Airline Soda Dispute

When looking at the yahoo news today, there was a story about a man suing an airline over a soda dispute. Basically the man asked for a soda, the steward told him to use the console, the customer declined using the console and the steward left without serving him his drink. He did not receive his drink until the third flight attendant. When the man attempted to leave the plane, he was escorted by police to be questioned about the encounter on the grounds that he started directing profanities at the crew. He is now suing the  airline for experiences of "depression, worry, and anxiety surrounding his detention by law enforcement." for 50,000. I believe both sides are overreacting but the Virgin Airlines overreacted first. I don't think that the person's demands were so unreasonable that they couldn't accommodate him and provide good customer service. I think it really says something about a company's customer service when they both do not provide good customer service and make a bigger deal about it than necessary. Do you know any other examples of bad customer service and escalation of the event more than necessary?

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/man-sues-airline-over-soda-spat-135121857.html

In response to Allison Ray

Allison posed the question "Do you think Blockbuster gave up when Netflix was invented? Do you think they could have come out with some type of new product or marketing tool to stay in competition?"

I wouldn't say that Blockbuster necessarily gave up. If I remember correctly, they did try to adopt a similar tactic to Netflix but just for whatever reason Blockbuster could not gain grounds against Netflix. It would have taken nothing sort of a complete marketing campaign to change people's long held perceptions about how Blockbuster was run. Netflix came into the market as something to order from the comfort of your home. Also the way Netflix could probably run more efficiently was not having an actual building to maintain in which people have to interact directly with the customers. Do you think it was long standing perceptions of Blockbuster that lead to its collapse? If so, what strategies could have Blockbuster used to change this perception?

In Response to Kendra

Kendra posed the question "Do you think it is better to take the risk and open up a business right away? What would be other problems with only creating a line or opening a store?"

There is an issue that one option isn't always feasible over another. If you can't get a preexisting store to adopt your product line, you might have no choice but to open your own store to get your product out into the world. I do agree that it is less risky to start with the product line method if feasible, though I don't know if there would be any legal implications for opening your own store after another store has specifically adopted your product line. What other options could be utilized to achieve market penetration?

Fast Food Price War

As a result of the recent economy, fast food chains have been trying to compete on price as a way to get people to come into their stores. Though this isn't apparently what most customers want. Most customers would prefer new selection rather than cheaper prices. The article points out a lot of the new items introduced have pretty much any profitability cut out from them with all the discounts and coupons given to promote them. McDonald's has its Dollar Menu, Taco Bell has its $1 Crave Menu, Wendy's has its "Right Price Right Size" menu with items from $.99-$1.29 and many Subway consumers started getting $3 6 inch subs apposed to $5 foot longs. A lot of the extreme discounting is a result of sales comparison to past performance. Do you think it is indicative of how well a store is doing if you are comparing it to a time when sales were abnormally good? What other benchmark could be used for determining how a company is doing?

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/value-menu-too-cheap-174100489.html

Dove Ad

Dove recently launched a video advertisement where a sketch artist would draw how a person described themselves and then the sketch artist drew the same person on the description of a person that they had interacted previously. In all the drawing, the women appeared more beautiful by conventional standards when described by a stranger. Though, there is a lot of factors to consider that the people describing the person only had limit contact with the person and not everyone is going to remember all the features of somebody and might leave out some of the little features such as crow's feet. Still, it seems to say something even while considering these factors. It has certainly generated a lot of buzz, as the video has gotten 2,000 likes and 1,000 shares on Facebook. Brenda Fiala, a senior vice president of strategy in a digital advertising said Dove was trying to create trust between the company and their female consumers by sending the message that Dove understands women self image issues. What other ads have you seen that are using this emotional connection to a specific company to advertise rather than the actual product itself? Was it more or less effective?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/19/business/media/dove-ad-on-womens-self-image-creates-an-online-sensation.html?adxnnl=1&ref=advertisingandmarketing&adxnnlx=1366435855-kBeWuPbo2rAzige5lWF0iQ

In response to Matthew Tolen

Matt Tolen posed the question "What do you think will be the biggest challenges companies face in entering these new markets (India and China)? Why?"

I think marketers might face the most resistance when a country has a very strong desire to preserve their culture. Countries such as these will often create policies to prevent less products. An example of this is that 45% of Canadian music must be Canadian in origin. When quotas like that are set, this makes marketing and getting into markets very difficult when establishing a new product in a country is already difficult without policies in place to preserve their culture. How would you approach marketing to one such country? Would you choose to market to the country at all if a quota was too high?

Of Designer Jeans and Prestige

This article in the New York Times discussed why people will pay extremely high prices for designer jeans that aren't of any better construction than unbranded jeans. The article mentions that before the recession in 2009, there didn't seem to be a limit on how much people would pay for designer jeans. The new cap as of 2009 seemed to $200 for most designer jeans. The article makes the point that the $200 jeans looks no different of the $300 jeans of years passed. This seems to suggest the price being relative to what people are willing to pay for a product to get the perceived prestige that goes with an item. An interesting parallel the article put forward is that that purchasing a pair of jeans cost as much as an iPad. It really puts in prospective the opportunity cost of purchasing such a expensive item. Have you ever purchased an item based mostly on the prestige that goes with it? If so, did purchasing the item get the desired response from others?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/29/fashion/29JEANS.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

In response to Lindsey Pinault

Lindsey posed the question "How else do you think technology has changed the way products or services can be marketed? Do you find internet advertising more successful or less successful?"

Technology has enabled companies to use social media to reach their customers. Personally, I don't think that the amount of likes on a media like Facebook correlates to a successful marketing campaign. I do admit that a lot of useful information can be distributed and confirmed through social media. Twitter is how word got out that the new XBox coming out will a "always on" system that in order to play a game, you must be connected to the internet. In this case, the leaking of this information put off a lot of customers from buying the product in the future but it shows the power that social media can have on influencing opinions. What are other examples of either negative or positive social media marketing?

Convenience Items

We all come across the familiar scene when we enter the check-line...A bombardment of all sorts of candies, snack food and magazine. These are placed here hoping that something will catch the customer's eye as they wait. The price will be low for the item but you will receive less for your money that way. I know that I consciously try to keep these two things in mind when I am standing in line. If I look at the candy and see something that catches my eye, I don't purchase it unless I am willing to get out of line to go back to the candy aisle to get the more cost effective version. Are they ultimately getting what they want by my actions when I do this, yes, but I feel more like I was not taken in by the specific strategy they were engaging in. My only admitted weakness when it comes to this sort of marketing is gum. When I see a new flavor of gum I have not tried and they haven't introduced the three packs for 2.00 of it, I usually buy at least one pack of it. How often do you buy these convenience items by the check out counter and what do you find yourself usually buying?

In response to Greg Mathews

Greg posed the question "Why our generation so likely to not oppose or fight against music piracy?"
I think a lot of the lack of opposition comes from the fact that our generation hasn't really had to spend much time where technology to pirate music wasn't available. I remember that my first experiences with pirated music was back when I was like 10. Also some music that cannot really be accessed by conventional means, like anime music. For me, it is easier to just go onto Youtube to listen to music I like rather than actually go out and purchase it. There is the issue of the Youtube downloader which you can convert a Youtube video into a sound file and get a song that way. Do you think that that is why Youtube has gotten more strict about their copyright laws?

Gamification

Gamification is the process of applying game mechanics to non-game related things in an attempt. Wikipedia describes the techniques used to employ gamification as leveraging "people's natural desires for competition, achievement, status, self-expression, altruism, and closure". Some of the game like rewards used are points, marks for certain achievements, some sort of leveling system or giving the player virtual money. An example of this is Starbuck use as it relates to Foursquare, which is a smartphone application where people check in to location. Starbucks apparently offer a customized Foursquare badge and gave discounts to people that were/are "mayors" of that location. A mayor is the person that has checked in to that place the most. Have you noticed any other places using gamification to attract customers?

In Response to Will Redding

Will posed the question "Do you think a permanent price match guarantee on all products for local competitors and major online competitors is a good strategy for Best Buy? Do you think this policy will help with Best Buy's poor stock performance? "

I think it will ultimately be a good strategy because of how available things are online and the fact that over 75% of electronics are purchased online. The exclusion of eBay makes sense but they are probably the e-place that most places chose over even other online places for the potential to get good deals. I know recently when my laptop charger died, the first place I turned to was the internet in the form of Amazon. I wouldn't know where to even specifically go to find a charger for my specific charger. As much as it is a good idea to offer the service, I don't think it will be too effective because it involves a bit more steps to get the product. If a person is "showrooming", they will first come in to try out the product. If they were to purchase the item, they would have to search the internet for the product and get a refund or something if they find a cheaper priced product on the internet. If they were to just buy it on the internet, it cuts out some of the inconvenience. Do you think there is anything Best Buy can do to improve their stores?

The "Marketing" of Criminals

It is no question that when a mass shooting spree happens, it is going to be the major thing that you are going to see on all the news that day. But for the most part we only hear about the number of victims rather than the about the actual victims themselves. Even more so, they focus on the shooter and why and how they did it because that is more "interesting" to try and figure out their motives. But I've heard the question raised whether or not this is leading to more people to emulate these sort of actions to "carve" their names into people's mind and leave a lasting impression even after their deaths, since most of the stories I heard on the news is that the shooter commits suicide. This New York Times article suggests that most of these mass shooters feel like they are victims of somebody else ruining their lives. The media will delve into the months leading up to the shooting and perhaps making people aware of their "struggles". Do you think if the media covered these shootings differently that these people would have less motivated to commit these horrible acts?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/opinion/what-drives-suicidal-mass-killers.html?_r=0

In response to Jullianne Braverman

Jullianne posed the question "Do you find yourself in need of a constant new item or toy? Do you find yourself to be a big spender or saver?"
I don't feel the need to buy the new "in" thing but this is because of my general philosophy of if my current one isn't broken to the point I can't use it anymore, don't get a new one. The only thing that I am a little impulsive with is food by buying snacks I don't need. It is also a matter that I refuse to spend above my means when I work so little during the school year. Also the nature of my purchases are normally craft supplies, so I get weeks of entertainment for around 20. Another thing I occasionally splurg on is entertainment but that is only roughly only a tenth of what I earn a week. What do you think is a reasonable amount to allocate towards entertainment when trying to save money?

Product Placement

When I was watching Psych the other day, I noticed a product placement for Axe products with the character saying something to the effect of "They flock to them, like ladies to men wearing Axe". Product placement is when a show or movie place either a product's logo or a blurb about the product within in exchange for payment from the company of the product. I don't think product placement is bad unless it really is detrimental to the quality of wherever the product placement is. The Subway product placement clip shown in class was an example of being at least slightly detrimental to the show because the mention was both long and had nothing to do with the show. I might be underestimating the power of celebrity influence on people but I see no harm in the Coca-cola labels being placed in a way that the camera sees them for the judges on American Idol. I also find it interesting that shows often have to modify names of products so they are spoofing brands, like with Pear computers on ICarly, so they won't get penalized from using a company's brand unauthorized but the viewer will still know what the product is referencing. This is to make sure that a company's brand won't be used in a negative light. How big of an influence do you think product placement has when paired with celebrities?

In response to Justin Joliffe's post

 Justin raised the question of whether or not generics would overtake the expensive brands and whether that movement would increase outsourcing.

I don't think the generics will overtake the more expensive brands. There will always be people that will buy the name brands no matter how much they cost because of the perceived value that come with them such as status. Also, with things like food, some generics just don't taste as good as the more expensive brands that they are use to. Labor seems to be the most expensive variable in the manufacturing process, so most likely if the expensive brands take a hit, they most likely would alter labor first. I don't think the movement is wide enough that the profit margins would change enough to make companies that don't already to outsource though. I have always used generics anyways when quality is not compromised opposed to the expensive brands anyways. How big of a price change would pay between the generic and the name brand if quality is slightly compromised?

In response to Ariana Barone: Blimps

Ariana posed the question "Have you ever had fell victim to the positve affects of a blimp?"

It might be that the areas I frequent are too rural but I have never actually saw a blimp used as advertising before. Personally, I don't think that I would be taken in by the relatively uniqueness of the advertisement. I have seen planes with the streaming banners behind them but the uniqueness of that advertisement didn't make me any more apt to buy if I wasn't interested in the product. Do you think the uniqueness of the advertisement influences whether or not you will purchase a product?

Naomi Klein Article

I found it interesting how she discussed branding as it relates to companies. I find it a little bit disturbing how companies like the independent military contractors can just rebrand to completely erase any association with the previous company. I had heard a little about Blackwater's screw up but I was not aware that they just rebranded the company to Xe Services. I think it is a little weird to describe companies as producers of ideas apposed to product. I believe the analogy is a little off because I would never buy a product just for the idea that goes along with it but it does have truth that maybe the only thing produced by the company is the idea or design since the rest is subcontracted. I also found it was interesting that some companies are both trying to embrace their brand and disengage from it at the same time, like with Starbucks and its "community personality" where people can bring their own music and social causes. Do you think this is so Starbucks can hit a wider market? What aspects does this "unbranded" Starbucks have that the branded Starbucks doesn't have?

Swimsuits

A recent article I read spoke about how Target was advertising for women's swimsuits in Sports Illustrated's swimsuit edition. This may seem surprising but according to the article 18 million women flip through SI. The ad is an eight page insert giving beauty and style tips and Target's swimsuit line. One issue brought up is that this could alienate the male readers who read the magazines for the fantasy in Target's marketing venture. The article says this about the intrusions of the ads.  “How does this make them feel, to have a really obviously female-skewing message in the middle of their very traditionally male book, this little treat
that they get every year?". What do you think.  Would you be off put by a message that is not of the typical gender market in your favorite publication or magazine?

http://www.marketingpower.com/ResourceLibrary/Documents/newsletters/mne/2013/2/target-swimsuit.pdf

In Response to Janell Grassman

Janell raised questions about Doctor Pepper 10s advertisements that featured statements like "It's not for women" and other such statements clearly claiming men to be its target audience and also posed the questions "Do you think that this is a brilliant idea or a massive mistake? Did they take things a little too far? Also, do you think that companies do the same thing but advertising towards women and alienating men? Can you think of any?"

I think it is bound to offend more than it will promote though personally, I view it as more like a silly over-exaggeration rather than an actual issue. It clearly does not take itself seriously, so I don't see the need to take any offense over it. I can't specifically think of any ads that have that level of exaggeration targeting women. Do you think men would get as offended if there were a commercial that was exaggerated as the Doctor Pepper Commercial?

In Response to K. Provost

 K Provost posed the question "Do you think that companies like Verizon should offer a conservative product and phone plan combination, or are they within their ethical rights to jack up simple phone prices to encourage buyers to increase data usage?"

I think it is within their rights to have the simple phone cost a little more if they are pushing the smartphones. Granted, it isn't smart to alienate potential customers who do not want expensive phones with a lot of data. Personally, I only need my phone to call people and remind me about dates, so a lot of data (and money) would be wasted on me buying one of those phones. Would the lack of options be enough to persuade you to switch to another company to find better ones?

Regulation

"Do you believe self regulation is more or less effective than governmental regulatory agencies?  Why?"

I don't believe that the self regulation is as effective as government regulatory agencies. Most organizations tend to act in their own interest, so if there wasn't any rules set by an entity outside of the organization, many would continue harmful practices towards the environment and/or people. Such an example of this is that of the minimum wage. While there are some critics of minimum of wage say that raising the minimum wage will make companies go offshore but the minimum wage isn't even sufficient for one to support themselves living alone. One can imagine the wage that less than scrupulous companies would pay without these laws in place given that some companies exploit cheaper labor elsewhere. Do you think that companies in general would take advantage of  no minimum wage in place to lower costs?

In response to  Haley Bannon:
Haley Bannon posed the question "Is it unethical for us to be supporting these companies knowing the prices they are paying to hard working employees?"

 I do believe that this is unethical to have such a difference in the cost of a product to what the product is sold for. Not that this is an excuse for what the corporations are doing but the economies of scale are probably different in those countries. This does not account for the poor conditions in which the workers there are possibly subjected to. It ties in with corporate social responsibility; both at the level that the corporations are not supporting the economy which their customers reside in and are not really improving the area around where the outsourced factories are. Do you think that corporate responsibility should extend to the community where the outsourced work is?

Product (RED)

"   Do you think a partnership with Product (RED) can improve Gap’s image? Is it a sign that they are making a commitment to corporate social responsibility or do you agree with critics who say their involvement is an attempt to spit-shine the company’s image while continuing to do business as usual?"

I think that the partnership with Product (RED) can improve Gap's image but I think the effects won't be maximized unless they remove the sweatshop conditions that they produce Product (RED) in. There isn't much validity in Bono's  inspection of the factory if it was announced. I  do  lean  more to the  side that they are just putting a bandage on the company image rather than actually fixing what is socially wrong with their company. It is evident in the fact that 50%  of their factories failed inspection. It isn't to say that they are wrong for them to participate in Product (RED) because even with only 25% going back to the fund, 25% of 100 million is still significant. 

Do you think that the 25% returns to the fund warrants all the good public relations that these companies are receiving in lieu of their bad social practices?

In response to Caitlyn Croasdale:
Caitlyn posed the question "Do you pay more for food or atmosphere when you go out to eat?"

 I definitely pay for the food when dining out at a restaurant. I would not pay to have the atmosphere. I feel the purpose of restaurants are that of utility: you don't have to prepare the food or clean up after the fact with dishes that the food was both on and what it was cooked in. I don't devalue the good service and atmosphere and it is important to have those for enjoyable experience but I view it as less important to my overall satisfaction.

Are customer satisfaction and customer value interdependent or mutually exclusive?  Can satisfaction occur simultaneously with low customer value?

I believe that customer satisfaction and customer value can be interdependent. Customer value can be described as having some of the following attributes: a product that performs the way it is suppose to, there is trust between the customer and the company they are purchasing from, the price is reasonable, facts are provided about the product, there is after-sale support and co-creation with the customer. Customers can be satisfied without all or even the majority of these conditions being met. For example, if a customer purchases a product with reasonable pricing but the employee selling them said product was very rude. This would lower their opinion of the company itself, thus reducing trust. This will lead to the customer not wanting to purchase with the company again but being inherently happy with the product after the fact.

One also can consider things that are basic needs. It is possible for a customer to purchase a product based on nothing but its price, only to move onto a cheaper product if it is made available. They are satisfied with the immediate products ability to satisfy their need but do not value the name attached to it and create any loyalty. How do you make your choices for what product you buy? Which of the customer value criteria do you consider the most?