I present to you Olla Condoms’ facebook marketing campaign headed by the Brazilian agency – AGE Isobar.
The agency targeted specific male facebook users and created fake facebook profiles for their hypothetical unborn children by adding “Jr” to their names. These profiles then sent friend requests to their respect “fathers” further solidifying the encouragement for condom use. This idea is not only innovative, but also at a low-cost (though labour-intensive).
However, is it actually effective? When evaluating this question. Two main issues arise.
One, the effectiveness is hard to measure. We do not know how many guys who have received this invite were actually put into action. Ultimately, we don’t know if this will actually convince these guys to choose Olla condoms over other brands. In addition, the campaign emphasizes more on the importance of general condom use rather than focusing on differentiating Olla as a brand. Hence it is hard to choose appropriate metrics to measure the effectiveness of this campaign.
Second, the response has a high likelihood of backfiring as what can be humorous to one can be can be annoying to another. One negative response as by one commentator expresses:
“That’s not advertising. Its spammish behaviour. No brand shall friend request me, without a life time hatred called upon them. Stick to the ads – douchebags..”
It is evident that while personalized advertisement can be memorable, over-personalized advertisement can become annoying, spam-like, and semi-creepy.
This case study can be applied to other marketing campaigns that attempt to break the mold with innovation – though creativity is a good thing, it must also ensure effectiveness – successfully positioning the brand and putting the viewer into action.
In his post, Alvin pinpointed the branding advantage Holy Crap had over Mom’s Healthy Secrets even though the two products share simliar functions. This advantage is a result of Holy Crap‘s unconventional brand name and atypical cereal packaging. This is an important, yet sometimes overlooked, point raised by Alvin – to be memorable, you really need to stand out.
To put in marketing terms, when your product is unique and unconventionally associated with, it effectively fills up an unoccupied position in consumer minds.
No one would have guessed that ‘crap’ and ‘cereal’ could be paired together to successfully form a brand that’s not only acceptable, but beloved.
While discussing this use of unconventional association with ‘crap,’ Poo Poo Paper comes to mind.
Who would have thought that recycled paper made from elephant feces would receive massive popularity and favourable reception by consumers considering you are essentially purchasing poop? I certainly wouldn’t have. And yet, the brand is able to remain vividly in consumer minds thanks to the exact reason Alvin pointed out – filling up unoccupied postions in consumer minds through association with unconventional terms.
However, perhaps there is no other brand that takes this to the extreme more so than Modern Toilet, a toilet-themed restaurant based in Taiwan that gained massive popularity since opening. Modern Toilet‘s marketing has done the impossible task of associating food successfully with toilets in consumer minds. Other than being immediately memorable, this fosters a massive word of mouth tendency, which attracts curious visitors who would share their unique dining experience through online photos and social media. This in effect, allows Modern Toilet to reap profitable rewards and gain positive recognition.
These examples show a vital indication that the product’s intrinsic properties only takes a secondary importance to brand presentation when it comes to being able to be remembered, accepted, and beloved.
Brace yourselves, brands are going to places where they’ve never gone before. Perhaps this gives hope to some entrepreneur out there currently working on a new line of Poo Poo Perfume.
In Heena’s post, she discussed how McCafe, McDonald’s subsidiary, contributes to McDonald’s brand image through diversifying McDonald’s service and offerings.
In this post, I wish the dissect why this approach for McCafe is successful with regards to my personal experiences with the brand as a consumer not only in Canada, but also on an international level.
As clearly demonstrated by the video below, McCafe’s value proposition is personalization that focuses on delightful personal treats. This is a disctint departure from McDonald’s main line of fast-served burgers and fries, or as Heena described, a shift from “[McDonald’s] brand image in order to better adapt to its customers changing needs.”
It is evident that McCafe aims to establish itself as a brand that is personal, pleasurable, and casual – a direct opposition to the often stress-filled 21st century working life-style. This especially resonated with John Betts, McDonald’s Canada CEO, who believes “people tend to linger a little bit more in restaurants today…[and] take a break from the busy lifestyle.”
As a consumer, I can particularly relate to this very tendency Betts refers to. In fact, I believe this is the exact reason why I was drawn to McCafe. Last summer, while travelling in Guangzhou, China, I decided to treat myself and visited McCafe for the first time after a long day of trekking outdoors under the unbearably scorching sun. For a cup of ice-coffee and 3 lamingtons, I was willing to spent a total of $30 RMB, which is equivalent of spending $30 Canadian dollars in Canada in buyer power terms.
As a usually frugal consumer, it was surprising to me how I was so willing to spent so much money for so little physical food. To put more precisely, I was surprised by how much I was willing to pay for an experience. I have to admit, the experience of sitting on McCafe’s leather furniture, enjoying the airconditioned and modernly decorated interior, and listening to smooth jazz was more memorable than the actual taste of the lamingtons. I felt relaxed and truely had “My Me Time,” as described by the promotional video, under the comfortable and warm setting.
This anectode precisely shows how successfully McCafe can deliver its value proposition. I am certain that I was not the only consumer who was able to experience McCafe in the way it portrays itself to be as McDonald’s July Same-Store Sales Rise 5.1% on Gains in China. Globally, McCafe’s brand establishment is so consistent in that the next time I visit a McCafe, regardless in Vancouver or in Guangzhou, I shall expect the same experience.
Yesterday, while web-surfing on Facebook, I received a personalized ad 2 seconds after my profile status update. Though the ad was not directly related, it was a highly intelligent selection out of a million other possibilities. This content-personalization technology is creating extraordinary opportunity for small businesses.
Facebook is an immensely powerful marketing tool with both highly capable push and pull functions. More specifically, it achieves every marketer’s dream – automatic market segmentation and targeting. This is an extremely efficient way for small businesses to reach its target markets because of:
Low Cost – Since all the market information is readily available, small business does not incur costs for market research to determine target market.
Effectiveness – Brand position will be effectively delivered because ads are only shown to people with higher likelihood of taking interest. In effect, brands more effectively develop relationships with potential customers since the ads presented are relevant to their needs.
Levelled Playing Field – The intelligent ad-filtering process decreases threat of competition with the playing field of Facebook being levelled – brands, big or small, will have to go through the same system only to be seen by the people who would be interested.
Connectivity – There is an tremendous sense of immediacy in ads displaying seconds after user online activity. This is crucial for retention because it encourages impulse interest. I admit. I clicked on the ad because I was immediately intrigued by what was presented to me. In addition, Facebook’s ‘like’ function promotes a strong network effect in which one can be instantly influenced by peers’ ‘likes.’
“Imagination is more important than knowledge.” – Albert Einstein.
If I were to identify one single lesson I’ve learned as the most significance and influential, I would pick imagination. The reason why imagination is so important is because it lends to two key attributes: empathy and intelligence. I feel both of these attributes are absolutely critical to have an enriching and fulfilling life.
How does imagination lend to empathy? Well, it’s quite simple, empathy requires the ability to apply yourself to other people’s reality. And this requirement can only be filled with the act of imagining yourself in a hypothetical situation that is similar to what people are actually going through.
How does imagination help with intelligence? Before i answer, I would like to differentiate intelligence from wisdom. Wisdom, I think, is the result of reflecting upon what you have experienced. In other words, the truths you’ve concluded from various things you had done. Intelligence, on the other hand, is the ability to predict truths before experiencing it for yourself. For instance, Einstein was able to theorize about travelling near the speed of light without actually doing it. Yet he was able to conclude truths which expanded into a new branch of physics. This demonstrates how the ability to imagine is absolutely crucial for one’s intelligence.
So to conclude, imagine great things, things you wouldn’t be able to experience at the present moment and learn from it.
In many of these countries where the Sweatshops are set-up, job opportunities are extremely scarce due to low living standards and weak economies. And it is unethical for these sweatshops to take advantage of the dire situations of these people to focus on profit gaining rather than considering the well-being of their employees.
In addition, the contrast between Disney’s projected brand image and the actual reality into making that image possible is unethical. Disney’s targeted market is children, and as you know, the Disney brand is all about happiness, family, children, childhood innocence, wonders of being a child, etc. However, the very children who are making these perception possible are suffering from complete opposite situations.
Not only is the concept of Sweatshops unethical, many of these sweatshops are unethical in operation. Audit companies check on these factories regularly for working standards and treatment of employees. However, before each inspection, notification and material will be sent out for employees to study. In particular, child workers will be coached as to how to answer, or lie, if you will, to inspectors’ questions.
Lastly, this goes against Disney’s corporate founding values. Walt Disney, an innovative animator who pioneered entertainment for children in the 1 believed and viewed children as individuals who were not inferior, but equal to adults, and had often described the minds of children as “our national treasure.” And it is unfortunate that these minds are wasted on providing cheap labour.
To conclude, I would like to leave you with a quote by Walt Disney to consider: “The problem with the world today is that people grow up, they forget what it’s like to be an 12 year-old. They patronize, and they treat children as inferiors”
At the thought of blogging about entrepreneurship, I figured who is better to blog about than someone my age.
Brian Wong, a nineteen year-old fellow Sauderite, is working on launching a new mobile gaming-ad start-up named Kiip, which raised $300,000 in funding
Kiip exhibits many entrepreneurial qualities. To illustrate this, I will compare Kiip to a fictional small convenience store.
High Aptitude to Pioneer Change and High Risk
Kiip distinguishes itself by not focusing on the virtual goods model, despite an 80% increase in the overall sales of virtual goods in games, reported earlier this year by Flurry Analytics. While the freshly appealing operation concept of Kiip’s may attract attention, it is highly risky considering the growing trend in virtual gaming goods.
On the other hand, a small convenience store is not radical at all, does not press for change and endures lower risks
A local convenience store would probably require sometime to gain a customer-base as it takes word of mouth and actual visits for the store to be remembered.
Innovation
A convenience store would probably follow a predictable style and format of operation whereas Kiip has a high innovation to revolutionize the way game developers profit from in-game ads.
As for its method, we can only wait and see until it officially launches.
In regards to what we’ve seen in Comm101, is this a strategy or a tactic?
The launch of such a device seems to be intended as a strategy, but it will only function as a tactic for Cisco Systems Inc. I think Umi is a plan to create a short-term effect to put an increased load on networks. Whereas their strategy is to, in turn, drive up a long-term demand for Cisco’s core products: network routers and switches.
It is really doubtful that the Umi, sitting at its current price plus monthly charges, will have a long lasting effect on consumers. Programs such as Skype, that offer video calling for free, are simply better and more accessible substitutes. As we’ve seen in class in Comm101, Blockbuster has reached Chapter 11 due to the accessibility of free movies online. Both situations could be examined with one of Porter’s Five Forces of Rivalry, the Threat of Substitutes. Therefore, the Umi will only be as good as a tactic in terms of having an impactful effect——creating a short-lived hype and would not be able to encourage people afford such a service on a long-term basis when they can have it for free.
It is evident that Apple is the dominant leader in hand-held technology with iPhones, iPods, iPads, the list goes on. The iProducts are so successful and popular it almost seems as if it has its own industry. Remind you of Kleenex, anyone?
Let’s examine this the iProducts industry with Porter’s Five Forces and try to find out just why it’s so strong.
Apple iProducts has minimal threat of substitutes simply due its irreplaceable innovation. There are too many functions beloved by hand-held users that are only offered by Apple, everything from apps, stylish design to multi-touch user-friendly interface. Thus buyers have little power because they can only get these from Apple.
People have low buyer power since Apple sells their iProducts exclusively at the Apply store. Unlike say, Toshiba sells cameras in Futureshop. So buyers have no choice but to purchase from one single designation.
There is tremendous barriers to entry. The technology rights for one, next is design, then it’s functionality such as apps and so forth. Not to mention Apple’s brand itself. Its strong brand is well-know for simplicity in design, powerful functionality, and reputation for quality. It has recently surpassed Microsoft as the most valued technology company just this May.
There is simply no rivalry, no one can offer what Apple can technology-wise.
CONCLUSION: this industry is not attractive to new-entrants, perhaps it never will.
It looks like not much will change in the demand for Apple products before any matchable rivals arise. By the way, this blog entry was written from a MacBook Pro (just so happens I own an iPod Touch too).
When we were introduced to the topic of finance in Comm101, I felt tiny and lost in a gigantic and unfamiliar world.
I think the gist of finance is – analysis of the general flow of huge sums of money. And what’s more huge than the monetary relationship between the US and China for the world at large? Not much, so i decided to blog about it.
Perhaps it’s an understatement when I say the US economy is declining due to hefty debt, causing its steady currency drop (Globe and Mail). Not too long ago, China, along with many other nations such as Japan and the UK, began buying portions of US’ debt (aka Treasury Bonds). And by May of 2010, the US owns China $867.7 billion, Hong Kong 145.7$billion, and Taiwan $126.2 billion.
Not sure about you, but these sound like Legacy Costs to me, a term we were introduced to in Comm101, which are costs associated with “deals” that were made in the present which create a liability for the future.
However, on China’s part, I feel it is an investment. According to Comm101, an investment consists of assigning some of the current wealth to the counter party in the investment contract (China lending money to the US), in return, you receive future payments that may be safe or risky (US paying back the loan plus interest).
The primary purpose of some investments is to transfer wealth across time.
And I think China does this in a BIG way. As far as I know, an investment of this scale, in terms of both rewards and risk, has never been attempted before.
As seen in Comm101, the most important characteristic of an investment to understand is its return. And Wen Jiabo, Premier of China expresses his thoughts in an interview with CNN, “We believe that the US is a credible country. Particularly at such difficult times, china has reached out to the US and actually we believe such a helping hand will help to stabilize the entire global economy and finance and prevent an major chaos from occurring in the global economic and financial system, I believe now cooperation is everything.”
As we’ve seen in Comm101, Social Media is extremely important in today’s business world, where the flow of information is key to any firm’s success.
First, let’s distinguish the difference between social media and media. In media, information flow is one-way. However, in social media, the flow of information is two-way, interactive, thus making it ‘social.’
The reason why social media is so powerful is because the information shared is diversified. Not only do you have the brand/marketer trying to establish an image, you also have consumers on the other end either resonating or dishing out the dirt. Thus the result from this combination is more authentic, raw, and unpretentious.
This new authentic way of sharing information goes completely against the conventional ways of advertising where the information flow was only one-way. Though the connection might be hard to spot, a parallel can be drawn between this phenomenon and the emerging blogging freedom in China. Han Han, an immensely popular Chinese blogger who was recently voted as TIME’s 100 Most Influential People says in an interview with CNN: “[the government] thought the internet was just like any other form of media. You can simply control and regulate the websites to show what they chose, but they forgot that people not only have a computer monitor, they also have a keyboard.”
Likewise, when using social media to advertise, one has to consider the fact that the audience on the receiving end now has a voice to respond back. And while this very interaction is very powerful to spread information, it should be considered that it simply cannot be controlled by the initiated-end like it was in the conventional media.
Although the concept of opportunity cost is a fundamental one in Econ101, I’ve actually first heard the term from Comm101.
I’ve been, and still is, a heavy procrastination addict. I’ve been trying pin-point its source for years, and recently I had a interesting observation.
I was sitting on the bus one day, and I started reading my OB textbook after thinking, ‘I should be doing some school work because I have nothing better to do.’ That’s when it hit me, the opportunity cost of reading a textbook on the bus is zero because I had nothing else better to do. Whereas at home, the opportunity cost of reading a boring text book is doing something more interesting. That is why I procrastinate and don’t do work until the opportunity cost of slacking off, which is suffering later, gets too high.
Does this cure my procrastination? No. But at least now I can think of procrastination on a different level and know that it is perfectly economically rational to procrastinate, it’s just a matter of how much you value its opportunity cost.
I was going to begin the title of this entry with “Look,” but you probably had already done that.
In regards to marketing, in Comm101 we were told the difference between product and brand. In the case of Lady Gaga, her product is her music; however, her brand is herself. Everything to from her name, outfits, music videos, all are excellent examples of Brand Positioning, a concept we were introduced to in Comm101.
Although she was not the first in pop music with a provocative image, she is definitely the first people would associate with in their minds. This grabs an unoccupied position in people’s minds when thinking of pop music.
So how does Lady Gaga do this? Well, she is able to differentiate herself from the music scene because she has shock value. While some say its all an freakish display for attention, some say she “encourages young women and girls to be comfortable in their own skin(Harvard Business Review, 2010).” Either way, she is making people talk about her, and she’s gaining wealth because of it.
At the end of the day, isn’t that’s what marketing is all about?
By the 21st of September, the last day to drop any course without a W standing, a bunch of my friends had either dropped or considered dropping Comm101:Business Fundamentals. And from hearing opinions here and there, the general reason was due to an unclear sense of what was to be learned. However, here are my thoughts.
I think the point of the course is exposure, rather than mastery of every aspect in business. Speaking for myself, as a fresh high school graduate, I need a source that provides me with exposure and insight to the business world, especially when I am completing a business degree. So in this regard, I don’t think it makes sense to withdraw from such a business course, particularly one that is designed and tailored specifically towards Sauderites. Look at it this way, transfer-hopefuls from other faculties can take Econ and Math this year, but they don’t have the opportunity to take specific commerce courses available in first year such as Comm101, so why take something that’s handed to you for granted?
In addition, every upper-year student I’ve talked to said they found the course really beneficial. And the fact that the course got promoted to a regular course this year from being a trial course last year shows that it was a successful and well-received course with enough support. Sure, the assignments, blogging, and tweeting can be tediously hard at times, but which course isn’t? Furthermore, I personally feel this is a more practical and relevant way to learn about the functionality of the business world than writing exams. Besides, in which other courses can you say “I get to use twitter for this course because its required.”
I feel the exposure and the learning outcomes we get from this course are worth the teeth-clenching required to pull through the undesired assignments and homework.
lastly, I would like to conclude this entry with a quote for consideration:
“The roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet.”
– Aristotle
As we’ve seen in Comm101, ethics matter. While this can be demonstrated through some obvious factors such as safety, I think there is a more subtle factor that can be discussed—–honesty.
The importance of honesty is often neglected in the realm of business, where the basis of its functionality is, quite simply, to attract as many people to buy as much as your stuff as possible.
I think the sense of ‘unethicalness’ ultimately stems from a feeling of lack of choice, a sense of being mislead into a situation in which you did not willfully intend. In the case of Active Periodicals, Inc., monthly magazine subscriptions were charged from participants of so-called free ‘surveys’ that were marketed as having $1000 rewards. I think the essential problem here is not monthly fees that followed, but rather the deception of the result of participation. If the participants knew of the aftermath, they would have simply CHOSEN to not participate. However, this choice did not take place since no such freedom was given.
As a result, the contrast between what was expected and actuality evolved into revolt and anger. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with promoting products to get as much attention as possible; as long as it is “engaged in open and free competition without deception or fraud” (Friedman).
