People in several countries around the world are very familiar with April Fool’s Day. If you’re not aware of this “holiday”, you may want to get out from under that rock. Basically, this is a day people around the world play practical jokes on each other. Now, what happens when a company pranks its consumers? Hilarity ensues, but not for everyone. As a blogger on Adages points out, marketers can’t assume that every customer has a “funny bone.” Recently, Proctor and Gamble released an advertisement on their Facebook page, announcing that it was coming out with a new bacon flavoured Scope mouthwash.
To many consumers’ dismay, the company soon revealed that it had been merely a joke. To be honest, who honestly thought that was real?! Clearly, a lot more people than P&G expected. Several people stated that they had already gone to the store to buy the new product, only to be disappointed that there wasn’t any to be found. Others “unliked” the Facebook page and criticised them, taking it as far as to say that they will never buy another P&G product again. However, this statement is almost impossible, as the customer will probably find himself using his toothpaste (Crest), shampoo (Head and Shoulders), and detergent (Tide), only to find out that they are all owned by Proctor and Gamble. Quite unlikely, I must say, as its brands dominate many of their respective markets.

Personally, I found this advertising scheme to be hilarious, and it even showed that the brand itself had some personality. These angry consumers’ responses honestly made me laugh, too. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see if P&G’s PR and marketing sectors will attempt to handle this, or if they’ll just laugh it off along with me (and all the other rational customers).

Throughout this semester, I was given the opportunity to work on a progressive marketing project with a number of my classmates. The assignments took up quite a significant amount of time each week for my team, as we preferred to fully discuss our decisions together in order to make sure that we were all always on the same page. Through this experience, I was able to learn a lot about myself and about my team members. I further developed my team working and interpersonal skills through the constant interactions with my teammates, and I learned how to better incorporate each person’s ideas into our overall decisions. Also, I gained a deeper understanding of the marketing topics that we were learning in class, as we had to apply terms and strategies by analyzing specific company case. For example, I learned how to create a clear and concise positioning statement for our company, Zara, in relation to the unique segment we believed would be the most profitable.
However, my team and I made some mistakes throughout this whole process. After Assignment 1, we did not split the work up into sections for each of us to do individually, as many of the parts were interrelated. We ended up wasting a lot of time meeting, as half of us could not work on the same thing at the same time anyway, especially during the video project. We realized a little too late that we should have split up certain parts that were not dependent and worked on it separately. However, I am glad to learn from these experiences, and I will make sure to correct these errors in the future. Overall, I was able to gain and improve on a number of skills from the assignments, and I truly believe that this has been an incredibly valuable experience.

The general population is well aware of the magic of the Photoshop, as well as the role that it plays in fashion and beauty marketing. Even when the model in a photograph looks incredibly stunning already, companies never fail to use the photo editing program to further enhance the lighting, the person’s figure or face, and even the clothes and makeup. Sometimes it even ends up looking inhuman and alien-like. However, The Globe and Mail reports that firms like Unilever’s Dove, has cleverly criticized this beauty industry norm to help advertise its own products. Using ads that show the drastic effects of Photoshop, as well as ads that show that women don’t need these enhancements and are beautiful in their real skin, has drawn much of the public’s attention to its marketing strategy. For example, the video below is one of Dove’s most famous ones:

DOVE “Evolution” from David Hayman on Vimeo.
Modern technology is amazing, isn’t it? I personally love these commercials, not only because it is an ingenious tactic, but also because it sends the right message to women out there, who are constantly being pressured to be skinnier and more “flawless” than possible. These Dove commercials illustrate that beauty standards are too exaggerated because of makeup and technology, and that the problem lies not within the individual, but within society’s perceptions. Many famous celebrities have even commented on the effects of Photoshop in their own personal experiences. A notable example is Jennifer Lawrence, who recently commented at the Oscars on her digitally retouched photos from her Dior campaign, declaring, “That doesn’t look like me at all…[o]f course it’s Photoshop. People don’t look like that.”

Photo credits to Huffington Post.

Perhaps it is time that fashion and beauty companies reconsider its marketing strategies and tone down the amount of photo editing used in the future. While the effects may be amazing, most of what the public typically receives are feelings of incompetence and low self-esteem.

The long fought battle between Apple and Samsung has just begun. As everyone knows, these two companies are two of the leading providers of mobile phones these days, and they are constantly striving to keep their market share. Recently, CNET has reported that Samsung has outspent its rival in regards to marketing, consuming a whopping $401 million. In comparison, Apple has a reported budget of $333 million. Because Samsung has not been on the scene as long as Apple has, they have had to go further in leveraging its marketing strategies in order to win over the consumers. With other phones such as the HTC and LG Optimus gaining popularity, firms cannot relax for even one moment. Samsung has been known to heavily advertise its “Next Big Thing” campaigns everywhere, and it even utilizes and insults Apple at the same time. Take a look at this commercial, for example:

What better way to show that you’re better than your rival than this? It’s direct, it’s clear, and consumers will understand the message: that Apple is yesterday’s news.  If people actually choose to believe it or not is up to them; however, the meaning is apparent. While Apple does still control a majority of the industry’s profits, Samsung is slowly climbing its way up, and is also expected to continue heavily with its promotions. With the new Galaxy S IV coming to carriers in May, the corporation will be able to see the effect of its innovation, research, and marketing on the consumers soon enough. Personally, I’m getting myself on the pre-order list ASAP.

Photo credits to pocket-lint.com.

YouTube is home to more than a million video creators around the world, bringing in over 800 million unique user visits each month. As Eleanore mentions in her blog post, “$600,000 – $2,000,000 from YouTube Videos. Wow.”, these video makers can earn up to 2 million dollars a year; that is, if they have enough views and subscribers. So, how do they get more views? More followers? The answer is of course, marketing.
As Eleanore mentioned, marketing acts as a mediator of the self-interests of a business and the needs of the buyer, and it allows others to know where your personalities and traits lie. As a YouTube creator, it is not easy in the beginning to gain subscribers and to get their videos out to the right people. These people need to utilize the features of YouTube and other channels in order to better advertise their videos, whether it is about makeup, humour, or life advice. For instance, the thumbnail that appears for each video is part of what brings in the viewers. If the picture shows something interesting, shocking, or amazing, then more people will click the video. Furthermore, just having subscribers doesn’t mean that they’ll watch all your videos. This means that the creators must also think about the title of the video for peaking the interests of the viewers. The more outrageous, the better.  Look at this video, for example:

The title makes you curious, doesn’t it? What surprise? What’s going to happen? You’ll only know if you watch the video. As it turns out, the video turned out to be an advertisement for a TV channel, but it was exciting while it lasted. However, as we can see, marketing isn’t just important for large corporations, but also for individuals. If one is successful, they might be able to earn as much as Jenna Marbles does.

The Super Bowl has been America’s most viewed television broadcast, with an average of 111 million spectators each year, and has also become one of the most watched sports events in the world. Because of this, big companies vie for a spot in the commercials that air during the game. It has even turned into what appears to be a social phenomenon, as many viewers tune in just to watch and judge these advertisements. Corporations, such as Doritos, Mercedes-Benz, and Samsung pay around $4 million for 30 seconds worth of an ad in order to market their products to the large audience.
So, who won the Super Bowl marketing war? Personally, my favourite was the Budweiser’s Clydesdales commercial:

While the most favoured advertisement may be up for debate, many agree that Oreo takes the award for quickest, wittiest, and most responsive. With consumers constantly on social networking sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, firms must do more than the traditional commercial to catch the attention of these people. The sudden, unexpected power outage during the third quarter, that caused the audience to wait in darkness for more than half an hour, ended up being skilfully taken advantage of by Oreo’s social media team. Only a few minutes after the shortage occurred, the company released this simple, yet effective, picture on its Twitter:

Photo credits to Wired.com.

With 15,000 retweets and 20,000 Facebook likes, Oreo successfully got their brand out to its consumers. This has shown the importance of social media in today’s marketing strategies, and the abundant interaction between consumers and the web. If firms wish to keep a competitive advantage, they must not concentrate only on the typical channels of promotion, but more responsive and interactive ones as well. Although the profits associated with this particular move may not be measurable, the benefits brought to the brand and its image are undeniable.

Too many products and services these days that are promoted in TV commercials, posters and other types of ads are accused of taking their marketing tactics to and unethical extent, crossing the line by misleading consumers. These direct channels of marketing are often recognized for their exaggerated facts and deceptive information. However, what happens when networks of communication that consumers depend on for reports on such unethical advertising are instead also used as a form of persuasion? Utter confusion.
A recent case regarding an article published on The Atlantic news has sparked controversy over its clear advertising for Scientology. Disregarding any thought of an objective report, the editorial leads headstrong into a lengthy post that blatantly praises the religion. Although the article is printed under “Sponsor Content”, it is not in the traditional section of advertisements, hoping that readers will take the time to notice if presented differently. This new business approach has led to the Atlantic’s defined audience of “America’s most influential individuals who wish to be…informed” to protest in an outcry of rage. To further exacerbate this situation, the marketing team had been deleting any negative comments on the website regarding the article’s content. Talk about freedom of speech.
Thanks to this, readers who might have previously been interested in reading these advertorials are most likely not coming back again. The incident has not only negatively affected how the Atlantic’s readers view and trust this news site, but it has also not helped to improve anyone’s view on Scientology either. If this news company wishes to keep its intelligent readers from returning ever again, they must start to seriously consider the repercussions of their marketing news division. If the company is concerned about its lack of cash inflow, it should realize that behaving in an ethical manner might be the foundation to long-term profitability.

Darah Hansen recently reported in her Vancouver Sun blog that “nasty workers earn more money.” A new study published by the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology found that the majority of employees who were unpleasant and ill mannered were in fact paid more than their friendlier coworkers. The experiment was conducted with a sample of around 10,000 workers in a variety of professions, salaries, and ages. Disagreeable men tended to earn around 18 percent more annually than the nicer male, whereas women earned around 5 percent more.

Picture credits to jillbremer.com

In my experiences throughout school and the workplace, I have not often observed that more agreeable colleagues were less successful or paid less. In fact, I believe that these people are more socially active, willing to compromise, and considerably more productive in group activities. However, I have noticed that these people sometimes appear to have difficulties expressing their views and are less assertive than others. The Wall Street Journal states that being highly agreeable does not conform “to expectations of ‘masculine behavior’.” People who are rude and unfriendly are also more likely to use unconventional means to artificially advance their career. It appears that the saying, “nice guys finish last,” might really be true.

Using Nalgene as the perfect example, Josh states in his blog that it is all about the consumer perception of a brand and product that is crucial to the organization’s positioning. When the company’s product was implicated as having a major health concern, consumers rejected its well-known water bottles.

Similarly, Coca-Cola faced its biggest crisis when they attempted to change to an improved formula called “new Coke”. Although this upgraded recipe was tested to fit the tastes of almost 200,000 consumers, its loyal fans felt a special bond to the brand already. While the corporation initiated this plan in order to counter its biggest competitor in the market, Pepsi, it was forced to return the original formula. However, somehow, this disaster had actually rekindled the consumer’s affection for the original Coke, causing sales to surpass its competitors, as well as allowing the brand to reach new heights.

                    
Picture credits to Wikimedia and www.americansweets.com

As demonstrated by these cases, it appears that it is in fact the consumer’s perception of the brand and the product that determines the success of the company. While the product or service’s quality may improve, remain identical, or deteriorate, none of this truly matters unless it’s in the eyes of the customers.

Picture credits to gigjets.com.

Nintendo had created the ultimate childhood experience for everyone, bringing to us games consoles like the Nintendo 64 and Wii. The company displays all the characteristics of an entrepreneurial venture: substantial wealth generation in a short period of time, innovation, and risk. Although the establishment was initially founded as a card business, its actual venture into the electronics market created massive short-term profits. The Nintendo Entertainment System was introduced in 1985, and it became an instant success, selling over 60 million units in two years.

Picture credits to www.gameyea.com

Soon after that, the Gameboy was released, becoming the most successful video game system ever invented. Nintendo continued to devise even more advanced game consoles, displaying the company’s constant innovation, resulting in what eventually became billions of dollars in profits. The risk of this venture was not small, as the video game industry had crashed in 1983 because of growing home computer usage. It was not until Nintendo entered the market that the video game industry was revitalized. The fact that Nintendo was able to overcome all the obstacles and generate such substantial profit in the short-term shows that it is a commendable entrepreneurial venture.