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?