Services

Recently we have been talking about services and how companies can face challenges when trying to advertise or market them. Services pose a problem to marketers because they are intangible. When thinking about this I really came to wonder if this was such a big issue for companies that strictly or primarily offer services. Most services are services that people need. For example the majority of people need haircuts and simply do not know how to or do not have the right equipment to cut hair. The same applies so a service like an oil change. Although these are something that is not necessarily tangible, and because of this they may be hard to market does this really pose such a problem?

I think because these items are services that people need the emphasis is not soley on marketing or advertising. Any good business should obviously use marketing skills for various reasons. Whether this is to draw in new customers, allow customers to know of new products, or simply to compete with the next business offering similar products. However, I think the mere fact that people cannot perform these actions themselves is a strong enough force to easy the burden of having to promote a certain service.

This applies to businesses like haircut salons, mechanical shops and things of that nature. However, or course this does not take into consideration all services. For example selling tickets to a sports game. This is something that requires a good amount of effort to assure, because what they offer is a service, that their product does not perish or become a complete loss.

Do you think that performing a service well is good enough promotion within itself? What recommendations would you give to a start-up business that offers only services?

Aesthetic Modifications

Aesthetic modifications are changes to the sensory appeal of a product. This could be a change in it's taste, texture, sound, smell, or appearance. When thinking of these modifications I immediate though of Domino's Pizza. Recently Domino' s has entirely remade their pizza. They have come up with new crust types, new sauces, and new cheese types. Domino's considered many customer reviews and put together a team to remake their pizza so more people would enjoy it. A video of this and the changes they made can be seen in this video.

When thinking of these changes I knew there were obvious advantages but for me it was far easier to think of the disadvantages of these changes. For example with Domino's I always loved their pizza the way it used to be. Now since they have changed it I do not like it at all. I think it is far too greasy and loaded up with garlic. However, the overwhelming majority of people who I have talked to say they like the changes. I feel when you change something like this you are changing what people actually like about the product, you are not simply changing the way it looks and this presents a huge risk.

When thinking about changes I also considered changes to the appearance of a product. When a product changes its label often times people do not recognize it. This can lead people to look around within a certain area and may cause them to look at other items they made not have considered before. This could lead to people choosing a new product entirely. However, people could recognize a new label amongst other products they are used to seeing an immediately pick up that product in hopes to learn more about it which in turn could cause them to buy it.

Can you think of any products that have made Aesthetic modifications? Do you think these modifications are essential to saving a struggling product or too risky to attempt?

In response the Sam's Blog: Craigslist: Marketing for Dummies

Sam asked..."Do you have any personal favorite techniques for selling and item on Craigslist/Ebay? Do you think that big companies use similar or different techniques to sell their products?"

I personally have sold many items on Craigslist. I think that Craigslist has done a very good job of keeping their site simple enough for many people to use it. In doing this they have also been careful not to make the site seem too basic and unreliable. With this being the case I think this is a huge problem many big companies face. A lot of companies want their web site to be the best and easiest to use but in doing this they actually make things more complicated than they need to be. Also as they do this I think people become wary of their sites. Features that companies may think give them the upper hand over other companies many actually drive consumers away. For example web sites that offer to save credit card numbers or sites that keep you logged in for extended periods of time.

When buying items I always click the option to only show items with pictures. If an item does not have a picture I will not even give it the time of day. With this being the case when I sell items on Craigslist I always make sure to include a picture. I think this is my favorite technique to lure people in. I think visuals are a huge factor especially when it comes to selling items online. For example I was recently looking to buy a new cell phone and the phone company provided a 360 degree view of the phone as well as compared it to common items like an Ipod or a deck of cards.

I think there are many lessons to be learned from sites like Craigslist and Ebay. These sites are hugely popular amongst the "average joe" and with close investigation a lot of big companies can learn valuable lessons from them. With this being the case I think sites like Ebay and Craigslist will always prove to be a favorite method of buying and selling for people. A lot of people are in the market for the lowest price possible as quick as possible and big corporations are just unable to compete with this.

Do you only use sites like Craigslist and Ebay to purchase certain products? How can commercial companies take advantage of this to capitalize on a market that does not appeal to these sites?

In Response to Gretchen Harbourt's: Poor marketing to employees not customers by Friendly's...

Gretchen asked..." Do you think it is effective marketing to market inside the restaurant while customers and employees are already there? Do you think annoying people is an effective way to market a company?"

Although what is being played over the intercom throughout the store may be repetitive it is only repeated once an hour. I would safely say the majority of customers are rarely in a restaurant for more than an hour and a half or even an hour, and if they are then restaurant has bigger problems to worry about. I know when I am at a restaurant I am generally engaged in conversation and have little recollection leaving the restaurant of what was played over the intercom. With this being the case maybe this type of marketing is not effective in a restaurant. However, I do feel as if this is an effective way to market.

At the store I work at they used to play instrumental music which would be interrupted regularly to tell of events the store was hosting, or deals the store was having. This recently changed and the store now plays music like you would hear on a radio station while also playing information about the stores deals and events. I would agree that some ads are annoying but I would more strongly agree that they are effective. After hearing an ad several times over the intercom I almost began knowing it by heart. This intrigued me to find out more about the deals and also to find out more about the events the store was having. Although I found it repetitive I pushed me want to learn more and it also helped me to better answer questions when the ad played over the intercom and triggered customers curiosity.

I would say annoying people is not an effective way of marketing. But I would also make a strong argument that very few people are in stores long enough to be effected by the music. Odds are if they are in the store long enough to hear something twice or enough to become annoyed by it they are already in an annoying situation as is. Or they are spending so much time in the store because they thoroughly enjoy that store.

I never gave much through to in-store marketing and I think it is an interesting aspect of marketing. Have you ever found yourself buying something or returning to a store because of an advertisement you heard over the intercom? What are some stores you think this type of advertisement are most effective in?

Trademarking Troubles

With the majority of us being business majors/minors and possibly wanting to open our own businesses one day we must be particularly aware of certain trademarks. A clever name or life-long idea could already be taken and there is little to nothing we can do about it. It would be unbelievably difficult if not impossible to create a start-up business while paying pricey court fees.

What brings me to this point is a recent article I read involving two of my idols, David Ortiz and Jay-Z. Ortiz recent opened up a nightclub named "Forty-Forty" which strongly resembles Jay-Z's 40/40 Club. Jay-Z's nightclub name is trademarked and he feels as if Ortiz's is trying to reek some of the benefits by creating a similar name to the already established club. Because of this Jay-Z is suing Ortiz for over $5 million.

Paying attention to trademarks or even trademarking your own brand is extremely important. However, trademarking can sometimes difficult to understand. For example generic brands are not protectable. In this case 40/40 refers to an achievement in baseball ( 40 homeruns, 40 stolen bases). I would consider the number 40 or even the achievement 40/40 to be pretty generic. I guess this is not the case when they become a club name.

Do you feel as if the two names are too close and there is a trademarking issue? These seems to be a lot that is unknown about trademarking, how can rules and regulations of trademarking be better cleared up to the public or start-up business owners?

Branding

Often times branding is something many consumers take for granted. There is little thought that actually goes into the significance of the equally as little symbol that is strategically placed on a product. However, the branding process can be a crucial part of establishing a product for many companies. A brand can essentially make or break a company. There are many aspects that go into creating a successful brand. This includes creating a name for that brand (brand name) as well as a symbol (brand mark). The brand name is important because if it is awkward or does not flow smoothly it likely will cause your product to not to sell. This is tough for new companies because the name of their product is not something that many consumers know and because of this the name may seem awkward. It is extremely difficult to create a brand name that automatically sounds correct to consumers. Many times these consumers need to hear a new name multiple times to become comfortable with it. The same applies with band marks. Often times people need to see these marks multiple times before they associate them with the name.

Both buyers and sellers benefit from branding. Brands help consumers recognize products they like. For me personally I know I tend to favor certain brands over others. The first and most dominant branding that comes to mind for me involves clothing. When I shop for cloths I am always aware of what brand they are and this makes up probably 90% of my decision as to if I buy the article of clothing or not. I think this is the case for many people. Some people are willing to spend $10 or $20 more when essentially all they are buying is the brand. I think this highlights how important a brand is to a company and the overall importance of a brand in general.

Do brands matter to you, if so can you think of the areas where brands weigh heavily on your decisions? Can you think of any brands you have avoided because you didn't know how to pronounce or were unfamiliar with?

In response to Rob Bellavance's: Brand Loyalty

Rob asked, how much would it take before you switched brands? Are you loyal to one product only?

I would like to tell myself that I am not loyal to one product only but in all reality I do tend to favor certain brands over others. For example when reading Rob's post he mentioned Toyota and Hyundi it brought to mind my preference in cars. Right now I drive a Volkswagen and although it is not the nicest car I have come to really like Volkwagens. I have considered getting a new car but when I look I really only look at other Volkswagens and do not have an interest in buying another make. Although I would like to consider myself a little more open minded than this I do find that I have a strong preference for Volkswagens. I also find myself favoring brands other places as well. Recently I have been looking to buy a new rain coat and I have only looked at coats made by The North Face. I am absolutely positive there are other rain coats out there but I am sold on the fact that I want a North Face rain coat. With this being the case I would say that I absolutely find a product or brand that I like and it is pretty hard to change my opinion from there. Nearly every pair of shoes I have owned in the last 5 years have been Nikes.

However, although I do like to stick to these brands there are certain limitations I do keep in mind. Like many of my peers I am a broke college student and price is a huge factor on my buying capabilities and decisions. Although I would like to buy a new Volkswagen car I need to keep price in mind and they do tend to be pricey. With this being the case if it came down to it and I really needed a new car I would have to settle on the best deal for the money regardless of make or model. This is also the case with the coat I planned to purchase. I have not purchased a coat yet because all the North Face coats I looked at were more money than I wanted to spend. With this being the case it is likely I will find something in the meantime to hold me over and it is likely I will forget about the North Face all together. All and all price is really the only thing that limits me from purchasing brands I am loyal to. If I had excess money to just buy whatever I wanted there is no reason why I wouldn't buy the expensive Volkswagen or the expensive new coat, assuming the quality of the product did not change.

Price is my main concern and what ultimately makes me choose one brand over another. In an ideal world I would always buy the brands I preferred. What factors influence you? Or what in the past has made you choose one brand over another? Or what has caused you to become loyal to a brand or product?

Price Competition

Price competition deals with emphasizing price and matching or beating competitor's prices. In todays economy many people are struggling to make ends meet. With this being case many companies have become more aware of their prices and have adjusted them so they themselves can stay in business. Despite the economy weighing heavily on retail stores these stores need to also keep in mind the online markets as well. In today's society the internet makes almost any item you would ever need available to you in numerous ways and in each of these ways at a different price. Many people can even buy items they are looking for from web sites like Craig's List and Ebay rather than going to the suppliers themselves. Although these items may be slightly used they are still sold for significantly less. With this being the case it makes it extremely difficult for suppliers to compete.

A technique used by stores to stay competitive includes price matching. However, even some stores cannot keep up with online prices. I know, for example, the store I work at will not price match with online prices. This is because often times the online store's prices do not account for shipping and things like that that ultimately need to be factored into the price we charge in the store. The store I work at does price match prices from fliers of other stores and I have also been in numerous stores that say they will price match.

With the Internet being such a prominent force in the way we purchase our goods how can companies that are not online compete with these low prices? What are some other pricing techniques a company could use besides price matching?

In Response to Robert McCarthy: Color in Marketing

Have you noticed any other marketing techniques that are used to make people more likely to buy things? What industries are these techniques found in?

I think a very easy industry to immediately connect with as far as marketing techniques is the grocery industry. These stores sell items that we absolutely need and because of this we shop at them often. With this being the case it is very easy to look past or not pay much attention to certain techniques. Often times consumers know what they are going there for and get in and out without looking around too much. Grocery stores know this and place items in particular places to gain the attention of shoppers. A specific example of a technique I know a grocery store in my home town does is that they move their products to different isles every few months. With this being the case if you once knew where an item was you not need to look around for it and are more apt to come across items you were not initially going for but may buy anyways having seen them. The idea of out of sight out of mind sets up many companies marketing techniques.

I also have noticed techniques that online companies use. Numerous online sites that I use to shop from offer free shipping on orders over a certain amount. These companies also offer a free product if you spend a certain amount. This is effective because although someone may have been done shopping they may come to realize they could get an item for 5 dollars or they could pay 5 dollars on shipping. This ultimately leads to more money the company is making considering they probably pay a fraction for shipping in comparison to what they charge.

What techniques have you noticed are most effective on your shopping habits? Do you think you are always aware of these techniques?

In Response to Chad Brown's post: Cognitive Dissonance

Have you ever experienced this, and can you think of any companies that may be susceptible to this.

I have experienced cognitive dissonance probably more times in my life than I would have liked to, and probably will experience it a few more times. On one occasion I purchased a backpack off the Internet and the web site listed the dimensions of the back pack wrong so when I received it in the mail it was entirely too small to serve the purpose I needed it for. Ultimately I returned the back pack but still had to pay the shipping and wasted probably $10-15. More recently I purchased a mountain bike with plans to ride it a lot over the summer. However, when the summer came I was wrapped up with work and when I wasn't working it seemed to be raining. This bummed me out a little bit and made me think about my purchase and if I should have gone to a professional bike shop to buy an expensive bike as opposed to going to Wal-Mart and purchasing one for half the price, considering the amount of use it actually got.

I think there are multiple companies that are highly susceptible to cognitive dissonance. For example when thinking about my bike purchase it brings to mind the idea of exercise equipment. So often people purchase this equipment with high hopes to use it and after a few weeks or a month it serves a better purpose as a cloths hanger. Another example of companies that are highly susceptible to cognitive dissonance are computer and cellphone companies. There are always new computes and new cell phones coming out. With this being the case the price of the computer or cell phone you just bought months priors often times drops and there is then a newer version of your purchase.

How can companies that sell products that are susceptible to having consumers feel cognitive dissonance improve their products to have their consumers avoid this feeling?

Impulse Buying

Our book, Marking Express, defines impulse buying as an unplanned buying behavior resulting from a powerful urge to buy something immediately. When I first read this I questioned how certain companies advertise their product to make it become something that someone would buy impulsively. I then realized that I do not think it is necessarily the promotion of the product but other parts of the marketing mix that are more important. For example aspects like price and place. For me the majority of my impulse buys seem to depend upon where I am. For example if I am in a store grocery shopping I hardly ever consider going down the candy isle. However I often find myself upon check out picking out a pack of gum or a candy bar that is easily accessible and putting in on the conveyor belt to be purchased. This is often times impulsive for me because the candy is so conveniently place. I do not need to take more of my time to get this item, I am already standing right there and my items are already being checked out. Along with the physical place of something I noticed price is a huge factor of impulse buying for myself. I find myself often times seeing something I have seen before for more money and picking it up not necessarily because I need it but because I feel as if I may at some point need it and it is too good of a deal to pass up. I think impulse buying adds a difficult aspect to marketing. Companies cannot anticipate these purchases and in turn this makes them extremely difficult to market. There is a lot of money to potentially be made or lost in efforts to predict these purchases.

Impulse buying also helps out retail stores rather than just the actual companies supplying the product. How and where items are placed within a specific store can have a significant impact on sales. For example I did a remodel for a retail store and in doing so I set up planograms which are essentially blueprints for what item will go where on a shelf. However, space on the end caps of each row was saved for only the top selling items in each particular section. With this being a new store and people not knowing the lay out it made it easier for them to find certain items or it acted as a reminder that the product was there. This is an interesting thing to pay attention to as you go into stores.

What factors most heavily impact your impulse buying? Do you think companies can predict impulse buying, if so how? If not what can they do better to predict them?

Online Profiling

Online profiling consists of collecting information about consumers by tracking or observing their actions as they browse the Internet. This can be done simply by tracking what links the consumer clicks on, what websites they visit most often, or even the amount of time they spend on each website. In doing this companies are able to collect valuable information about consumers and in turn use this information to target specific audiences by placing ads on specific websites. Online profiling is a great tool for businesses to get to know their consumers. However, many people are concerned with this profiling interfering with their personal privacy as well as question the business' ethics in doing so.
Many privacy advocates claim these companies are creating profiles and using them to figure out political, religious, or even sexual orientations and then selling this information unethically. However, the companies that are collecting this information claim they are making consumer's lives easier. They claim these profiles are saving their customers time so they do not having to look around at multiples sites, they also claim they save their customers time by saving previous information so they do no have to retype it into frequently visited sites.
For me personally I am a little bit weary of online profiling. I know for a fact that certain sites I visit partake in it. Multiple sites that I visit regularly store my information and allow me to stay signed in, for example Facebook and even my Yahoo mail account. I have also noticed banners on sites that mention specifically my hometown and I have wondered how they knew this information. I think a lot of people have the false notion that because you are on the Internet no one is watching and this in turn gives them a false sense of security.

Do you think this profiling is helpful or hurtful to consumers? Do companies take advantage of unknowing consumers or is it the consumers responsibility to know what they are making known to the public?

Trash Talking in Marketing

At this point all of us are very familiar with the rivalry amongst AT&T and Verizon. In prior years this rivalry may not have been at the forefront of our attention. However, more recently it is nearly impossible not to turn on the TV without seeing an ad that appears as if one of the companies is directly attacking or saying something poorly about the other. Rivalries to a certain extent can be healthy and keep markets competitive. However, I feel as if these ads are taking it too far, and actually becoming quite annoying. For me these ads make me less interested in the product being advertised and are almost distracting me from what the product or service actually is. Sure the ad is effective in the sense that I can remember it, but certainly it is not effective in the sense that I want to support or remain loyal to that product or service.

I have also seen this type of marketing in other settings. For example the other day I was driving down a street in which McDonald's and Wendy's are next to each other. On one of the company's large signs where they advertise their latest deals the sign instead read, "Fresh beef sold here, frozen patties next door." I feel as if these direct attacks are being more and more common. Lately I have also seen commercials for Clorox talking badly about Tide, and even a commercial where on pizza company claims another pizza companies ads are false.

Do you think this is effective marketing? Do you think this type of advertisement actually has an adverse effect on these companies?

Here is a link to a commercial that Verizon made against AT&T around Christmas time...

John Smith Questions

Not knowing the exact details and the guidelines in which he conducts these surveys makes it hard to determine if these names should or should not be sold. If John conducts these surveys under the confidentiality that the information he gathers will not be shared with outside parties, then absolutely he should not. An example of this from the AMA's statement of ethics is mentioned under the terms of fairness. Under these terms it states that a professional organization should avoid knowingly participating in conflicts of interest, and should seek to protect private information of customers, employees, and partners. For John to sell this information would be to betray the trust of his customers and in turn create a conflict of interest. John would neglect the agreement he made with his customers to better himself and his company.

On the flip side if John were allowed to sell this information he could actually use it to help out his customer base. The AMA's statement of ethics mentions responsibility and as part of responsibility a professional organization must strive to serve the needs of customers. John is selling information about people who are likely, or very likely to purchase cars; he is not necessarily troubling people who have no intentions of purchasing cars. Having a car dealership contact these customers may actually be a step in the right direction to get them started in purchasing a car where as maybe before they didn't know how to go about this.

Can you think of any terms under the AMA's statement of ethics that could apply from the perspective of John's employees, or his customers?

In response to Robert McCarthy...

Rob asked... Are there any other types of advertisement that you feel has run its course by now? Why aren't they effective?

When I think of advertising and where I most commonly see advertisements I immediately think of broadcast advertising which consists of the television, radio, and Internet. I think this is because technology is such a large part of my life, and the lives of younger audiences. When I think of methods of advertisement that have run their course I consider certain types of print advertisement. An example of print advertisement that I feel has run its course includes fliers. For me there are many reasons why these are not effective. One major reason I feel this way is because personally I think fliers are a huge pain. To walk through a parking lot and see nearly every car with a flier on its windshield really just annoys me. Also I find they rarely ever contain something I am interested in. There is also no personal interaction with fliers, I rarely meet or talk to the person handing them out. To me this makes me feel as if the person is just doing a job and doesn't actually care for what they are trying to promote. I also feel as if society has helped this method run its course. In today's society many people are all about "going green" and to hand out paper that is likely to just be thrown away is not viewed as being socially responsible.

Despite technology becoming a large part of many people's lives I also feel as if there are types of advertisement that pertain to technology that are being phased out. A specific example of this includes pop-ups. When I first started using the Internet I was intrigued my nearly everything so for me a pop-up was new and exciting. However, now that I use the Internet more I absolutely cannot stand them and have now learned to close them so fast I can often do it before the ad even loads. With technology becoming a huge part of many people's lives I feel as everyone wants everything done ten minutes ago. With this being the case I think a lot of advertisement types that take up people's time are now being perceived as a burden and because of this they are being phased out and ineffective.

More and more types of advertisement methods are becoming ineffective. With this being the case what are some new methods you would suggest and why? What older methods do you think will withstand the test of time in the ever-changing world we live in?

Text Messaging Costs

When is the last time you sent or received a text message? For many this probably less than an hour ago. Text messaging is something that has quickly become second nature to cell phone users. However, how much do you really know about text messaging? In 2008 about 2.5 trillion text messages were sent. Text messaging takes up no extra resources for the phone company and essentially piggybacks on what they already offer. For a text message to be sent it cost the phone company about 1/3 of a cent. In turn if texting is not part of your cell phone plan they charge anywhere between 10-20 cents for 160 character text. If texting is included in your plan it costs anywhere from $10-15 per month. Without doing the exact math it is still very easy to see phone companies are making a killing off of text messaging.

Nearly all of this information was news to me. I had never given much thought to how much it actually costs phone companies to incorporate texting into the services they offer. Despite this I had heard numerous stories of outrageous cell phones bills do to people sending extreme amounts of text messages. This made me wonder about how texting came about how it was marketed in such a way that actual costs were hidden from the public. For me I think it was the pricing aspect that blinded people. I know for me personally with my first cell phone plan it did not include texting so nearly every month I was cautious of how much I was sending out, despite this I almost always went over the amount that was in the price range I wanted to spend on texting. So when my phone company offered unlimited texting for only $10 a month as part of me plan when I was almost always paying double or triple this, it was an easy decision. I think the act of charging for a single text or instead offering a set amount for an unlimited amount of texts is what distracted people. People became blinded by the deal the thought they were receiving instead of concentrating on the killing phone companies were making.

Multiple companies offer deals for buying in bundle or signing up for contracts with them, can you provide examples of any? Do you think phone companies are taking advantage of their customers? What marketing techniques do you think cell phone companies used to make texts become so popular, and what techniques could they use to possibly make even more money from this service?

In response to Ryan Berridge...

Ryan asked... " How do you see advertising changing within the next 30 years and do you believe that direct mail will still be around."

When considering direct mail, I feel as if this will always be a used method and because of this it will still be around. I feel as if there are many strategies off direct mail that allow it to be a valuable source for advertising. One major feeling I have pertaining to this use of advertising if the way it allows certain companies to relate to their customers. I think this bond and type of respect amongst employees or businesses and their customers is one that is fading quickly possibly due to e-marketing and how it has shaped the way we live today.

When considering marketing in 30 years I can only imagine how it will change. It is hard to even believe the things that are possible today. One example I read in an article recently talks about how certain shoe companies are inserting a type of chip into their shoes. This chip can then be tracked and linked to you to show companies where you are going or how much you are traveling and allow them to adjust their marketing this way. This chip can also be read by certain censors as you walk into stores in which you will then a text message will be sent to your phone which tells you of deals or discounts in the certain sections that you tend to shop in. These profiles are becoming more and more popular. With this being the case, in 30 years, I think the possibilities are endless.

What do you think of marketing for the future? Do you think new types of advertising invade privacy? Can you provide any examples of this, or what you personally do to try and avoid these profiles from being created?

Primary Data

For many businesses it is absolutely important that they understand their customers. In the process of understanding their customers they can learn valuable information. This information can be how they feel about a certain product or how it could be improved, this also could include customer suggestions as to new products the company could produce. In an effort to do this companies need to collect data. One type of data is primary data. This is data and information that comes directly from the consumers, as opposed to secondary data which comes from reports of internal and/or external sources. A way in which companies collect primary data can be through sampling, surveys, interviews, or even questionnaires. Although these methods are important for companies the can prove to be tricky to come about. In the world we live in today everything is about speed and everyone wants everything to have been done 10 minutes ago. With this being the case ways to gather this primary data can prove to be a challenge. In an effort to get this information sometimes companies will pay you or give you some sort of coupon or discount for participating. This discount can easily be made up for by the profits they receive from good feedback.

For myself, I have personally been approached by people in efforts to collect this information. I have been approached as I was walking through the mall to participate in a short interview. I have also been asked by certain websites that I use frequently to participate in short surveys. I have also been asked to fill out questionnaires. A few specific examples include the site Yahoo! which recently asked me to take a short survey. I was also approached on campus to take a short questionnaire while I was eating lunch. For me I personally found the interview to be a burden and because of this I shied away and chose not to participate. However, when it came to the survey and the questionnaire I had no problems helping out. For me I felt as if both of these were on my own time which made them more convenient. I think this directly shows how sensitive people are to types of primary data collection, and it is absolutely something that proves to be tricky to companies and something they must pay much attention to.

How do you feel about this type of data collection (primary)? What method of primary data collection do you feel is most effective in efforts to get your attention, why so? Or do you feel as if more attention should be payed to secondary data collection?

Electronic Marketing Questions for Tuesday's Class 2/23

What are some of the benefits of direct mail compared to electronic means of marketing?

The main advantage that I immediately think of when considering anything that is personal or confidential is security. I feel as if one major advantage of direct mail is security. With electronic mail there are multiple ways that people could get into your account. It is also a lot easier for someone to open up one of your emails accidentally as often times emails are not addressed to a specific person but instead an email address which could easily be typed wrong. Also it is very easy to set up folders with email that automatically put mail you may not be interested in into a junk folder. With this being the case you may never reach your intended audience.

Bar codes seem so promising, but what are some of the possible concerns with their use?

There are many concerns with bar codes. First off they are difficult to implement. In order for them to be used many people will need something that is able to read these bar codes, and this will prove to be costly. This could be an expense that could take people a while to accept and in turn hurt companies that choose to use them. Also bar codes and the technology for them seems to target a younger audience that is more tech-savvy. Older consumers may not pick up on this type of marketing which could also hurt companies that rely on this audience for their sales.

Do you think e-marketing techniques will replace traditional forms of marketing?

I think e-marketing forms have already begun to take over traditional forms of marketing. Almost every company you go to in this day and age has their own website. Along with their website they offer opportunities to create accounts with them in which you can tally your purchases and earn points. These points then add up and you receive coupons directly via email. These companies also target which areas within the store you tend to shop in and give you coupons pertaining to those sections. I work in a store that offers the ability to sign up for a discount card and in the last 3 years the process has almost entirely switched over from looking up people by home addresses to now email addresses.

What are some other companies that would benefit from direct mail efforts, how would they benefit?

I think smaller companies could benefit from direct mail. I think this is the case because direct mail allows you to build a more personal relationship with your customers. A hand written letter shows your customers you are far more interested in them and concerned with their business than a mass email sent out to many. I think this could help them to build customer loyalty and in turn it could also give them a good perception which could lead to people spreading a good word about them and how they conduct their business.


What do you think about these articles, how do you prefer to be approached? Do you feel more apt to read a letter you receive in the mail or a letter you receive in your inbox?

In Response to Joe Cretella

Joe asked... If companies did not care about the marketing environment would people still value their product and continue to buy it?

I have wondered myself many times why certain companies spend all the money they do on marketing. For me when I wonder about this I often times consider companies like Pepsi and Coke. At almost all times I can recall one of their ads. This could be from the radio, TV, or some sort of banner at the local convenience store. For me I feel like these companies are well established and without certain aspects of marketing they would still be successful. For example all the money they do spend on all these sorts of ads. For these companies, from my perspective, if they did not pay attention to this aspect of the marketing environment I would still purchase their products.
Although as far as caring or not I think all companies need to be aware of the marketing environment. I feel as if this applies for all companies. There are companies that sell milk, bread, and gasoline and basically things that nearly every person cannot go with out that still must be aware of the marketing environment. I think in the process of providing something that is so important to many peoples lives these companies need to have some sort of care for the marketing environment and some sort of values. Marketing is expansive with many companies essentially providing the same thing or substitutes for similar products. With this being the case I think if companies didn't care for the marketing environment people would seek alternative brands and because of this they wouldn't value the product or continue to buy it.

What companies do you feel as if you have a commitment to and why? Do you think their marketing aspects reflect how they feel about their company and customers? How so?

E-Marketing

E-marketing is a huge part of life that I rarely give any thought to. In this day and age nearly every person has a computer or access to a computer that can get onto the Internet. For myself I notice I am always trying to find the best deal. I will often times to go stores and see items I want to buy but hold off on buying them until I have looked them up on the computer. This has proven to be beneficial in many cases. For example, I purchased my school books offline and spend $40 for a book that the bookstore was charging $180 for. Along with being cautious about sales I also find myself reading reviews about products I am interested in. I think this is where e-marketing becomes very important to companies. Many websites have sections where you can write reviews of a specific product and these reviews can essentially make or break a product. If a company puts out a good product reviews will directly show this.

However, e-marketing can prove to be a bad thing for companies, atleast from my perspective. For me there is nothing more annoying that when I am browsing the web and my computer suddenly becoming slow because a pop-up is trying to load. I purposely try not to support companies that market via pop-ups. Besides pop-ups ads can be seen nearly everywhere, whether it is on a banner of a web site or along the side of a web page. I think subliminally these ads have an impact on the way I shop. For example when I am in stores and I see a new product and I remember seeing it on a page I happened to come across I am always a little bit intrigued to give it a shot. Although this is the case I find it to be with items that are inexpensive often times for things like a new type of snack or beverage.

Do you find yourself being influenced by e-marketing? What is the most effective way that this type of marketing gets your attention, pop-ups, banners etc...? Do you find yourself reading reviews before buying products?

Shiny Suds

To say that Youtube may be more watched than actual television may be a stretch, but probably not a far stretch. Any big event that happens on TV is almost instantly on Youtube, whether this is a wardrobe malfunction, Kanye interruption, or Snookie punch-out. With this being the case I don't think you can blame Method for choosing to advertise here. Although you can most definitely blame them for taking advantage of the more lenient or almost nonexistent censor ships it allows. I think Method knew this ran with it. There commercial was absolutely disturbing and almost uncomfortable to watch, not to mention incredibly awkward. I think Method pushed the limits for sure with this ad.
However, despite pushing the limits I think the idea of creating a viral video for advertisement purposes is pure genius. Viral videos are the latest craze and almost always the topic of conversation. When used properly the word of mouth they generate could prove to be more valuable than the actual ad its self. Hence why myself and others are blogging about it.

What do you think, are viral videos the new way to advertise? Do you think companies take advantage of the leniency allowed on the latest sources of media? Give some examples.

In Response to Chad Brown's "Best Superbowl Commercials"

Chad asked the question, If you were the CEO of a company that had the money for an ad spot for the Superbowl, would you do it? When I first read Chad's blog and considered his question I automatically thought to myself, sure why not? But then I considered some companies that chose not to advertise and considered there reasons for not participating. The first reason which is seems most obvious is the price you must pay for an ad spot. This price can be anywhere from 2.5 to 3 million for just 30 seconds. I then also considered some other reasons. When I did this I looked into Pepsi who for the first time in 23 consecutive Superbowls did not advertise during the Superbowl. Pepsi's reasoning for not participating is because they feel as if the mass market media is no longer the sole vehicle to reach an audience. Pepsi is instead saving this money and giving it away in forms of grants in six project categories. These categories include: health, arts and culture, food and shelter, the planet, neighborhoods and education. Pepsi is also allowing access to their website directly and through popular sites like Facebook and Twitter to allow fans to make recommendations on other projects they find fitting for grants.
After reading this article I changed my opinion as to if I would advertise during the Superbowl. I think Pepsi is a well known company and unless they are trying to advertise a new product, there is no need to market old products for such a large amount of money. Considering this if I were a CEO and had the money depending on my company I may choose to sit the Superbowl out. I think appearing more socially responsible and helping out the public will be for more beneficial to Pepsi than a 30 second Superbowl ad that markets products the public already is familiar with.

Do you think Pepsi's socially responsible approach will prove to hurt them? Or do you think Pepsi's approach will start a trend and companies will choose not to advertise but instead put their money to better use?

Environmental Forces in International Markets

For many firms the question is not should we go overseas, but instead it is when should we go overseas. Examples of these firms include discount variety stores such as Wal-Mart or other firms like fast food restaurants such as McDonald's. The ability to spread their business to new places offers a whole new risk but with this risk comes the potential of great return. These firms however, must pay close attention to the environmental forces in internation markets. These forces include sociocultural, economic, and political, legal. and regulatory. Each of these forces has their own impact on how successful or how unsuccessful a firm can potentially become.
As we look at sociocultural forces firms need to keep in mind that not ever place in the world thinks that same way that they do, and in this event they need to carefully study the behaviors of the people they will be presenting their business to. In an effort to do this firms must carefully know the culture of the people that will be shopping at their stores and tailor their business to fit their lifestyles. Examples of this can be seen though McDonald's. Some countries are more health conscience than others and if McDonald's wants to be successful overseas it must change its menu accordingly.
Economic forces also have a large impact. Economic forces ultimately decide if a customer can shop at one place over another depending on the amount of money they have for specific product. This can be seen during times of economic struggles when people are no longer buying brand name products from mainstream stores but instead shop at discount stores. Businesses must be aware of this because this can ultimately decide if the products in their store will sell especially if there may be a competing store close by, or even if the brands they may offer are popular or will catch on in new environments overseas.
There are also political, legal, and regulatory forces. Companies that wish to move overseas must be aware of these regulations. These could potentially prevent one company from being able to sell its products in a new market. As you move overseas there are also import tariffs and quotas that could prove to be costly. These could potentially limit you from selling your main product that keeps your company afloat.
There are many factors to consider when thinking about going overseas. There is much time and research to be put into process of moving your company. Because of this many companies run into problems or conflicts they did not for see while others make the appropriate adjustments and go forth to have great success.
Although the two examples of firms I provided are both largely successful, are there any firms you can think of that suffered from their attempt to bring there business overseas? Which Environmental force do you think has the largest impact on a firm's success?

In Response to Robert McCarthy

When considering Rob's question: What industries will take the biggest hit from environmentalism, and can they adapt to the challenge? The first industry that comes to mind for me is the oil industry. I think before the issue of environmentalism and being eco-friendly was in the spot light or as focused on as they are today, these companies were already being questioned for the impact they have on the environment. These companies take over land that is important to native people as well as force out or kill off species that live in this land, and when they're done the have depleted the resources and left the land unusable. However, this is what these companies need to do because the oil cannot be replaced as fast as it is consumed. This puts these companies in a tough situation when trying to be more environmentally responsible.
In an effort to fix this many companies have developed alternative energy sources and because of this some of them can adapt to the challenge. The problem with this though is that these alternative energy sources take a lot of money to start up and not always is the public open to the new ideas. Because of all this I think these companies will take a large hit, it may take them years to build and base themselves off of the alternative products they offer. In the long run if these alternative ideas catch on and more people are in support of helping out the environment they will invest in these new ideas and in this event these companies will have adapted to the challenge.

Where do you think oil companies are right now as far as dealing with environmentalism? Do you think they are in the process of considering new ways to be more eco-friendly, or do you think they are trying to invest in and implement new ideas and portray themselves as being more socially responsible? Do you think people will be open to these new energy sources?

Impacts of Environmentalism on Marketing

Environmentalism poses many challenges for marketers, however not all of these challenges necessarily have to be negative. The idea of environmentalism and being socially responsible presents companies with new possibilites and becuase of this I feel as if it is oportunistic to them. The money that may be spent in an effort to become more, "green," seems to overtime more than make up for itself. This can be seen throughout many companies. one specific example of this can be seen with the comany Poland Springs. Bottled water companies were under tremendous scrutiny for being socially irresponsible and creating unnecessary waste. However, Poland Springs did not let this become a threat to them and in turn used this information to better their company and the way they go about producing their bottles. In an effort to do this Poland Springs reduced the amount of raw materials in their botteling process. They also made every part of their bottle recycable, including the lable, and have also created larger containers that are reusable upto 100 times. (http://www.polandspring.com/DoingOurPart/Default.aspx)

Being socially responsible can also improve the public's perception of a company. If consumers are conscience of the environment and feel as if the company is doing their part to better it the consumer is more likely to invest in that company. This helps out companies because public percetion is a huge contirbuting factor to revenues.

Although I chose to focus in on Poland Springs can you think of any other companies that are paying attention to and making changes to their products becuase of enviromentalism?

In Response to Kevin MacArthur's Post: The 4 P's of Marketing

I would agree with Kevin in the sense that when coming into a new company you are generally paid a significantly less amount of money than veterans of that company. However, I do disagree in some ways. To say you can't expect to be paid a legitimate salary going into a company, I think depends on the particular company you are talking about. The company depends on the positions it offers and the responsibility each position holds. For example If I were going into a company that dealt with computers and inputting data into them and I was the person who had the responsibility of fixing the computers and making sure they all worked properly I would expect to have a higher salary than the person who sits at the computer and inputs the data, because essentially their job depends upon mine. So although the person who inputs the data may have been with this business longer, I would still expect that although I may be a new hire I would receive a higher pay rate. However, when comparing myself to the other people in the same position within the same company, who have been there longer, I would not expect to receive the same rate of pay as them.
In regards to raises or promotions I definitely feel as if acceptable to ask for them. I think this is acceptable because essentially you enter a company in hopes to become experienced and take on addition responsibility in that business and with added experience and responsibility should come a promotion or an increase in pay. Asking for this however can be challenging for many people. I can almost directly relate to this. I have worked for the same company for 5 years, 2 of them being while I was in high school. During the two years I was in high school I worked while going to school. When I graduated and went to college I began only working during the longer breaks, like winter and summer since I was no longer in the same town. Because I was in and out of the store I didn't receive my regular reviews as I did when I was there nonstop during high school. After two years of not having reviews or chances for pay raises, and noticing I had been promoted into the system as an assistant manager I finally got up the nerve to ask my boss for a raise. My boss understood where I was coming from and in turn increased the amount of pay I was receiving. He raised my pay to the new amount the new hires were receiving (because this was now higher than it was when I got hired) then added on the amount I received from the reviews I did get and then added on more for the reviews I missed. So in the end working up the courage absolutely paid off.
Has anyone else been in this situation with school maybe interfering with pay raises? Or had felt intimidated asking for a raise and after doing so realized it wasn't so bad?

The 4 Marketing P’s Applied to Employment

In an effort to better understand marketing principals and concepts we can apply the 4 P's. Product, price, promotion, and place, can all be applied to a situation in which most, if not all of us have already gone through at this point in our lives. This situation being the process of obtaining a job. Product, just as you would go to a store and select on brand over another applies to the employer. This is becuase they probably had multiple choices as to whom to select for the job and because of this we were esentially a product for them to choose from amongst other products (people). The second P, price, applies in the sense that this is the amount that the employer is willing to hire us at, or in turn the price we are willing to work for the employer at. This is similar to the way we may purchase goods, we may buy one product over another if it is less money but we feel it is still comparable to another product. Just as an employer may hire one worker over another if one is willing to work for a lower price but has comparable skills. The third P, promotion, applies as we try to sell ourselves to the employer. During this process we build up our resumes and point out our strong points and what skills we have to try and make ourselves more desirable over another person applying for the same position. This in turn directly relates to the price and employer is willing to hire us at, or rather our salary. The last P, place, applies to the position you are trying to fill or even more broad than that, the location of the actual facility. Place applies to why we may choose to submit an application to one job over another or why we may choose to work in one position over another. This is similar to why we may choose to shop at one store as opposed to another, simply for the convenience of getting to this particular location.

How do these, "P's," relate specifically to how you shop, or how you consider choosing one good, service, or idea over another? Which P weighs more heavily on your decision to select one product over another, price? The way it is promoted? Or simply the location of it or the convenience of getting to the place it is located?