Month: November 2010

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).