|
Author
|
Topic: The Future of Marketing - Fall 2006
|
Doug
Proprietor
|
posted November 02, 2006 09:02 AM
   
Please go to the Bistro MBA 604 Roundtable's Future of Marketing section of the course web and talk about what you learned from reading the articles linked from there.What important ideas you are taking away from each? Elaborate on those ideas in a couple of hundred words. Is there a direct connection between these ideas and your experience online? Please explain. Why would I be assigning these? For example, what challenges does Chris Locke present to old ways of thinking. He is clearly a positive change agent for some, at least through Rogers' first three, especially diagnosing problems. For others, Chris is too radical to even read let alone take seriously. How do you respond to him? Has he correctly diagnosed the problems with Industrial Age marketing? What about his solutions? Can you make a business case for them? How would they benefit a new economy business model? Can you make money using Chris's kind of marketing? Or would you be fired outright? |
bmoudgil
Member
|
posted November 16, 2006 03:26 PM
The Future of Marketing can’t be told without looking at its past. The ground zero, when companies went from selling a product to the present day of selling a brand came around the time of Campbell’s soup to the present Nike’s” just do it” and Starbucks “baristas”. The article The Brands Bounce Back investigates the act of branding was becoming a larger and larger focus of their businesses. The brand that is being sold is not necessarily the coffee you buy at Starbucks, but the feeling of warmth and community people get in Starbucks stores. What was changing was the idea of what in both advertising and branding was being sold. The old model of marketing was to sell a product. In the new model the new product takes a back seat to the brand. Companies thought themselves as production oriented businesses all the emphasis was put on manufacturing and production however today; marketing the product is where most of the monies go. Reputations are now what make business successful for example Tommy Hilfiger. Hill finger doesn’t make anything they just slap a label on shoes shirts etc.
No logo discusses the fact that we as a country should be more about manufacturing. That was the mindset in an article in 1938 things hasn’t really changed that much since then. Companies today Nike Microsoft etc. believe that marketing and not manufacturing are the keys to success.
The key takeaways from the readings are that marketing sells product and manufacturing is not the key to success in business. There is a connection between these ideas and my experiences online the terms Google and Amazon again are marketing they don’t have a manufacturing facility, they are associated with the internet and that is how they make money via advertising on their sites. The 95 theses comments on the fact that markets tend to be created by people through conversations opinions etc. This same type of marketing can be successful in an internet community where there is less pressure to get items into the hands of consumers but more conversations about what is the right product for consumer x vs. . consumer y. The online marketing allows for a very specific demographic to be niched vs. the paint roller approach to traditional marketing.
|
pritchkl
Member
|
posted December 13, 2006 07:34 PM
One of the main things that I have learned is that Brand name has a huge impact on what people buy and use. Throughout this class we have looked at different products and services from different companies. After reading some of these articles you can see that people buy products because of their name and not necessarily because of there features or quality. This is apparent online as well. Kids and teenagers see something on line that looks cool and has a name that they know and they want it. Take for example the Apple ipod. This is a good machine but people want it because of the name. Also you can talk about clothes. Some people want the top name clothes like Abercrombie & Fitch even though they may not have the best quality. The reason being that everyone has heard of them and therefore they must have good clothes. I don’t think that this is the way to go. Branding is hurting the public but helping the companies.Another thing that I found interesting was the talk about all the politics. Advertising and Politics go hand in hand. There were quite a few articles that talked about the advertising for the campaigns. I thought this was great to read about. The article “Using M.R.I.’s to See Politics on the Brain” was interesting to read. It was weird to hear how different commercials and advertising can affect different people. I think that there shouldn’t be any advertising for the people that are running for political offices. These advertisements waste more time than anything. It was great to see where some of the information comes from and the facts. Like the fact that people tend to like Coke or Pepsi because of its name. This just shows you that marketers were right when they said that they could influence consumers' choices. Since when do you choice a soft drink on the commercials and not the real taste. I don’t really agree with Chris Locke. I think that he is looking at the Internet all wrong. People do like it because of all its jazzy things but most importantly they like it because of the convenience factor (or you could say their lazy factor). If it is cold outside people would rather look on the web for something they need then get in their car and run all over town trying to find it. The web has just about everything all in one place. People are so busy in today’s day and age, that they don’t want to run around and go to 10 different stores to get what they want. Also there are more gadgets and products out there that people want. The web is here to stay and businesses and people need to get used to that. Do I necessarily agree with that, No, but who am I to complain. Bob Dylan said it best when he said “The times they are a changin’”. Online advertising, marketing and shopping are here to stay.
|
DBouchard
Member
|
posted December 15, 2006 02:13 PM
These articles were very interesting to read. They actually bring up certain situations I have experienced, especially if you have kids. Let's start with brand names and branding. I remember that my kids had to have a certain brand name sneaker or they wouldn't be cool. I remember that they needed a certain brand shirt or jeans to fit in. The advertising industry is basically using peer pressure to their advantage. Because the cool kids have it, so do I. It's all a dreamed up perception as we learned in Walt's ecomonics class with DeBeer's and their diamonds. Branding makes a huge impact on sales. Even an adult falls to it. When I grocery shop, I'll pay the extra 20 cents to get the better brand name food item. Sometimes it's worth it and sometimes it isn't.I also found the articles on neuromarketing interesting. I liked the Pepsi challenge experiment. The taste test basically was 50/50 until they were told which drink was pepsi, then they would say that their favorite was better and the numbers changed. It was also interesting how they studied the brain waves and blood flow to test different reactions to advertising. The internet is definitely here to stay and it's advertising will make a huge impact. I can see why the articles refer to companies trying to exploit this to it max and what approach they take. | |
Bistro Friend: Email this page's URL to friend!
Ground Zero Bistro
