Sheen Sagalongos' Blog

Initially, I dreaded marketing class in general because I saw marketing as a very artsy class -that someone had to be the creative type to do well and enjoy this class. After a while, however, when we started to get into details and got our hands dirty with the team project, I quickly learned that there is so much more to marketing than advertising. Marketing = advertising. That was my mindset before. I started enjoying going to class, the lessons, and the work itself to the point that I’m heavily considering changing my intended specializations for next year.

The video project itself was a challenge, not only for myself, but for the whole team in general. None of  us had any experience whatsoever in making and editing videos which caused conflicts and more burden upon our shoulders. Coming up with ideas was the easy part, but the technical aspect of this project made it really difficult for us to convey what we wanted to say has caused us to spend significantly more time trying to figure out how to do things and such. Evidently, we became more cooperative with each other with regards to decisions because none of us really knew how to make a video.

Because of these assignments, I felt that I did things that I normally wouldn’t have. For example, I’m the one who always took initiative and got our group and responsibilities straightened out. Normally, I would be the one on the receiving end. Additionally, one thing I would’ve changed is to delegate less parts for myself. I usually have teams that composed of keeners (me being one of them!) so the work was usually split pretty evenly unlike this one.

One thing I have to say is that I know this is a marketing class and we are encouraged to do our own thing and be creative so a video project would make sense, yet I felt that I would’ve personally benefited more if we presented in class since Sauder is first and foremost a business school and I want to get more practice on presenting. Having said that, I did learn technical skills from the last project but I’ll still try my best to stay away from digital media stuff as much as possible in the future. Not really my thing! I’d personally prefer to do the research.

Overall, the assignments were a good way of applying the things we learned in class. I thought it was a really fair (and fun!) application of our knowledge and skills because we get to work on a specific case or company. Comm 296 is easily one of the best and most interesting classes I’ve taken in my university career! Thanks for making it enjoyable and worthwhile, Tamar! 🙂

Google: a company that will eventually dominate the world.

You probably have heard the rumors regarding Google following Apple and Microsoft’s footsteps and its plan to set up retail stores in select cities. Well, if you’re just like me, you probably found it exciting the first time you heard it. Then as you begin to process the thought and let it sink in, you quickly become a skeptic and question the feasibility of this.

A Google store? Weird. What would they sell? Google has a very “open” system compared to Apple. Products that they are known for such as Gmail, Google Chrome, Google Drive, and Google Maps among a number of programs are all online. Surely, they don’t need a physical store for that. Android is used by a number of companies like Samsung, LG, and HTC. So will they start carrying mobile phones in there stores? How would that benefit them? What could they possibly put into the store?

A few days or weeks later, I heard about the unveiling of the new Chromebook; the ad for Google Glasses goes viral shortly after. Huh, I think to myself, their rumored plan doesn’t seem so weird now! Some have said that Apple’s success is because of the Apple Stores. They marketed their products as elegant, high quality products, but they had to get consumers to physically come into their stores, hold their iProducts and let them explore it.

Will the same strategy yield the same results for Google? Whether it is profitable or not, if Google plans to sell “legitimate” Google products such as the Google Glasses, the Nexus 4, the Chromebook or even their driverless cars, I think that it eventually has to open stores. We know that products like these require a lot of research and test drives before people buy them (not to mention the increased need for post-purchase service). By cutting down the distribution channels, Google can directly interact with their customers and their qualms. Though I love Google, I’m still hesitant to say that this is an ingenious strategy. We’ll find out soon, perhaps.

Looking through my classmates’ blogs, I found a number of interesting topics I never would’ve stumbled upon in my own time. Though the one I found most interesting was Phil Allmark’s blogpost about Apple and their slogans; having said that, we already have had a discussion about this when he brought up the subject when he was writing the said post last term so I’m slightly already biased.

Similar to Phil’s rants, I agree that Apple does have some strange promotional slogans. Way before Apple was an icon mainstream culture, they had a number of campaigns like “Byte into an Apple” and “Switch” (when they were just about to get really big) that were really clever and successful. As well as pretty nice slogans such as “Thinnovation” and “Tap into what’s new” to promote the Macbook Air and the iPod Touch.

Now, however, they seem to be sliding down into something that’s totally uncreative and might even seem a bit arrogant and pompous to some. Their campaign a few years back was “Get a Mac.” Come on, how is that good marketing? I mean it probably was successful for them since probably 90% of students have a Mac instead of a PC, but it’s just a tad bit dumb that people would be swayed with an add that says “Get a Mac.” The iPhone line suffers from the same marketing strategy: “The first phone to beat the iPhone.”, “If you don’t have an iPhone, well you don’t have an iPhone.”, “The biggest thing to happen to the iPhone since the iPhone.” Need I say more?

Their latest one yet: the iPad Mini

Obviously I don’t hate Apple, I for one am an iPhone user (though it’s the only Apple product I own). But it’s ridiculous to see how they are dominating the industry with such marketing campaigns.  Most companies struggle to even get their brand out there and here’s Apple just basically telling people to get a Mac (and they do!). It goes to show how their customer base is very loyal to their brand. Most Apple product owners usually own more than one product and this loyalty obviously insulates and protects the company from their competitors. Because of this, they can get away with their ridiculous slogans without losing a big share of their consumers.

As I was wasting my night a while ago browsing through Reddit, also known as “the front page of the internet”, I came across one of the top posts on the website that led me to Tim Nudd’s post in Adweek. In this post, he talks about one commercial from Expedia’s “Find Yours” Campaign: a story about Artie Goldstein and his relationship with his daughter, Jill.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThzdsnXeE28

If you watched the video, you cannot help but be emotionally moved with the Goldsteins’ story. The video conveys how Artie comes into terms with his shattered dream for his daughter -to find and marry the man of her dreams- when Nikki, Jill’s girlfriend, asks for Jill’s hand in marriage from Artie. He talks us through his whole thought process and shares his experiences, developing a deep and emotional connection with his audience.

Jill Goldstein and Nikki Weiss on their wedding day.

The advertisement really fits in well with the whole “Find Yours” campaign where Expedia emphasizes that they “exist to help each individual find exactly what it is they are looking for.” The company steps away from typical “good deal” commercials where there’s a silly skit and somewhere in between actors blurt out “This deal from wherever is SO good! Don’t miss out.” kinda thing like what their main competitor, Kayak, recently aired. (Here is that said Kayak commercial). According to Nudd in a separate post, “it relates a physical journey and an emotionally transformative one at the same time—which is Expedia’s larger point about all kinds of travel.”

I think this campaign is a really effective marketing strategy for Expedia. Not only are the videos well-made and the stories really interesting that it can stand alone without Expedia’s branding at the end of the video, but it redefines what Expedia is and positions itself as something more than just the typical travel reservation website.

Expedia capitalizes on the small difference between the word “trip” and “journey”. They understand that a journey is personal and different for everyone and it how it has a different tone to it, unlike Kayak who emphasizes good deals on trips to Cancun or wherever. People look and expect different things from their journey, in Artie’s case, it was understanding (hence “Find Your Understanding”). For others, it could be passion, strength, or perspective. (These three by the way are also other commercials from Expedia. Learn more about it here.). While it is not revolutionary, I think Expedia did a great job in differentiating themselves from Kayak and other competitors and ultimately added value into the services they offer.

This has got to be one of the best commercials ever. It is simply a masterpiece. A commercial by Sussex Safer Roads, an entity that works “to reduce road casualties across Sussex with the three E’s – Education, Engineering and Enforcement,” has immediately caught my attention from the get-go. I watched diligently as the story unfolded and a surge of feelings of awe and sadness came over me as the scene ended and the credits rolled.

Why? Why was I so affected with this ad when I don’t even have a car to drive myself? I hardly ever drive and constantly use Translink’s awesome services. Did the creator of the commercial intend for this to happen or was I just being too melodramatic?

After a few minutes of research, it turns out that every aspect of this commercial was planned and was there for a reason. Alexander Commercials, the company who created this advertisement, briefly talks about how the idea and execution of the commercial came about on their “The Making Of” page.

Daniel Cox, the writer and director of the Embrace Life commercial, chose to film in the family’s living room mainly to “represent the feelings many people equate with their car… a level of safety and protection from the ‘outer’ world.” Additionally, the slow motion technique greatly added to the dramatic effect of the ad “allowing the audience the time to be drawn into the film’s world and to let them connect with and project their own feelings onto the scenario.” I also thought that one simple, yet important, moment was the big switch in the tone of the background music when the father “crashes” at the 0:50 mark.

Besides the obvious message or reminder to always wear our seat belts, I think one other thing that we can take away from this (from a marketing prospective) is that the best way to capture your intended audience’s time and attention is to engage them emotionally and use a better non-threatening strategy like most smoking, DUI or other similar commercials do. Targeting the affective component of attitude can definitely make a consumer think twice and identify him/herself with the actors and hopefully marketers achieve what they aim for; in this case, getting people to wear their seat belts.

As you may already know, Nestlé has been in deep trouble for its questionable marketing strategies regarding its formula for infants. The company promoted its product extensively in third-world countries which led to a number of infants getting serious health problems -or even ended up dying, for that matter. This is due to the lack of education in the developing countries: parents often do not have the knowledge of sanitation and water contamination; on the other hand, if they do have the knowledge, they may lack the resources (such as electricity or fuel) to boil their water. Additionally, due to their limited income, they might also dilute the formula to make it last longer -leaving their infants under-nutritioned.

A tampered image of Nestlé’s logo due to boycotts.

In their defense, it is not really their fault if most of their consumers in third-world countries have a below average level of education; however, it pains me to think that a big successful company would viciously take advantage of that fact. Their corporation’s social irresponsibility has not only lost them a huge amount of consumers, but also cost them potential new consumers due to the widespread negative light in the media and boycott from the public and NGOs that has been ongoing for a while now. (See this article from Business Insider about a recap on the whole scandal.)

What I do not understand is why they did not avoid unethical marketing like this in the first place or accounted for the variables between different cultures. It simply does not pay, there are no benefits in doing so. Instead, an international and big corporation like Nestlé should have paid more attention to its consumers’ health and building better relationships with them. Surely, they would have benefited from that in the long run.

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!