The BlackBerry project has been fun and useful this term. I normally have a strong dislike for marketing projects, because there was always a need for creativity, group work, and presentations. This term I was able to have a topic that I really enjoyed and am interested in, which made the project much easier to complete. I think that I only become creative if I’m enthusiastic and interested in something. My experience with group work hasn’t been pleasant in university, until now, my group mates were helpful and supportive of each other. My group was also very studious in completing individual parts of assignments. The project having the final assignment as a video really helped me out. I found it much easier to be creative and do things that I normally wouldn’t think of doing in a presentation. There were time when my team couldn’t all meet together and work on the project, but Facebook solved that problem for us. We were able to notify each other online and delegate tasks efficiently. Every member was cooperative and willing to work on which ever part was assigned to them. We were successful at managing our time and prioritizing tasks for the team. We were always trying to finish assignments a few days before the deadline to give the team less stress and allow for edits. The video was fun to make and the ideas we all contributed was an interesting and entertaining experience. Everyone was cooperative and the video was recorded successfully in a day. Big thanks to Andrew Jenkins for providing a camera, which saved us the trouble of renting one. Marketing was a fun class and professor Silva’s stories and examples are very interesting, even though I might be quiet in class I definitely paid attention to his stories.

After reading Yue Zhang’s post on the sale of Motorola to Lenovo I started thinking about politics effect in marketing and business. Politics has great effect on how business is done overseas. Regulations, tariffs, and laws hinder a lot of business opportunities and a very obvious one would be Canada’s prevention of a foreign investor, China, from large investments in the oil sectors (Gault, 2014). The Canadian government has regulations that are preventing Chinese Companies from acquiring oil and energy companies. Chinese companies have been suspicious that Canada is deliberately making it tough for Chinese companies’ acquisitions of oil and energy companies to pass through reviews. I understand that the Canadian government may be cautious to pass through massive acquisitions by state-backed companies from China, but it’s consistent denial of the acquisitions aren’t bringing them a reputation of being good international business destination. Canada has most of it’s oil and energy exported to USA, but USA may not always keep the importing of oil and energy from Canada at a consistent amount. If Canada leaves an unforgettable bad experience for China, then perhaps future negotiations may not go as smoothly as they could. Let’s not even think about China innovating new methods to sustain the energy and oil needs in their country and perhaps taking their vision completely away from Canada to Middle East. Canada should in my opinion stay on good terms with China since China is a major player in the international market. Another interesting fact that occurred due to the strict regulations in Canada is the new method China came up with in response to their perceived suspiciously tough reviews of their acquisitions. China may just decide to purchase land and develop the oil and energy sites themselves, since land acquisitions are more lenient than company acquisitions (Vanderklippe, 2014). Perhaps Canada may have to reconsider their decisions and plan for targeting a different market.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/asian-pacific-business/for-china-an-oil-sands-investment-that-cant-be-blocked/article17446725/

http://www.albertaoilmagazine.com/2014/01/seekingthedragon-going-up/

COMM 296 Blog 2 Why did Lenovo buy Motorola

Cheap Versus Better

Price vs. Quality, a business decision that every company has to make. Do you go with Price and follow the paths of giants like McDonalds and Walmart or do you enjoy some high quality cuisine at a local restaurant and shop for your home necessities and specialized shops? Like Seth Godin mentions, there is market for cheaper and good enough alternatives, which I translate into a factor that paved the path for fast food giants like McDonalds (Godin, 2014). The number of customers for McDonalds in one store in one day would most likely be more than most higher quality restaurants in one week; maybe more than in one month. This “go cheaper” strategy worked very well for Walmart as they ran competitors down with their low low prices. Walmart is known for being cheaper than other retail stores and people go to Walmarts’ looking for a cheap deal. “Go cheaper” works for some, but not all the time. For example, would when you purchase a cheaper computer mouse and it stops working after a year, when a quality mouse that may cost twice the price but lasts twice as long and performs better (YNAB forum, 2012). In the long term, buying quality over inexpensive could save more money. Better quality products builds loyalty and grows the company. Customers that are happy with the product will mention this fact to people they know and your product just received free marketing by word of mouth. The Consistency Principle, created by Robert Cialdini, indicates that when a customer buys the product and enjoy it then those around them are more likely to purchase the product. If a company can develop a product to be of high enough quality that people will miss it if it’s gone, then the company has been successful by going better.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/

http://forum.youneedabudget.com/discussion/15084/buying-cheap-vs-buying-quality

Groupon, a phenomenon on how powerful the internet can influence marketing and business in modern society. Groupon started with humble beginnings in Chicago in 2008 and expanded into a billion dollar valued company in 2010 (Steiner, 2010). It was able to skyrocket itself into the billion dollars zone in just two years, because it took advantage of technological changes and the moving trend to a more social media based world. Groupon utilized a strong marketing mix with a very beneficial price factor to its goods, which are gift certificates and deals for stores near the customers. It provided cheaper prices than normal to customers by making deals with the local stores, which sells to the consumers that are looking for cheaper alternatives to products around them. Consumers go to the Groupon website to look for better valued deals and the discounts Groupon indicates are definitely attractive to the deal-seeking individuals with Vancouver having 50-90% discount rates (Groupon, 2014). Its use of online distribution is very convenient for the growing tech-savvy market. It utilizes location excellence and price excellence to attract its customers. It may be glorious to have a company that is one of the quickest to a billion dollars value, but there is quite a bit of questioning of the company’s advertisements on the website. In 2011, Groupon breached ASA code for promoting deals that were not fully truthful (Sweney, 2011). One of the deals that violated the ASA code was about breast enhancing sessions advertising to bring results in five to eight weeks, which was found to be unrealistic and misleading since the claim was based on 6 subjects. Groupon’s lack of discipline in verifying claims and prioritizing customer confidence is hurting the company. Groupon’s growth has been amazing, but hopefully it doesn’t burst like an oversized balloon.

Groupon Deals Example:

http://www.groupon.ca/

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0830/entrepreneurs-groupon-facebook-twitter-next-web-phenom.html

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/dec/07/groupon-breaches-asa-code

111.5 million viewers and millions more after the actual game that had their attention captured by creative and eye-catching commercials for the 2014 Super Bowl. The game itself may not have been as interesting and exciting as fans would have expected, but the commercials definitely stepped up their game to entertain the viewers. Companies incur large expenses to produce the commercials that they place in the Super Bowl commercial time slots for $4,000,000 per 30 seconds and they do it because it works. The commercials are exposed to real-time viewers that amounts to approximately 21.7 percent of the North American population (529 Million). That is a large number of current and potential consumers to market to with clever, meaningful, and memorable commercials. Companies who advertise during the Super Bowl, is historically, rewarded with an increase in brand recognition and higher gross income (Samuelson, 2013). Well-made commercials this year that caught my eyes were the two car commercials for Jaguar and KIA. The commercial for Jaguar was entertaining and used celebrity star influence very well. “Have you ever noticed how in Hollywood movies, all the villains are played by Brits?” the main idea behind the commercial, which marked the car with a bad boy feel, a rebellious side, and power (Power that all villains look for and finds in Jaguar vehicles). This commercial works very well in America which looks for power in an automobile vehicle (Jaguar and Villains). The KIA K900 commercial was a star influenced one as well, Morpheus from the Matrix Trilogy, and its use of concepts from the trilogy was entertaining and recognizable, which made it more memorable. It’s use of music and dialog marked it as a luxury car while the signature matrix explosions and effects helped give it a sense of being powerful; perhaps indestructible (KIA and Morpheus). I can’t speak for other viewers, but these two commercials definitely caught my eyes and improved my image of Jaguar and KIA.

http://www.worldpopulationstatistics.com/north-america-population-2013/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/super-bowl-2014-ratings-set-new-record/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/community/super-bowl-commercials-2014-s-10-best-1.2520976

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/so-do-super-bowl-ads-really-work

Nike has been targeting children by feeding them the idea that Nike products, especially the Nike shoes, will make them be stronger, faster, more confident, and able to obtain endless possibilities. Nike’s marketing campaigns are able to “brainwash” individuals to believe that Nike shoes will make them play soccer like Ronaldinho, known Brazilian soccer player. Here is a great example of what one can achieve by putting on a pair of Nike’s magical shoes (Ronaldinho & Nike). Take a look at basketball commercials from Nike (Michael Jordan & Air Jordan). This video speaks to me that those kids play like NBA stars, because they possess “Jordans” and they just instantly become a skilled player like Jordan (#23 Jersey at 0:39). Commercials that implies connection between performance and Nike’s shoes makes children misunderstand the value that Nike products bring. Children may understand Nike products to be items that makes one a better athlete, a status symbol to be like their athletic idols, a hope to become a sport superstar. Children mostly would not understand that these “benefits” are not actually proven. They are willing to pester their parents, who may not be able to afford a $300 luxury item, until they receive the desired products. These marketing tactics could very well influence young children to become materialistic, insecure without Nike goods, even perform drastic and dangerous activities like fighting and gun shots (News Article on Brawls and Gun Shot for Nike).

We’re all capable of a little more – Nike Commercial

We’re all capable of a little more — a little faster, a little higher, a little stronger, a little more (ethical).

http://www.kulturekritic.com/2012/08/men/dr-boyce-why-i-am-boycotting-nikes-lebron-james-sneaker/

http://leagueoffans.org/2012/08/23/new-300-nike-lebron-james-shoe-is-absurd-and-unethical/