘cool’ and ‘sleek’ company, judging from its advertisements. The way they carry themselves on a global media platform is impressive and this leaves a long lasting impression on people too, especially impressionable teenagers and young adults who hanker after items that will elevate their social status. Walking around school with a 13-inch MacBook Pro definitely makes you look cooler.

Fluff aside, Apple also markets itself in a way that makes them customer-centered. Apple has a way of understanding customers better than no other company. They are customer-centered and they are able to understand what we want and need. For example, they introduced “FaceTime” to allow people to connect with their loved ones via video-chat anywhere on the planet, anytime of the day.

Their launch of the latest operating system (iOS 7) is also very brilliantly marketed. After watching the press release, I get the feeling that Apple is continually innovating their products to enhance their consumers’ life. They are very clever in the sense that they not only promote the new features of the iOS 7 but they subtly incorporate how consumers’ lives will be enriched with all these new features.

Customers are able to feel the connectedness that a company fosters with them and this in turn, creates customer loyalty, which is important especially in the increasingly competitive smart phone market. This ‘loyalty’ that customers have then translates to the cult-like following that Apple holds the reign on.

Without effective marketing strategies, not matter how great the product is, it wouldn’t sell as well. Similarly, without all these effective strategies employed by Apple, Apple would not be what it is today.

The Dove advert shown in class last week about a Dove model getting transformed from a imperfection-laden, girl-next-door to a stunning, billboard model struck a chord in me because it reminded me that external beauty is transient and temporary, what Dove defines as ‘true beauty’ comes from within and I’m sure that’s what most females feel after watching a Dove advertisement. I have to agree that it’s effective marketing because it appeals to the emotional side of people, showing that it’s a company with a heart that cares for their customers, not just a mere faceless giant.

Dove is one of the many brands own by the big umbrella company, Unilever.

I would expect the way Dove portrays themselves to be reflective of the values that Unilever holds. However, learning that another personal care brand, Axe, was also affiliated to Unilever somewhat shocked me.

Axe is one of the brands by Unilever and it’s known in the North American market for it’s raunchy advertisements, often highlighting the sex appeal of men and marginalizing women. It portrays how the male population should look like, with masculine features and a toned, bronze body and it also makes women appear like they are subservient to them.

I understand that it’s part of the marketing tactics to target the younger male population to use their products in order to look good and feel as good as the models do on television and it sure is effective especially when your target audience are impressionable, teenaged, pubescent boys.

What I’m uncomfortable with is the contradiction both Dove and Axe bring out, despite being from the same parent firm- one promoting inner beauty while the latter extolling the importance of the exact opposite- sex appeal and physical attraction. Shouldn’t Unilever have a common set of marketing ethics to abide by? And if so, shouldn’t this set of ethics be reflective in all of their brands? Why then the disparity in both Dove and Axe?

I figured that it could be just a genius marketing ploy to cater to the emotional needs of both the female and male population, like how females tend to feel more insecure about their looks while men feel less emotional about such issues and are more concerned with portraying their best. However, I personally feel that ethics (marketing ethics, in this case) is something that should be of paramount importance because having strong values is what builds trust in customers and this trust in customers is likely to result in loyalty. This customer loyalty is something that can’t be bought but can only be built up after a substantial period of time and in the long run, this is essential to the success of the firm.

Just my two cents on this ethical issue. 🙂