Categories
Marketing

Marketing Thoughts

After reading several different posts from various marketing blogs, the one that caught my attention the most was from the Influential Marketing Blog, mainly because it mentioned some ideas that I have certainly thought about during Comm 296.

1. Minimalism. Personally, I prefer those products or services that have straight-forward advertising campaigns, as well as a clear marketing mix. I always choose minimalism over maximalism. Advertising should be honest and unambiguous, companies should give what they offer and packaging should be plain and explicit. I would say Apple is the company that best suits this description.

iPhone 4: minimalist, simple and straight-forward packaging.

 

2. Having more options is not necessarily better. Economics tends to state that a larger number of brands for the same product will increase market competition, and so benefit the consumer in the long term. I partly disagree. Personally, I dislike going to a clothing store to find about twenty different types of jeans. I am aware that more brands means that the price becomes competitive, but to be honest I would rather choose between three or four options, and not from twenty. Mainly because if I am not fully satisfied with my final decision, my sense of regret afterwards will be very high. In any case, I can barely tell the difference between most brands.

Three options. Choose one. A good deal to me.

 

3. Benefits are crucial. If there is one main idea that you learn in Comm 296, that is the following: costumers do not buy features, they buy benefits. As mentioned in the blog post, one of Blackberry’s competitive advantages is their physical keyboard. In terms of usage, applications, and features, they cannot really compete with other smartphones, such as the iPhone. However, RIM has managed to succeed without really heavily advertising this feature. Some customers consider this benefit invaluable, and that is the key of their success. No advertising is really necessary.

The Blackberry keyboard: the key to their success.
Categories
Marketing

Honesty in Marketing

After reading many classmates’ blogs, I finally found Amanda’s post and I thought it was really interesting. She talks about honesty in marketing and how it can affect the image of a certain product or brand. In my opinion, I like the idea of having an honest world but I know that achieving that is near impossible, especially when there is so much competitiveness everywhere. Marketing is certainly one of the places in which I wouldn’t expect much honesty, because let’s face it: most times it’s about winning, not about transparency.

While doing some research on transparent marketing, I stumbled upon Domino’s Pizza campaign called “Domino’s Pizza Turnaround”, which was all about being honest with the consumers. The first step was accepting that their pizza was, basically, horrible. In the video we can see people in focus groups complaining about various features, describing the crust as ‘cardboard’ and the sauce as ‘ketchup’. As a result, they decided to redesign their recipe in an attempt to make a better product.

YouTube Preview Image

We will never be sure if Domino’s chose this marketing strategy because they wanted to make a real change or because they couldn’t hide the fact that their product was terrible anymore. Anyways, I’m really glad that we can see some transparent marketing once in a while.

If you want to know how customers reacted to the new recipe, watch this video.

 

Categories
Marketing

“Long Live Play”

When I think about marketing, I think about advertising campaigns. In our first lecture, we were told that marketing is not just about that. However, it is one big part and so I decided to write about an interesting campaign for this first post. I tried to think about a certain commercial I had watched recently and found appealing, interesting and innovative. After some time thinking, I remembered Sony’s PlayStation newest campaign: “Long Live Play”.

YouTube Preview Image

Following the extremely successful “It Only Does Everything” campaign (2009-2011), PlayStation has managed to live up to the expectations with this new engaging and innovative campaign. “Long Live Play” is about the gaming experience and how PlayStation can bring several entertainment options to different types of audiences.

A few months before, PlayStation asked their loyal gamers to send pictures of themselves with their consoles and a brief description of what the PS3 meant for them. The response was amazing; thousands of gamers sent their responses. PlayStation selected about a dozen of those die-hard gamers to represent the gamer community and the resulting ad was fantastic and critically acclaimed. The key to its success was engaging the customers and letting them be part of the campaign. This way, the customer felt valued and could appreciate the company more. This, along with bringing the price of their most basic console down to $249  has been essential.

The previous “It Only Does Everything” campaign helped to increase PS3 sales by 184% in the first three months and overall make the PS3 a household name in 50 million houses worldwide. This new campaign definitely seems to be in the same path. Sony managed to innovate by engaging their customers in a unique way to further strengthen the relationship with their existing customers and create new ones with potential ones.

 

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

Spam prevention powered by Akismet