Mingchi Choo's Blog

Apparently, technology has progressed to the point where it’s no longer necessary to physically go out and meet girls if you’re in search of a hookup. Tinder is a dating app that works on the simple basis of see and swipe. After giving the app permission to sign in with your Facebook ID, which hopefully includes your gender, age, photos, and sexual orientation, it then presents you with a picture of someone you’re sexually compatible with. If you like them, swipe right. If not, swipe left. It’s that easy. Once the app successfully matches you with one of the ‘yes’ candidates who also swiped right for you, you’re given the opportunity to start a private conversation. What happens next is up to you.

Possibly following in the footsteps of Facebook’s success, Tinder first launched its marketing campaign at various colleges. The main difference, however, was specifically which colleges they chose. Rather than aiming for its entire target market at once, they chose to focus on the portion that would act as satellites and would continue spreading the app on their own once they had been exposed to it. That’s what I believe was the most ingenious part of their plan. They targeted schools known for their reputation as ‘party schools,’ such as the University of Southern California, and narrowed it down even further from there, approaching those they considered to be “the highly social kinds on campus, the people that were looked up to in their peer groups.” Within a couple months even the CEO of Match.com was questioning just how they had managed such extraordinary growth, purely through word-of-mouth.

One year after its launch, Tinder makes two million matches a day on average. In August 2013, 3 billion swipes took place.

Related Links:

BloombergBusinessweek: Dating App Tinder Catches Fire

Tinder’s Homepage

At what point does friendly competition turn into an all-out war? And, more importantly: at what point should ethics be considered when waging that war?

With its first product released in 2007, Chobani could be considered an underdog in the yogurt world, especially when compared to a giant like Danone. However, Chobani became the largest seller of Greek yogurt in the US market within two years — so to retaliate, Danone upped the focus on its Greek yogurt line, Dannon Oikos, launching an aggressive marketing plan. Tactics used included changes to the packaging that emphasized the Greek origin of their product, advertising in men’s fitness magazines, and celebrity endorsements by a Greek-American actor named John Stamos. Coupled with a Super Bowl ad and countless in-store samples, this is a clear example of how a well-established player in the market can employ marketing to greatly impede the progress of newcomers.

Granted, this is something that should be expected in business, but it still highlights an interesting question: when should companies draw the line when it comes to aggressive marketing policies? Is it when they have forced all other competitors out of the market? Granted, the Greek yogurt market has not become a monopoly, but how close does it have to get before it becomes a question of ethics? On the flip side, is it acceptable because they are protecting themselves and their own profits?

Since 2011, Chobani’s market share has fallen from nearly 50% of the Greek yogurt market to 39%. This is a 11% drop, compared to Danone whose share rose from 18% to 29%. Chobani is currently fighting back through price cuts in order to hold on to its customers, and has recently recalled a shipment of moldy yogurt that has caused over 200 reported cases of illness.

Related Links:

Medical Daily: Chobani Recall 2013 Update: 223 Complaints Associated With Moldy Yogurts

Bloomberg Businessweek: A Culture Clash in the Yogurt Aisle

Bloomberg Businessweek: Danone Plots Revenge Against Chobani

Traditional methods versus mass production in factories — a battle that is hardly a newcomer to the global stage. Trends in history have shown that people tend to lean towards the latter simply because the decrease in time and costs make it worthwhile to sacrifice a bit of quality.

So, which way will the market of croissants in Paris swing? More and more vendors are using frozen, factory-made variants to cut costs, something which is becoming a growing issue. In a city where many purists who insist that the taste of handmade croissants is superior, will traditional methods win out in the end?

Similarly to the hockey stick industry in Canada discussed during class, traditional methods may gradually be forced out. Lower costs will allow vendors using frozen croissants to lower their prices, hence giving them a competitive edge over those who make them by hand. However, those who use the older methods will be left with a point of difference that appeals to many Parisians. Will the culture-laden population of Paris be able to maintain their strong traditions, or will practicality and the lure of profits win out? It could go either way at this rate.

Related Links:

Canadian Business: The croissant war in Paris