Categories
Competiton Marketing

Marketing: Short-term vs Long-term

Marketing is essential in every business. It is the process of defining current and potential customers, and promoting the product accordingly to increase sales. Coca-Cola and Pepsi are the two biggest companies in the beverage industry, and their fierce competition depends greatly on their marketing strategies.

In 2008, for the Beijing Olympic Games, Coca-Cola decided to become official sponsors, taking in consideration the huge potential of the Chinese market. Coca-Cola saw this as the perfect opportunity to strongly compete in a market in which Pepsi was the clear leader.

However, during the Games, a survey concluded that 60% of the people thought that Pepsi was the official sponsor, showing that Coca-Cola’s marketing strategy had clearly failed. Additionally, respondents considered Pepsi a superior brand. Furthermore, only 10% of the respondents said that they were more likely to buy a product only for being an official Olympic sponsor.

Coca-Cola’s main error was focusing their strategy in a short-term, one-time dose of marketing, such as the Olympics campaign. On the other hand, Pepsi had designed a long-term brand-building marketing strategy in which they had managed to conquer most of the Chinese market, even years before the Games.

Pepsi's long-term strategy defeated Coca-Cola's short-term strategy in the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games

Further reading: Beijing Olympic sponsorship analysis

Categories
Competiton

Apple iOS vs Google Android

Google's Android is quickly becoming a threat for Apple's iOS.

The Mac vs PC war for the personal computers market has existed since the creation of these devices. Nowadays, with the development of smartphones, the new battle is between Apple and Google operating systems. Apple has had the iOS for some years now, and the iPhone is a worldwide success. Oppositely, Google’s Android is quite new, but has had an exponential growth. In the last 6 months, Android phones totaled 32%, while Apple phones reached 25% of market share.

In terms of the features each OS offers, these are basically the same. However, Android’s competitive advantage seems its versatility: it can be installed in any smartphone. On the other hand, Apple insists on exclusivity on their own hardware (iPhone) and one single carrier in the US (AT&T). Some may say Google should develop its own hardware, but that is not their strategy. In any case, Apple’s next tactic should be making their iPhone available for other carriers (i.e. Verizon) in order to keep market share.

It’s true that Google’s success has not meant Apple’s failure until this point, but if Apple does not respond to this aggressive competition, this might happen in the future.

Further reading: Apple and Google’s smartphone war

Spam prevention powered by Akismet