Marketing&Me

I think the most valuable thing I took away from Comm299 was the way we were always driven to think long-term career-wise and to be proactive in everything in which we were involved: from how we manage our time, to how to go on the hunt for a job, as well as just interacting with our peers on a day-to-day basis.

With the resume project – I wasn’t a fan of getting a zero, but there is no doubt that I came out of the course with a resume incomparably better than what I had at the start. Some common sense was certainly involved as well, but applying some of the interview and networking skills we learned in class as well as a top-notch resume and cover letter definitely contributed my success in lining up an internship this summer, through the COOL website I might add.

The number one most influential person in my life is my father. He taught me honesty, integrity, and how to stand up for what I believe in. He instilled in me a strong work ethic and showed me the value of discipline.

Almost everything he tells me – advice, reprimands, encouragement – I eventually find to be true, whether or not I accept it at the time. For this I know I can always trust him and I have the utmost respect for him.

I was thinking about how many new business ventures fail in a short period of time, and how many times this is related to the inability to generate enough product awareness in the market. The “Mom’s Healthy Secrets” cereal company is a good example of how difficult it is to break into an established market with a new product. Another classmate was discussing in their Blog Post how people will often try to get on a show such as Dragons Den not only because they need the capital but also because it is a great way to get wide exposure to their unknown products. Promotional and communication costs are extremely high when introducing a new product, and this is an example of an innovative way to generate initial exposure.

It’s interesting how much influence a brand name can have in our purchase decisions. Especially when buying products of which we have a limited knowledge base, we often will assume that a higher priced brand or one that is in our evoked set offers better value, whether or not the price is an indicator of quality. For example, when buying guitar strings recently, I opted for the the more expensive brand name which I had purchased before, even though I had never tried the cheaper “in-store” brand. I did this not because I have any concrete proof that it’s better, but because the overall “value” I felt I was getting from the purchase was higher. This is an example of just how valuable a well-established brand can be to a company.

Recently, a number of new wireless providers have entered the Canadian market, and sparked a flurry of competitive activity among the “Big 3” telecommunications companies. Mobilicity, WIND Mobile, and Public Mobile are three new private companies are offering some stiff competition to the established carriers because they are building their own neworks, not just using the same infrastructure. They are marketing their services mainly to “talk and text” consumers, those with limited wireless needs for whom price is a critical decision maker. In response, Rogers has launched a new brand, Chatr, and Bell and Telus say they are soon to follow with low-cost carriers.

I think this heightened competition is a great thing for Canadian consumers; we have some of the highest prices for wireless service in the world. As the companies scramble to reposition and promote their brands and services, prices will begin to steadily drop.

There are thousands of causes across the world for which people hold fundraising events and awareness campaigns, but one of the most successful in recent years has been Movember. The Movember foundation has been running charity events since 2004 in Australia and New Zealand, but in 2007 the campaign was launched in North America and parts of Europe and has really taken off. The premise: men grow a moustache for the month of November in order to raise awareness and funds for prostate cancer research. I think the marketing of this ‘event’ has been so successful because how simple and noticeable is its driving force – the moustache. It creates humor, conversation, spawns competition and comradery, and all this has a compounding effect on the awareness of the issues. Granted, it can become just something to do, a joke or a statement, but overall the fundraising aspect has had amazing results – in 2009, $7.8 million was raised in Canada alone for prostate cancer research.

Co-branding can be a great way to expand your market or take advantage of new markets by gaining access to other company’s loyal customer bases. One major thing to look for in a brand partner is the brand equity: if one brand is more widely recognized or is associated with more value than the other, then it is more likely that the lower-valued brand will “bring down” the other. But it has to make sense: not only should the benefits be logical but there should also be a good fit between the core philosophies and values of the companies. This article highlights some factors to consider when making co-branding decisions: Business Week

The article highlighted three decision factors which can guide companies through choosing a co-branding parter: many companies should co-brand only with other companies that hold similar values, a similar status in their class, and where they can maintain full rights to review and approve decisions. These things will greatly narrow their possibilities, but it will also reduce risk by eliminating many less than ideal options.

This blog highlights some interesting and unexpected co-branding partnerships, such as Ferrari and Acer (above image).

Over thanksgiving I happened to travel from Kamloops to Vancouver on a Greyhound bus for the first time in years and was surprised at their current state of affairs. They have an up-to-date and well designed website including online booking, etc. but this is in stark contrast to their bus depots, which look and feel like they’ve been stuck in time since the 80’s. Everything from the plastic chairs to the arcade games feel like they haven’t changed in decades. The front office was closed for much of the afternoon, and the electronic booking system was so ineffective the receptionist had to make several calls to just see if she could continue to book the bus in question. While these issues may exist mainly in smaller centers, Kamloops is not that small of a town and is a rather central hub in BC.

I was thinking about how Greyhound is the only (major) public bus service in Canada and therefore has a virtual monopoly on many routes, giving them little incentive to upgrade their service. However, the government does require them to operate many unprofitable routes, resulting  in demands for heavy subsidies (for example, greyhound says they lose $7.5 million per year just operating routes in Alberta – http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Greyhound+says+losses+could+portend+massive+Alberta+cuts/3570826/story.html).

It struck me just how much it would take to rejuvenate the company’s image. First of all, it would take a massive amount of money to overhaul the system, but also they would need a major re-positioning in terms of how they are viewed by the public. Currently, greyhound is often seen as mainly used by the lower levels of society; those less fortunate and with few options (including s a lot of poor students such as myself). Taking the Greyhound is often seen as a ‘last resort’ by many.

While travelling in Europe over the summer I rode buses in many different countries, and was surprised at the quality of the service even in some countries where you may not expect it. For example, bus lines in Slovakia and Croatia were efficient, modern, on time, and reasonably priced, few of which describe Greyhound buses in Canada. Granted, their volume is much higher and distances generally shorter, but I think much can still be learned from some of these successful bus services in terms of how they have effectively marketed their product.

This recent advertisement from GMC uses irony to catch attention, but it caught a little too much attention from certain parties: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel owns Einstein’s publicity rights and is suing them for the illegal use of the image. They claim the advertisement causes injury to their image rights and Einstein’s reputation. GM transfers the blame for the infringement to the firm they hired to do the advertisement, who they claimed to be ‘reputable’. This shows how important your research can be prior to outsourcing advertising.

Whether or not the university’s claims are valid, this also shows how firms are pushing the boundaries of what might be considered acceptable advertising techniques. While the ad may not disrespect Einstein’s reputation, and most people would just consider this humorous, it does show the extend a firm will go to try to be original and catch people’s attention. And some would say – all publicity is good publicity; even the media attention brought on by a lawsuit can be used to get a brand noticed and talked about.