In this section we learn about suitable job for student.Everyone want money n job but little of them are satisfied of his job. Why all jobholder are not satisfied we learn and remove the tension of sortage of money.
The listed are below
1.what you learn in your student life is it fulfill your dream to real life ?
2.Are you take any experience of your desire job?
3.Are you know about anything desire job
4.Are you search any where for job ?
Monday, July 27, 2009
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Product focus
In a product innovation approach, the company pursues product innovation, then tries to develop a market for the product. Product innovation drives the process and marketing research is conducted primarily to ensure that profitable market segment(s) exist for the innovation. The rationale is that customers may not know what options will be available to them in the future so we should not expect them to tell us what they will buy in the future. However, marketers can aggressively over-pursue product innovation and try to overcapitalize on a niche. When pursuing a product innovation approach, marketers must ensure that they have a varied and multi-tiered approach to product innovation. It is claimed that if Thomas Edison depended on marketing research he would have produced larger candles rather than inventing light bulbs. Many firms, such as research and development focused companies, successfully focus on product innovation. Many purists doubt whether this is really a form of marketing orientation at all, because of the ex post status of consumer research. Some even question whether it is marketing.
An emerging area of study and practice concerns internal marketing, or how employees are trained and managed to deliver the brand in a way that positively impacts the acquisition and retention of customers (employer branding).
Diffusion of innovations research explores how and why people adopt new products, services and ideas.
A relatively new form of marketing uses the Internet and is called Internet marketing or more generally e-marketing, affiliate marketing, desktop advertising or online marketing. It tries to perfect the segmentation strategy used in traditional marketing. It targets its audience more precisely, and is sometimes called personalized marketing or one-to-one marketing.
With consumers' eroding attention span and willingness to give time to advertising messages, marketers are turning to forms of permission marketing such as branded content, custom media and reality marketing.
The use of herd behavior in marketing.
The Economist reported a recent conference in Rome on the subject of the simulation of adaptive human behavior.[7] It shared mechanisms to increase impulse buying and get people "to buy more by playing on the herd instinct." The basic idea is that people will buy more of products that are seen to be popular, and several feedback mechanisms to get product popularity information to consumers are mentioned, including smart-cart technology and the use of Radio Frequency Identification Tag technology. A "swarm-moves" model was introduced by a Florida Institute of Technology researcher, which is appealing to supermarkets because it can "increase sales without the need to give people discounts
An emerging area of study and practice concerns internal marketing, or how employees are trained and managed to deliver the brand in a way that positively impacts the acquisition and retention of customers (employer branding).
Diffusion of innovations research explores how and why people adopt new products, services and ideas.
A relatively new form of marketing uses the Internet and is called Internet marketing or more generally e-marketing, affiliate marketing, desktop advertising or online marketing. It tries to perfect the segmentation strategy used in traditional marketing. It targets its audience more precisely, and is sometimes called personalized marketing or one-to-one marketing.
With consumers' eroding attention span and willingness to give time to advertising messages, marketers are turning to forms of permission marketing such as branded content, custom media and reality marketing.
The use of herd behavior in marketing.
The Economist reported a recent conference in Rome on the subject of the simulation of adaptive human behavior.[7] It shared mechanisms to increase impulse buying and get people "to buy more by playing on the herd instinct." The basic idea is that people will buy more of products that are seen to be popular, and several feedback mechanisms to get product popularity information to consumers are mentioned, including smart-cart technology and the use of Radio Frequency Identification Tag technology. A "swarm-moves" model was introduced by a Florida Institute of Technology researcher, which is appealing to supermarkets because it can "increase sales without the need to give people discounts
Dependency of the media and corporate censorship
Almost all mass media are advertising media and many of them are exclusively advertising media and, with the exception of public service broadcasting are privately owned. Their income is predominantly generated through advertising; in the case of newspapers and magazines from 50 to 80%. Public service broadcasting in some countries can also heavily depend on advertising as a source of income (up to 40%).[48] In the view of critics no media that spreads advertisements can be independent and the higher the proportion of advertising, the higher the dependency. This dependency has “distinct implications for the nature of media content…. In the business press, the media are often referred to in exactly the way they present themselves in their candid moments: as a branch of the advertising industry.”[49]
In addition, the private media are increasingly subject to mergers and concentration with property situations often becoming entangled and opaque. This development, which Henry A. Giroux calls an “ongoing threat to democratic culture”,[50] by itself should suffice to sound all alarms in a democracy. Five or six advertising agencies dominate this 400 billion U.S. dollar global industry.
“Journalists have long faced pressure to shape stories to suit advertisers and owners …. the vast majority of TV station executives found their news departments ‘cooperative’ in shaping the news to assist in ‘non-traditional revenue development.” [51] Negative and undesired reporting can be prevented or influenced when advertisers threaten to cancel orders or simply when there is a danger of such a cancellation. Media dependency and such a threat becomes very real when there is only one dominant or very few large advertisers. The influence of advertisers is not only in regard to news or information on their own products or services but expands to articles or shows not directly linked to them. In order to secure their advertising revenues the media has to create the best possible ‘advertising environment’. Another problem considered censorship by critics is the refusal of media to accept advertisements that are not in their interest. A striking example of this is the refusal of TV stations to broadcast ads by Adbusters. Groups try to place advertisements and are refused by networks. [52]
It is principally the viewing rates which decide upon the programme in the private radio and television business. “Their business is to absorb as much attention as possible. The viewing rate measures the attention the media trades for the information offered. The service of this attraction is sold to the advertising business” [36] and the viewing rates determine the price that can be demanded for advertising.
“Advertising companies determining the contents of shows has been part of daily life in the USA since 1933. Procter & Gamble (P&G) …. offered a radio station a history-making trade (today know as “bartering”): the company would produce an own show for “free” and save the radio station the high expenses for producing contents. Therefore the company would want its commercials spread and, of course, its products placed in the show. Thus, the series ‘Ma Perkins’ was created, which P&G skilfully used to promote Oxydol, the leading detergent brand in those years and the Soap opera was born …” [53]
While critics basically worry about the subtle influence of the economy on the media, there are also examples of blunt exertion of influence. The US company Chrysler, before it merged with Daimler Benz had its agency, PentaCom, send out a letter to numerous magazines, demanding them to send, an overview of all the topics before the next issue is published to “avoid potential conflict”. Chrysler most of all wanted to know, if there would be articles with “sexual, political or social” content or which could be seen as “provocative or offensive”. PentaCom executive David Martin said: “Our reasoning is, that anyone looking at a 22.000 $ product would want it surrounded by positive things. There is nothing positive about an article on child pornography.” [53] In another example, the „USA Network held top-level ‚off-the-record’ meetings with advertisers in 2000 to let them tell the network what type of programming content they wanted in order for USA to get their advertising.” [54] Television shows are created to accommodate the needs for advertising, e. g. splitting them up in suitable sections. Their dramaturgy is typically designed to end in suspense or leave an unanswered question in order to keep the viewer attached.
The movie system, at one time outside the direct influence of the broader marketing system, is now fully integrated into it through the strategies of licensing, tie-ins and product placements. The prime function of many Hollywood films today is to aid in the selling of the immense collection of commodities.[55] The press called the 2002 Bond film ‘Die Another Day’ featuring 24 major promotional partners an ‘ad-venture’ and noted that James Bond “now has been ‘licensed to sell’” As it has become standard practise to place products in motion pictures, it “has self-evident implications for what types of films will attract product placements and what types of films will therefore be more likely to get made”. [56]
Advertising and information are increasingly hard to distinguish from each other. “The borders between advertising and media …. become more and more blurred…. What August Fischer, chairman of the board of Axel Springer publishing company considers to be a ‘proven partnership between the media and advertising business’ critics regard as nothing but the infiltration of journalistic duties and freedoms”. According to RTL-executive Helmut Thoma “private stations shall not and cannot serve any mission but only the goal of the company which is the ‘acceptance by the advertising business and the viewer’. The setting of priorities in this order actually says everything about the ‘design of the programmes’ by private television.” [53] Patrick Le Lay, former managing director of TF1, a private French television channel with a market share of 25 to 35%, said: There are many ways to talk about television. But from the business point of view, let’s be realistic: basically, the job of TF1 is, e. g. to help Coca Cola sell its product. (…) For an advertising message to be perceived the brain of the viewer must be at our disposal. The job of our programmes is to make it available, that is to say, to distract it, to relax it and get it ready between two messages. It is disposable human brain time that we sell to Coca Cola.”[57]
Because of these dependencies a widespread and fundamental public debate about advertising and its influence on information and freedom of speech is difficult to obtain, at least through the usual media channels; otherwise these would saw off the branch they are sitting on. “The notion that the commercial basis of media, journalism, and communication could have troubling implications for democracy is excluded from the range of legitimate debate” just as “capitalism is off-limits as a topic of legitimate debate in U.S. political culture”. [58]
An early critic of the structural basis of U.S. journalism was Upton Sinclair with his novel The Brass Check in which he stresses the influence of owners, advertisers, public relations, and economic interests on the media. In his book “Our Master's Voice – Advertising” the social ecologist James Rorty (1890–1973) wrote: "The gargoyle’s mouth is a loudspeaker, powered by the vested interest of a two-billion dollar industry, and back of that the vested interests of business as a whole, of industry, of finance. It is never silent, it drowns out all other voices, and it suffers no rebuke, for it is not the voice of America? That is its claim and to some extent it is a just claim...”[59]
It has taught us how to live, what to be afraid of, what to be proud of, how to be beautiful, how to be loved, how to be envied, how to be successful.. Is it any wonder that the American population tends increasingly to speak, think, feel in terms of this jabberwocky? That the stimuli of art, science, religion are progressively expelled to the periphery of American life to become marginal values, cultivated by marginal people on marginal time?"[
In addition, the private media are increasingly subject to mergers and concentration with property situations often becoming entangled and opaque. This development, which Henry A. Giroux calls an “ongoing threat to democratic culture”,[50] by itself should suffice to sound all alarms in a democracy. Five or six advertising agencies dominate this 400 billion U.S. dollar global industry.
“Journalists have long faced pressure to shape stories to suit advertisers and owners …. the vast majority of TV station executives found their news departments ‘cooperative’ in shaping the news to assist in ‘non-traditional revenue development.” [51] Negative and undesired reporting can be prevented or influenced when advertisers threaten to cancel orders or simply when there is a danger of such a cancellation. Media dependency and such a threat becomes very real when there is only one dominant or very few large advertisers. The influence of advertisers is not only in regard to news or information on their own products or services but expands to articles or shows not directly linked to them. In order to secure their advertising revenues the media has to create the best possible ‘advertising environment’. Another problem considered censorship by critics is the refusal of media to accept advertisements that are not in their interest. A striking example of this is the refusal of TV stations to broadcast ads by Adbusters. Groups try to place advertisements and are refused by networks. [52]
It is principally the viewing rates which decide upon the programme in the private radio and television business. “Their business is to absorb as much attention as possible. The viewing rate measures the attention the media trades for the information offered. The service of this attraction is sold to the advertising business” [36] and the viewing rates determine the price that can be demanded for advertising.
“Advertising companies determining the contents of shows has been part of daily life in the USA since 1933. Procter & Gamble (P&G) …. offered a radio station a history-making trade (today know as “bartering”): the company would produce an own show for “free” and save the radio station the high expenses for producing contents. Therefore the company would want its commercials spread and, of course, its products placed in the show. Thus, the series ‘Ma Perkins’ was created, which P&G skilfully used to promote Oxydol, the leading detergent brand in those years and the Soap opera was born …” [53]
While critics basically worry about the subtle influence of the economy on the media, there are also examples of blunt exertion of influence. The US company Chrysler, before it merged with Daimler Benz had its agency, PentaCom, send out a letter to numerous magazines, demanding them to send, an overview of all the topics before the next issue is published to “avoid potential conflict”. Chrysler most of all wanted to know, if there would be articles with “sexual, political or social” content or which could be seen as “provocative or offensive”. PentaCom executive David Martin said: “Our reasoning is, that anyone looking at a 22.000 $ product would want it surrounded by positive things. There is nothing positive about an article on child pornography.” [53] In another example, the „USA Network held top-level ‚off-the-record’ meetings with advertisers in 2000 to let them tell the network what type of programming content they wanted in order for USA to get their advertising.” [54] Television shows are created to accommodate the needs for advertising, e. g. splitting them up in suitable sections. Their dramaturgy is typically designed to end in suspense or leave an unanswered question in order to keep the viewer attached.
The movie system, at one time outside the direct influence of the broader marketing system, is now fully integrated into it through the strategies of licensing, tie-ins and product placements. The prime function of many Hollywood films today is to aid in the selling of the immense collection of commodities.[55] The press called the 2002 Bond film ‘Die Another Day’ featuring 24 major promotional partners an ‘ad-venture’ and noted that James Bond “now has been ‘licensed to sell’” As it has become standard practise to place products in motion pictures, it “has self-evident implications for what types of films will attract product placements and what types of films will therefore be more likely to get made”. [56]
Advertising and information are increasingly hard to distinguish from each other. “The borders between advertising and media …. become more and more blurred…. What August Fischer, chairman of the board of Axel Springer publishing company considers to be a ‘proven partnership between the media and advertising business’ critics regard as nothing but the infiltration of journalistic duties and freedoms”. According to RTL-executive Helmut Thoma “private stations shall not and cannot serve any mission but only the goal of the company which is the ‘acceptance by the advertising business and the viewer’. The setting of priorities in this order actually says everything about the ‘design of the programmes’ by private television.” [53] Patrick Le Lay, former managing director of TF1, a private French television channel with a market share of 25 to 35%, said: There are many ways to talk about television. But from the business point of view, let’s be realistic: basically, the job of TF1 is, e. g. to help Coca Cola sell its product. (…) For an advertising message to be perceived the brain of the viewer must be at our disposal. The job of our programmes is to make it available, that is to say, to distract it, to relax it and get it ready between two messages. It is disposable human brain time that we sell to Coca Cola.”[57]
Because of these dependencies a widespread and fundamental public debate about advertising and its influence on information and freedom of speech is difficult to obtain, at least through the usual media channels; otherwise these would saw off the branch they are sitting on. “The notion that the commercial basis of media, journalism, and communication could have troubling implications for democracy is excluded from the range of legitimate debate” just as “capitalism is off-limits as a topic of legitimate debate in U.S. political culture”. [58]
An early critic of the structural basis of U.S. journalism was Upton Sinclair with his novel The Brass Check in which he stresses the influence of owners, advertisers, public relations, and economic interests on the media. In his book “Our Master's Voice – Advertising” the social ecologist James Rorty (1890–1973) wrote: "The gargoyle’s mouth is a loudspeaker, powered by the vested interest of a two-billion dollar industry, and back of that the vested interests of business as a whole, of industry, of finance. It is never silent, it drowns out all other voices, and it suffers no rebuke, for it is not the voice of America? That is its claim and to some extent it is a just claim...”[59]
It has taught us how to live, what to be afraid of, what to be proud of, how to be beautiful, how to be loved, how to be envied, how to be successful.. Is it any wonder that the American population tends increasingly to speak, think, feel in terms of this jabberwocky? That the stimuli of art, science, religion are progressively expelled to the periphery of American life to become marginal values, cultivated by marginal people on marginal time?"[
The price of attention and hidden costs
Advertising has developed into a billion-dollar business on which many depend. In 2006 391 billion US dollars were spent worldwide for advertising. In Germany, for example, the advertising industry contributes 1.5% of the gross national income; the figures for other developed countries are similar. Thus, advertising and growth are directly and causally linked. As far as a growth based economy can be blamed for the harmful human lifestyle (affluent society) advertising has to be considered in this aspect concerning its negative impact, because its main purpose is to raise consumption. “The industry is accused of being one of the engines powering a convoluted economic mass production system which promotes consumption.”[39]
Attention and attentiveness have become a new commodity for which a market developed. “The amount of attention that is absorbed by the media and redistributed in the competition for quotas and reach is not identical with the amount of attention, that is available in society. The total amount circulating in society is made up of the attention exchanged among the people themselves and the attention given to media information. Only the latter is homogenised by quantitative measuring and only the latter takes on the character of an anonymous currency.” [35][36] According to Franck, any surface of presentation that can guarantee a certain degree of attentiveness works as magnet for attention, e. g. media which are actually meant for information and entertainment, culture and the arts, public space etc. It is this attraction which is sold to the advertising business. The German Advertising Association stated that in 2007 30.78 billion Euros were spent on advertising in Germany,[40] 26% in newspapers, 21% on television, 15% by mail and 15% in magazines. In 2002 there were 360.000 people employed in the advertising business. The internet revenues for advertising doubled to almost 1 billion Euros from 2006 to 2007, giving it the highest growth rates.
Spiegel-Online reported that in the USA in 2008 for the first time more money was spent for advertising on internet (105.3 billion US dollars) than on television (98.5 billion US dollars). The largest amount in 2008 was still spent in the print media (147 billion US dollars).[41] For that same year, Welt-Online reported that the US pharmaceutical industry spent almost double the amount on advertising (57.7 billion dollars) than it did on research (31.5 billion dollars). But Marc-André Gagnon und Joel Lexchin of York University, Toronto, estimate that the actual expenses for advertising are higher yet, because not all entries are recorded by the research institutions.[42] Not included are indirect advertising campaigns such as sales, rebates and price reductions. Few consumers are aware of the fact that they are the ones paying for every cent spent for public relations, advertisements, rebates, packaging etc. since they ordinarily get included in the price calculation.
Attention and attentiveness have become a new commodity for which a market developed. “The amount of attention that is absorbed by the media and redistributed in the competition for quotas and reach is not identical with the amount of attention, that is available in society. The total amount circulating in society is made up of the attention exchanged among the people themselves and the attention given to media information. Only the latter is homogenised by quantitative measuring and only the latter takes on the character of an anonymous currency.” [35][36] According to Franck, any surface of presentation that can guarantee a certain degree of attentiveness works as magnet for attention, e. g. media which are actually meant for information and entertainment, culture and the arts, public space etc. It is this attraction which is sold to the advertising business. The German Advertising Association stated that in 2007 30.78 billion Euros were spent on advertising in Germany,[40] 26% in newspapers, 21% on television, 15% by mail and 15% in magazines. In 2002 there were 360.000 people employed in the advertising business. The internet revenues for advertising doubled to almost 1 billion Euros from 2006 to 2007, giving it the highest growth rates.
Spiegel-Online reported that in the USA in 2008 for the first time more money was spent for advertising on internet (105.3 billion US dollars) than on television (98.5 billion US dollars). The largest amount in 2008 was still spent in the print media (147 billion US dollars).[41] For that same year, Welt-Online reported that the US pharmaceutical industry spent almost double the amount on advertising (57.7 billion dollars) than it did on research (31.5 billion dollars). But Marc-André Gagnon und Joel Lexchin of York University, Toronto, estimate that the actual expenses for advertising are higher yet, because not all entries are recorded by the research institutions.[42] Not included are indirect advertising campaigns such as sales, rebates and price reductions. Few consumers are aware of the fact that they are the ones paying for every cent spent for public relations, advertisements, rebates, packaging etc. since they ordinarily get included in the price calculation.
Media and advertising approaches
Increasingly, other media are overtaking many of the "traditional" media such as television, radio and newspaper because of a shift toward consumer's usage of the Internet for news and music as well as devices like digital video recorders (DVR's) such as TiVo.
Advertising on the World Wide Web is a recent phenomenon. Prices of Web-based advertising space are dependent on the "relevance" of the surrounding web content and the traffic that the website receives.
Digital signage is poised to become a major mass media because of its ability to reach larger audiences for less money. Digital signage also offer the unique ability to see the target audience where they are reached by the medium. Technology advances has also made it possible to control the message on digital signage with much precision, enabling the messages to be relevant to the target audience at any given time and location which in turn, gets more response from the advertising. Digital signage is being successfully employed in supermarkets.[18] Another successful use of digital signage is in hospitality locations such as restaurants.[19] and malls.[20]
E-mail advertising is another recent phenomenon. Unsolicited bulk E-mail advertising is known as "spam". Spam has been a problem for email users for many years. But more efficient filters are now available making it relatively easy to control what email you get.
Email is however, becoming a major force in advertising when bulk mailed correctly, not as unsolicited Spam, but as e-blasts. The difference between spam and e-blasts is spam is unsolicited email advertisements that continue to be mailed against the recipients wishes while e-blasts can be "opted out" so the recipient will not receive it again. More and more people are choosing a select number of email solicitations they wish to receive, making e-blasts a viable method of advertising. In addition to the fact e-blasts are relatively inexpensive to use, you can track the recipients viewing of your advertising with great precision depending on the program you use. There are a number of companies that offer on-line systems to distribute e-mail blasts. You can also buy software capable of sending and monitoring e-blasts. In both cases, these programs are designed to allow the recipient to opt out if they do not wish to receive your ads.
Some companies have proposed placing messages or corporate on the side of booster rockets and the International Space Station. Controversy exists on the effectiveness of subliminal advertising (see mind control), and the pervasiveness of mass messages (see propagan.
Customer focus
Many companies today have a customer focus (or market orientation). This implies that the company focuses its activities and products on consumer demands. Generally there are three ways of doing this: the customer-driven approach, the sense of identifying market changes and the product innovation approach.
In the consumer-driven approach, consumer wants are the drivers of all strategic marketing decisions. No strategy is pursued until it passes the test of consumer research. Every aspect of a market offering, including the nature of the product itself, is driven by the needs of potential consumers. The starting point is always the consumer. The rationale for this approach is that there is no point spending R&D funds developing products that people will not buy. History attests to many products that were commercial failures in spite of being technological breakthroughs.
A formal approach to this customer-focused marketing is known as SIVA
[6] (Solution, Information, Value, Access). This system is basically the four Ps renamed and reworded to provide a customer focus.
The SIVA Model provides a demand/customer centric version alternative to the well-known 4Ps supply side model (product, price, place, promotion) of marketing management.
In the consumer-driven approach, consumer wants are the drivers of all strategic marketing decisions. No strategy is pursued until it passes the test of consumer research. Every aspect of a market offering, including the nature of the product itself, is driven by the needs of potential consumers. The starting point is always the consumer. The rationale for this approach is that there is no point spending R&D funds developing products that people will not buy. History attests to many products that were commercial failures in spite of being technological breakthroughs.
A formal approach to this customer-focused marketing is known as SIVA
[6] (Solution, Information, Value, Access). This system is basically the four Ps renamed and reworded to provide a customer focus.
The SIVA Model provides a demand/customer centric version alternative to the well-known 4Ps supply side model (product, price, place, promotion) of marketing management.
Marketing in changing world
The swoosh it’s everywhere just for fun, try counting the swooshes whenever you pick up the sport pages, or watch a pick-up basketball game, or tune in to televised golf match. Nike has built the ubiquitous swoosh into one of the best-known brands symbols on the planet. The symbol is so known that the company routinely runs ads without even maintaining the nickname. In fact you may be surprised to finds that your latest pair of Nike shoes or your nice hat or t-short, carry no brand identification other than the swoosh
The power of its brand and logo speaks loudly of Nike’s superb marketing skill. The company’s now-proven strategy of building superior products surround popular athletes has forever changed the face of sports marketing Nike spends hundred of million of dollars each year on big name endorsement splashy promotional events, and loots of attention-getting ads. No matter what your sport change are good one of your favorite athletes wears the Nike swoosh.
Nike knows, however, that good marketing is more than promotional hype and promises-it means consistently delivering real value to customers. Nike’s initial success resulted from the technical superiority of it running and basketball shoes, pitched to serious athletes who were frustrated by the lack of innovation in athlete’s equipment. To this day, Nike leads the industry in product development and innovation.
But Nike gives its costumers more than just good athletes gear. Nike has always knon the truth-its not so much the shoes, but where they take you beyond shoes apparel and equipment Nike market away of life a sport culture, a just o it ! Attitude. When you lace up your Nikes you link your self in at least some small way with all that Nike and it athletes have come to represent. Through Nike you share a little of Michael Jordan’s intense competitiveness, tiger wood’s cool confidence, Jackie joynerkersee is blurring speed. Nike is athletes, athletes are sport, Nike is sport
The power of its brand and logo speaks loudly of Nike’s superb marketing skill. The company’s now-proven strategy of building superior products surround popular athletes has forever changed the face of sports marketing Nike spends hundred of million of dollars each year on big name endorsement splashy promotional events, and loots of attention-getting ads. No matter what your sport change are good one of your favorite athletes wears the Nike swoosh.
Nike knows, however, that good marketing is more than promotional hype and promises-it means consistently delivering real value to customers. Nike’s initial success resulted from the technical superiority of it running and basketball shoes, pitched to serious athletes who were frustrated by the lack of innovation in athlete’s equipment. To this day, Nike leads the industry in product development and innovation.
But Nike gives its costumers more than just good athletes gear. Nike has always knon the truth-its not so much the shoes, but where they take you beyond shoes apparel and equipment Nike market away of life a sport culture, a just o it ! Attitude. When you lace up your Nikes you link your self in at least some small way with all that Nike and it athletes have come to represent. Through Nike you share a little of Michael Jordan’s intense competitiveness, tiger wood’s cool confidence, Jackie joynerkersee is blurring speed. Nike is athletes, athletes are sport, Nike is sport
Nike’s marketers build relationship-between Nike, its athletes, and its customers. For example, a recent ad in a tennis magazine shows only a Nike tennis shoe with the red swoosh and an 800 number. Redrew call the number hear tennis favorites Jim courier talking drums with his favorite drummer randy Goss toad the wet sprocket. Call the number of similar basketball ad and you will overhear a humorous phone conversion in which father Guido seduce tries to get Michael Jordan to invest in his newest invention, edible bicycle. “I’ll pass” says Michael, but thanks anyway.” The simplicity and charm of such ads and promotions typify Nike’s simple but powerfully personal approach to marketing.
Nike seems to care as much about its customers lives as their bodies. It does not just promote sales it promotes sport for benefit of all. For example, its “if you let me play” campaign lends strong support to women‘s sports and the many benefits of sports participation for girls and young women. Nike also invests in wide range of lesser-known sports, even though they provide less-lucrative marketing opportunities. Such actions establish Nike as not just a producer of good athletic gear, but as a good and caring company.
Nike seems to care as much about its customers lives as their bodies. It does not just promote sales it promotes sport for benefit of all. For example, its “if you let me play” campaign lends strong support to women‘s sports and the many benefits of sports participation for girls and young women. Nike also invests in wide range of lesser-known sports, even though they provide less-lucrative marketing opportunities. Such actions establish Nike as not just a producer of good athletic gear, but as a good and caring company.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Business-to-business buying and the internet
To must consumers, excitements about internet buying has focused on website sealing computers, software, clothings, books, flowers or other retail gods. However, consumers-goods sale
s via the web are dwarfed by the internet sales of business goods. In fact, experts predict that business-to business internet trade will reach $134 billion a year by the turn of the century.
General electric is among the pioneers in internet purchasing. Last January, GE’s Information service division (GEIS) launched a Website, which allows buyers in GE’s many division to purchase industrial products electronically. This website lets GE buyers snap out requests for bids to thousands of suppliers, who can then respond over the Internet. Such electronic purchasing save money, time and piles of paperwork. According to account in Forbes, here is how it works:
The machinery at a GE lighting factory in Cleveland broke down GE lighting needed custom replacement parts, fast. In the past GE would have asked for bids from just four domestic suppliers. There was just to much hassle getting the paperwork and pro duction- line blueprints together and sent out to (a long list of) suppliers. But this time they posted the specification and “requests for quotes” on the GE’s website-and drew seven others bidders. The winner was Hungarian (vender) that would not (even) have been contacted in the days of paper purchasing firms. The Hungarian firm’s replacement parts arrived quicker, and GE Lighting paid just $320,000 a 20 percent savings.
So far, GE’s Internet purchasing system has logged more than $350 million worth of purchases by GE division, at a 10 percent to 15 percent saving in costs and five-day reduction in average in order time.
Based on its own success, GE is now opening the website to other companies. However, as a supplier of Internet purchasing services. GE will face formidable competition. As noted in forbs:
GEIS has jumped ahead of such companies as IBM, Microsoft, and Netscape to led the race in to business-to-business internet commerce. The tough part of establishing such a system, says Orville Bailey, who manages GEIS’ internet project, is just getting it started. Buyers do not want to invest in a system unless suppliers are already on board, and vice versa. “It’s the classic chicken-or-the- egg problem,” says Bailey. [Here, GE’s tremendous size gives it] a crucial advantage. GE division spends more then $30 billion a year on other companies’ good and service. So when GE announced last year that it would be soliciting bids over the internet, even the smallest, most technology of its supplies listed. Smiles bailey, “we could build the critical mass” [needed to get the internet commerce network up and running].
With its own network of industrial goods suppliers already hooked into the system, GE is finding it easy to resell the internet purchasing just as GE does. For access to its website,GE information service will charge buyers an initial fee of $70,000 and an undisclosed annual fee based on volume. Suppliers get to sign on to the system free.
The first [outside firm] to sign on is Textron automotive a subsidiary of the $9.3 billion Textron, inc. like GE, Textron automotive buys a lot of row materials and components: resin,asthrays,matel clips, and other parts used in auto dashboards and paneling. By year-end, Textron Automotive hopes to palace all its order-more than$500 million a year –over the GE information service website.
GEIS’s bailey expects various GE units to be buying goods at the time rate of $2 billion a year by a next year and outside firms like Textron auto motive to be doing another $3 billion or so. If a $134 billion market for business-to-business internet commerce by the year 2000does materialize up to $50 billion of that will move over GE’s internet purchasing system. What of the much-ballyhooed retail website?
….Those site will do about$10 billion in 2000.That’s one-fifth the potential volume of GE’s business goods website alone
Thus, the internet promises to change dramatically the face of business marketing. As one expert suggests, “internet presences is becoming as common as business cards and faxes.” To stay in the game, business-to-business marketers will need a well thought out internet marketing strategy to supplement their other business marketing efforts.
s via the web are dwarfed by the internet sales of business goods. In fact, experts predict that business-to business internet trade will reach $134 billion a year by the turn of the century.
General electric is among the pioneers in internet purchasing. Last January, GE’s Information service division (GEIS) launched a Website, which allows buyers in GE’s many division to purchase industrial products electronically. This website lets GE buyers snap out requests for bids to thousands of suppliers, who can then respond over the Internet. Such electronic purchasing save money, time and piles of paperwork. According to account in Forbes, here is how it works:
The machinery at a GE lighting factory in Cleveland broke down GE lighting needed custom replacement parts, fast. In the past GE would have asked for bids from just four domestic suppliers. There was just to much hassle getting the paperwork and pro duction- line blueprints together and sent out to (a long list of) suppliers. But this time they posted the specification and “requests for quotes” on the GE’s website-and drew seven others bidders. The winner was Hungarian (vender) that would not (even) have been contacted in the days of paper purchasing firms. The Hungarian firm’s replacement parts arrived quicker, and GE Lighting paid just $320,000 a 20 percent savings.
So far, GE’s Internet purchasing system has logged more than $350 million worth of purchases by GE division, at a 10 percent to 15 percent saving in costs and five-day reduction in average in order time.
Based on its own success, GE is now opening the website to other companies. However, as a supplier of Internet purchasing services. GE will face formidable competition. As noted in forbs:
GEIS has jumped ahead of such companies as IBM, Microsoft, and Netscape to led the race in to business-to-business internet commerce. The tough part of establishing such a system, says Orville Bailey, who manages GEIS’ internet project, is just getting it started. Buyers do not want to invest in a system unless suppliers are already on board, and vice versa. “It’s the classic chicken-or-the- egg problem,” says Bailey. [Here, GE’s tremendous size gives it] a crucial advantage. GE division spends more then $30 billion a year on other companies’ good and service. So when GE announced last year that it would be soliciting bids over the internet, even the smallest, most technology of its supplies listed. Smiles bailey, “we could build the critical mass” [needed to get the internet commerce network up and running].
With its own network of industrial goods suppliers already hooked into the system, GE is finding it easy to resell the internet purchasing just as GE does. For access to its website,GE information service will charge buyers an initial fee of $70,000 and an undisclosed annual fee based on volume. Suppliers get to sign on to the system free.
The first [outside firm] to sign on is Textron automotive a subsidiary of the $9.3 billion Textron, inc. like GE, Textron automotive buys a lot of row materials and components: resin,asthrays,matel clips, and other parts used in auto dashboards and paneling. By year-end, Textron Automotive hopes to palace all its order-more than$500 million a year –over the GE information service website.
GEIS’s bailey expects various GE units to be buying goods at the time rate of $2 billion a year by a next year and outside firms like Textron auto motive to be doing another $3 billion or so. If a $134 billion market for business-to-business internet commerce by the year 2000does materialize up to $50 billion of that will move over GE’s internet purchasing system. What of the much-ballyhooed retail website?
….Those site will do about$10 billion in 2000.That’s one-fifth the potential volume of GE’s business goods website alone
Thus, the internet promises to change dramatically the face of business marketing. As one expert suggests, “internet presences is becoming as common as business cards and faxes.” To stay in the game, business-to-business marketers will need a well thought out internet marketing strategy to supplement their other business marketing efforts.
Motorola’s customer-driven “six-sigma” quality
Founded in 1928, Motorola introduced the first commercially successful car radio- hence the name Motorola, suggesting, “sound in motion.” During World War II, it developed the first two-way radios9Walkie-Talkies), and by the 1950s, Motorola had become a household name in consumer electronics products. In the 1970s, however, facing intense competition mostly from Japanese firms, Motorola abandoned the radios and televisions that had made it famous. Instead, it focused on advance telecommunication and electronics produces two-way radio pagers cellular telephones, semiconductors, and related technology gizmos. However, by the early 198-, Japanese competitors were still beating Motorola to the market with higher quality products at lower prices.
Since those trying times, however Motorola has come roaring back. It now lead all competitors in the global two-way mobile radio market and ranks number one in cellular telephones with a 35 percent worldwide market share. Motorola is the world’s fifth-largest semiconductor,producer,trailing only Intel,NEC,Toshiba, and Fujitsu.One in danger of being forced out of the pager business altogether, Motorola now dominates that market an astonishing 85percent global market share rather then suffering at the hand of Japanese competitors, ,Motorola’s sales in Japan now exceed $2billion, accounting ,almost 8 percent of total company sales.
How has Motorola achieved such remarkable leadership? The answer is deceptively simple: an obsessive dedication to quality. In the early 1980s, Motorola launched an aggressive crusade to improve product quality first by ten fold then by hundred-fold .It set the unheard–of goal of six-sigma standard means that Motorola set out to slash product defected to fewer than 3.4 per million for every process 99.997 percent defect free. Six sigma become Motorola’s rallying cry. In 1988,It received one the first annual Malcolm Balding National Quality Awards recognizing “preeminent quality leadership.”
Motorola initial efforts focused on manufacturing improvements. The goal was to prevent defecates by designing products for quality and making things right the first time and every time. Meeting the six-sigma standard meant that everyone in the organization had to strive for quality improvement. Thus, total quality hs become an important part of Motorola’s basic corporate culture. Motorola spends $160 million annually to educate employees about quality, and then rewards people when they make things right. The company also forces its suppliers to meet exacting quality standards. Some suppliers grumble, but those that survive benefits greatly from their own quality improvement. As an executive from one of Motorola’s suppliers puts it, “if we can supply Motorola, we can supply God”
More recently, as Motorola has developed a deeper understanding of the meaning of quality, it initially focus on preventing manufacturing defects has evolved into an costumer-driven quality and costumer value. “Quality,” notes Motorola’s vice president of quality has to do something for the customers. If a product does not work the way the designer planned it. Our definition of the defects is “f the commuter doesn’t like, it’s a defects.”
Thus since 1980s, the fundamental aim of Motorola’s quality movement has been total customer satisfaction. Instead of focusing just on manufacturing defects, Motorola’s surveys customers about their quality needs analyzes customer complaints, and studies service record in a constant quest to improve value to the customer
Some skeptics are concerned that Motorola’s obsession might be too expensive. Not so, claim Motorola in fact the reverse is true –superior quality is the lowest-cost way to do thing. The cost of monitoring and fixing mistakes can far exec the cost of getting things right in the first place. Motorola estimate that is quality efforts have result in cumulative saving of more than $9 billion during the past six years.
Therefore, Motorola’s quest for quality continuous. By the year2001, Motorola is shooting for the near-perfection- a mind-boggling rate of just one defect per million.(Gopal )
Sunday, July 12, 2009
The rise and fall of new coke:what's the problem
In 1985, the Coca-Cola Company made a classic marketing blunder. After 99succesfull years, it set aside its longstanding rule-“don’t mess with mother cook”-and dropped its original formula coke! In its place came new coke with a sweeter smoother taste.
At first, amid the introductory flurry of advertising and publicity, new coke sold well. But sales soon went flat, as a stunned public reacted. Coke began receiving sacks of mail and more then 1500phone calls each days from angry from consumers a group called “old cola drinkers” staged protests, handed out T-shirt, and threatened a class action suit unless Coca-Cola brought back the old formula. Most marketing experts predicted that new coke would be the “Eddies of the eighties.” After Olney three months, the coca cola company brought old coke back. Now called “coke classic,” it sold side by side with new coke would remain its “flag ship” brand, but consumers had a different idea. By the end of 1985, classic was outselling new coke in supermarket by two to one.
Quick reaction saves the company from potential disaster. It stepped up efforts for Coke classic and slotted new coke into a supporting role. Coke classic again became the company’s main brand –and the countries leadings soft drink. New coke became the company’s “attack brand” –its Pepsi stopper-and ads boldly compared new Coke taste with Pepsi’s. Still, new coke managed only a 2 percent market share. in the spring of 1990,the company repackaged new coke and relaunched it as a brand extension with a new name coke II. Today, coke classic captures more than 20 percent us soft drink market; coke II holds a miniscule 0.1percent
Why was new coke introduced in first place? What went wrong? Many analysts blame the blunder on poor market research.
In the early 1980s, although coke was still the leading soft drink, it was slowly loosing market to Pepsi for years, Pepsi had successfully mounted the “Pepsi challenge” a series of televised taste testes showing that consumers preferred the sweeter taste of Pepsi. By early 1985, although coke led in the overall market, Pepsi led in the super market sell by 2 percent (That doesn’t should like much, but 2 percent of the huge soft drink market amounts to more than $1 billion in retail sales!).Coca kola had to do something to stop the lose of its market share, and the solution appeared to be a change in coke’s taste.
Coca-cola began the largest new product research project in the company history. It spends more then 2 years and $4 million on research before settling on a new formula. It conducted some 200,000-taste tests 30,000 on the final formula alone. In blind tests,60 percent consumers chose the new coke over the old and 52 percent chose it over Pepsi. Research shows that new coke would be a winner and the company introduced it with confidence. So what happened?
Looking back, we can see that Coke defined its marketing research problem narrowly. The research locked only test; it did not explore consumer’s feelings about dropping the old Coke and replacing it with a new version. It took no account of the intangibles-Coke’s name, history, packing, cultural heritage and image. To many people, Coke stands alongside baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie as an American institution. Coke’s symbolic meaning turned out to be more important to many consumers than its taste. Research addressing a broader set of issues would have detected these strong emotions.
Coke’ managers may also have used poor judgment in interpreting the research and planning strategies around it. For example, they took finding that 60 present of consumers preferred New Coke’s taste to mean that the new product would win in the marketplace, as when a political candidate wings wit 60 percent of the vote. But it also meant that 40 percent still linked the original formula. By dropping the old Coke, the company trampled the taste bunds of the large core of loyal Coke drinkers who did not want a change. The company might have been wiser to leave the old Coke as a brand extension, as it later did successfully with cherry Coke.
The Coca-Cola Company has one the largest, best managed, and most advanced marketing research operation in America. Good marketing research has kept the company atop the rough-and-tumble soft drink market for decades. But marketing research is far from an exact science. Consumers are full of surprise and figuring them out can be away fully tough. If Coca-Cola can make large marketing research mistake, any company can.
At first, amid the introductory flurry of advertising and publicity, new coke sold well. But sales soon went flat, as a stunned public reacted. Coke began receiving sacks of mail and more then 1500phone calls each days from angry from consumers a group called “old cola drinkers” staged protests, handed out T-shirt, and threatened a class action suit unless Coca-Cola brought back the old formula. Most marketing experts predicted that new coke would be the “Eddies of the eighties.” After Olney three months, the coca cola company brought old coke back. Now called “coke classic,” it sold side by side with new coke would remain its “flag ship” brand, but consumers had a different idea. By the end of 1985, classic was outselling new coke in supermarket by two to one.
Quick reaction saves the company from potential disaster. It stepped up efforts for Coke classic and slotted new coke into a supporting role. Coke classic again became the company’s main brand –and the countries leadings soft drink. New coke became the company’s “attack brand” –its Pepsi stopper-and ads boldly compared new Coke taste with Pepsi’s. Still, new coke managed only a 2 percent market share. in the spring of 1990,the company repackaged new coke and relaunched it as a brand extension with a new name coke II. Today, coke classic captures more than 20 percent us soft drink market; coke II holds a miniscule 0.1percent
Why was new coke introduced in first place? What went wrong? Many analysts blame the blunder on poor market research.
In the early 1980s, although coke was still the leading soft drink, it was slowly loosing market to Pepsi for years, Pepsi had successfully mounted the “Pepsi challenge” a series of televised taste testes showing that consumers preferred the sweeter taste of Pepsi. By early 1985, although coke led in the overall market, Pepsi led in the super market sell by 2 percent (That doesn’t should like much, but 2 percent of the huge soft drink market amounts to more than $1 billion in retail sales!).Coca kola had to do something to stop the lose of its market share, and the solution appeared to be a change in coke’s taste.
Coca-cola began the largest new product research project in the company history. It spends more then 2 years and $4 million on research before settling on a new formula. It conducted some 200,000-taste tests 30,000 on the final formula alone. In blind tests,60 percent consumers chose the new coke over the old and 52 percent chose it over Pepsi. Research shows that new coke would be a winner and the company introduced it with confidence. So what happened?
Looking back, we can see that Coke defined its marketing research problem narrowly. The research locked only test; it did not explore consumer’s feelings about dropping the old Coke and replacing it with a new version. It took no account of the intangibles-Coke’s name, history, packing, cultural heritage and image. To many people, Coke stands alongside baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie as an American institution. Coke’s symbolic meaning turned out to be more important to many consumers than its taste. Research addressing a broader set of issues would have detected these strong emotions.
Coke’ managers may also have used poor judgment in interpreting the research and planning strategies around it. For example, they took finding that 60 present of consumers preferred New Coke’s taste to mean that the new product would win in the marketplace, as when a political candidate wings wit 60 percent of the vote. But it also meant that 40 percent still linked the original formula. By dropping the old Coke, the company trampled the taste bunds of the large core of loyal Coke drinkers who did not want a change. The company might have been wiser to leave the old Coke as a brand extension, as it later did successfully with cherry Coke.
The Coca-Cola Company has one the largest, best managed, and most advanced marketing research operation in America. Good marketing research has kept the company atop the rough-and-tumble soft drink market for decades. But marketing research is far from an exact science. Consumers are full of surprise and figuring them out can be away fully tough. If Coca-Cola can make large marketing research mistake, any company can.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
RSS Feed (xml)