Godiva, known as luxury chocolate brand from Belgium is launching into cities of China to compete with existing competitors to share a sweet success of the market. As mentioned by the article, since the opening of its first Godiva store in Shanghai’s Grand Gateway Mall, the manufacturer plans to expand geographically into other places of Shanghai. The two new locations will be in the city’s Xintiandi area and at Shanghai International Financial Center (IFC).

Since Chinese people’s living standard continues to improve, they are looking for brands, especially brands from America or European countries. As mentioned further in the article, there is a report shows that China’s luxury goods sales saw 12 % growth in 2009, while the global market is experiencing an 8 % contraction. The total size of the chocolate market in China in 2009 is approximately 7 billion yuan and is expected to grow about 11% in 2011.

It is because of seeing the growth of Chinese demand for luxury products, the premier chocolate manufacturer Godiva also launching in more stores and expanding geographically to Beijing and Guangzhou. However, it is still a fresh entrant as compared to its competitors, therefore it has to create point of differences that will differentiate it from the others in order to experience continue success in the market.

Sources: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2010-01/30/content_9401690.htm

In Sandra’s blog, she talked about McDonald’s using social network to establish a platform that aims to debunk rumors about its food. As Sandra mentioned that McDonald’s launched in a website in June 2012, known as “Our Food. Your Questions.” Through this website, customers will ask their questions and get the answer back right away. In the past five months since the start of the website, it has hosted over two million interactions and over ten million video-response views as further mentioned in Sandra’s blog. These numbers indicate that using social media can help firms to interact with customers and response to customers’ concerns easily.

Example of questions asked by customers on the page ” Our Food. Your Questions.”

Example of answers right away from McDonald to a customer’s question.

I agree with Sandra’s idea that using social media can have both positive and negative effects. But, I personally think there will be more to the positive side than the negative side. The positive effect that Sandra already suggest is there exists an opportunity to stamp-out false rumors, which allows McDonald’s to regain some of its credibility and regain its reputation. Also, establishing a platform like “Our Food. Your Questions.” will attract customers to ask questions and raise their interest about McDonald’s, which can act as part of a marketing campaign. Furthermore, it ensures customer loyalty since customers get to know more about the brand. Finally, I agree with what Sandra’s brand positioning concept that once a company’s image is stored into a customer’s mind, it is hard to remove that image and redevelop reputation. Therefore, it is essential for McDonald’s to reply as fast as it can to a customer’s concern and create this point of difference that will set it apart from its competitors.

Sources: http://yourquestions.mcdonalds.ca

Photos taken from the “Our Food. Your Questions. ” website page.

The article in The Globe and Mail suggests that not only U.S. consumers prefer to buy local made products, but the research conducted show a rising trend that the Chinese are also willing to pay more for “Made in America” label.

Research show that nearly half of the 1000 people surveyed in China, 61% said they prefer U.S. made products to the ones made in local, and are willing to pay more for it. The actual shopping behaviour showed that 64% of the Chinese respondents said they have purchased U.S. products at least once a month. The highest product categories purchased are mainly baby food, and electronics. The reason behind is that U.S. made products is higher in quality and greener to the environment.

Since the milk scandal happened in 2008, Chinese consumers are now more careful in choosing baby food for their kids. They are willing to pay more to buy ” Made in America” baby milk powders as compared to the ones that are made in local, where toxic chemicals are added.

Although many U.S. firms have moved their factories from China back to the United States, the rise of Chinese consumers seeking for ” Made in America” label has created an incentive for the U.S. firms to increase their output and focus on quality for the Asia market.

Sources: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/marketing/made-in-america-a-valuable-label-even-in-china/article5315663/

Wal-Mart, known as the world’s largest retailer announced a goal to reduce twenty million metric tons of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from its supply chains by the end of 2015. This is equivalent of removing more than 3.8 million cars from the road for a year.

Since 2005, Green House Gas (GHG) has brought out the issues of global warming and climate change, which made energy efficiency and carbon reduction became the central issue for the world today as said by Walmart president Mike Duke.

In pursuing its goal, Wal-Mart work together with Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), and other experts like Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) to evaluate its supply chains on a global scale. In doing so, both the EDF and CDP will act as a team to help advise the suppliers, and measure reductions.

Wal-Mart also plans to achieve its goal by mainly targeting on popular product categories like milk, bread, meat, clothing, DVD, tooth paste, soap, beer, soda water etc. that contain highest embedded carbon. It does that by asking its suppliers to  rethink how they source, manufacture, transport, and examine the carbon lifecycle of their products. For example, in the past few years, Wal-Mart’s DVD supply chain reduces greenhouse gas emissions by eliminating the plastic knob in the centre of its CD cases. It then changed the labels on the clothing it sells to indicate that the product can be washed in cold water, which helped customers to lower their cost for electricity.

In doing these, Wal-Mart not only creates sustainability development to meet current needs, it also reduced costs because of increased energy efficiency of the supply chains. Therefore, it can be passed along to customers with products sold at lower prices, and help maintain Wal-Mart’s reputation as a destination for “rock-down prices.”

Sources: http://futurepredictions.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/FOG.jpg

http://www.ftlcomm.com/ensign/business/walmart/files/cover.jpg

http://news.walmart.com/news-archive/2010/02/25/walmart-announces-goal-to-eliminate-20-million-metric-tons-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-global-supply-chain

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/26/business/energy-environment/26walmart.html

Mr. Mainwaring states in his blog that Skechers copied exactly from shoes to concept off TOMS by launching in a new line called BOBS. The shoe company has the same idea as TOMS where it states that “Buy a pair of BOBS, and Sketchers will donate a pair to a child in need.” Even the shoes’ design and name tag are the same. However, there are a distinction between the two, which Mr. Mainwaring raised the fact that some “do good because of the meaning behind it, while the others do it simply for marketing purpose.”

I agree with Mr. Mainwaring‘s view that Skechers’ approach appears to be “cynical”. Because TOMS has a social mission behind where its founder Blake Mycoskie found out that children have no shoes to protect their feet in Argentina, so he and his team took a risk by betting their business on an untested business model. On the other hand, Skechers just seeing what is successful out there and copied the whole model and shoe designs. It did not place a financial bet on their business.

Although Blake Mycoskie did states that he hoped others would copy his business model, Skechers should not copied exactly the same shoe design from TOMS. As Mr. Mainwaring said Skechers’ approach shows not only “a lack of creativity originality, but they left themselves wide open to accusation of disingenuous social concern.” Because customers knew brands well, so a new line BOBS already prove to customers that Skechers lack a point of difference. Even the price set by BOBS is only about $13 dollars cheaper, but the shoe sole and inside materials are all different. I have tried on one pair of BOBS in Shoe Warehouse, it feels completely different. BOBS used cheap synthetic material, while TOMS used a better quality to provide comfort to customers.

Same concept, Same shoe design

Therefore, I also agree with Mr. Mainwaring that Skechers will do a lot better if they launch in a new line by deriving TOMS’s “One for One” concept. Because it will attracts customers to connect with the brand, at the same time gaining “warranted admiration”.

Sources: http://simonmainwaring.com/brands/toms-vs-bobs-how-skeechers-shot-themselves-in-the-foot/

http://www.youngdigitallab.com/wp-content/uploads/toms-marketing2.png

http://www.polyvore.com/cgi/img-set/BQcDAAAAAwoDanBnAAAABC5vdXQKFmh1d0x1ckY1NEJHZ1EzMG9EU3Z1cFEAAAACaWQKAXgAAAAEc2l6ZQ.jpg

TOMS shoes is created by Blake Mycoskie in 2006 after his trip to Argentina, where he found out that children had no shoes to wear to protect their feet. Wanting to help, he created TOMS with a social mission known as the “One for One movement”. The movement stated “With every pair you purchase, TOMS will give a pair of new shoes to a child in need.” Within five years, they have donated over one million pairs of shoes to children around the world.

TOMS social misson

TOMS shoes’ founder Blake Mycoskie matched the term “Social entrepreneur” that we have covered in class. He recognizes a social problem where children had no shoes to wear by creating TOMS, and making a social change by giving away shoes. TOMS is a social enterprise that has both a private sector where they make a profit while having a public sector where they help the community.

One for One Movement

I bought my first pair of TOMS because of its popularity and comfy feature. I bought the second pair because of its social mission. Although there are many substitutes like BOBs, Aldo who offer similar styles with cheaper prices, TOMS’s social mission is what really inspired people including myself to become loyal customers. Also, it creates social events like “One day without shoes” to raise people’s awareness the impact of a pair of shoes to children.

–“Giving is what fuels us. Giving is our future”–Blake Mycoskie

Sources: http://www.toms.ca

 https://twimg0-a.akamaihd.net/profile_images/1105807567/LOGO.jpg

http://www.inhabitots.com/toms-wants-you-to-go-one-day-without-shoes-on- april-5/