Group items tagged

I found this article really relevant to my own life. I almost always buy the brand name product, especially with medications. My brother has just started to buy the Equate or Up&Up versions of Ibuprofen because he looked at the back of the bottle and found both products are made exactly the same. I completely agree with the point Megan pointed out about how we are "conditioned" to buy name brand products. My whole life, my family has always purchased brand name everything - from peanut butter, to toilet paper, to milk - because we perceived better quality with the higher price and brand name to back it up. I do agree with this to an extent that some items are made better or are of higher quality. I have been raised on these products and trust them, but I am definitely going to re-examine some of my product purchases in the future so I can save money but not trade down on quality and effectiveness.

I agree with Megan's statement: "It brings to light that consumers need to consider the price quality perception and recognize that they are paying much more for exactly the same product." As a consumer we typically go for name brands but what we need to realize that some products -- like medication are the same. I agree that "brand names" mean a lot to people and sometimes I don't get why. I usually go for a generic brand especially when the ingredients are the same as the brand name - it just depends on the product and a consumers willingness to stray from what they know. It would be interesting to do a blind fold experiment on many brand name products versus off brand products and see what consumers prefer.

I'm not a sucker! Always buy generic.

It often depends on what I'm buying, but if I can get the generic, knowing it works the same, I will buy that product over the brand name. For this example specifically, it is often a mind game with patients, just like the article said. If you have the attitude that you are going to get better by taking Advil instead of Ibuprofen, then you probably will get better. On the other hand, if you have the attitude that you are not get better by taking Ibuprofen, then chances are you may not because people get it in their head that they will not get better with the certain medication even though it is the same thing. Seems pretty crazy, but it's true. So I can see where people are more apt to buy the brand name products due to that perception they have of that product.

I totally agree with what Sarah said about it depending on what I'm buying. If I'm just getting ibuprofen, I will almost always get the generic brand from target or cvs. However, if I'm getting really any other sickness medications, I will get the brand name. Somehow it's always been in my head, like the article states, that those brands are better and will be more effective. I also think, for our generation, it depends on what we've grown up with. My parents normally buy brand name medicines (other than Advil), and I know my grandma will always get the brand names, no exceptions. It's interesting to see how people feel about this kind of thing.

It will be very interesting to see if this pricing strategy is successful. If Everlane can promote to and convince consumers ad to HOW their bags are affordable i.e. cutting out the middle men. Consumers must believe that they are getting the same quality compared to $1000 bags. Not offering discounts is one of the major keys to getting this to work. I do love a good deal but if a bag was already significantly priced lower plus discounts I would begin to question the brand. Im convinced but will consumers be?

I think the best part about this article is when it states, "Everlane's big challenge will be convincing shoppers that they're getting a good deal by purchasing bags that would retail between $1,000 and $1,500 for a fraction of the price." They are right by saying that consumers have no idea how much retailers mark up a simple t-shirt let alone a purse/handbag. Many women show "status" by carrying high-end handbags by Louis Vuitton, Marc Jacobs, Coach, etc. Like the article said, these handbags can run upwards $1000 to $1500! Interested to see how their handbags will sell, I really like them!

The idea is really great, but I do worry about how they are going to advertise this to consumers to convince them of this great idea as well. If they can devise a plan to convince the consumers, then I think Everlane could be very successful. Though I am a huge fan of discounts, even if a $1000 bag were 50% off, I'd still be paying more than the $400 bag from Everlane. That being said, if they can convince consumers that the quality is still there, then I do think this pricing strategy could work.

This is a really interesting pricing strategy for a brand that is interested in conveying quality. The brands that come with status are known for quality but women are also attracted to the altruistic aspects that women get from carrying a name brand bag with a designer name on it. I think that if this strategy is to be successful then they need to build their name in the market by growing their popularity and quality through consumer testing and testimony. They need to get their bags to have that status before they can expect to be in the same market as the other designer brands.

I have seen the same pricing strategy before. A Dutch firm called Suitsupply sells high quality suits (also produced in Italy or Portugal btw) for medium prices (between $300 and 700$), even including in-store tailoring. They just started about 10 years ago but are now expanding all over the world. I visited their Chicago penthouse store last month and it looks really great. They also achieve those low prices by cutting out the middleman of the supply chain. The thing is that they rely almost only on mouth-to-mouth marketing and endorsements such as one of the WSJ that ranked a standard Suitsupply suit even above a $2000 Armani suit. What I want to say with this is that both Everlane and Suitsupply might have found a new way of price marketing that propells them in front of many of their competitors.

I think Megan has a good point, if the brand doesn't have a status then why would people believe or want to buy it? When a brand has a status it gives it an association with quality, high cost, and etc. The status and association is what I think draws consumers in to purchase the various brands that are of the designer level. The brand needs to establish itself as a brand of quality a before they can expect consumers to believe they are offering them a deal on this bag that is comparable to the quality of a designer, well known brand.

I agree with Petro's thoughts that JCPenney needs to listen to the customers. Apple is a different "breed" in a way because we as consumers don't know what we want in technology until we see it - I would have never been able to think I wanted a device such as the iPod or iPad until it was introduced. Now, I can't envision my life without them! JCPenney's "suburban house-wife consumers" need practical and versatile items. JCPenney's St. John's Bay brand was a $1 billion brand and they need to capitalize on their strengths - not completely take it out. They need to insert new and exciting items such as Joe Fresh but keep the elements that make their company successful...and carefully change "the right 20%." Have you all shopped the new brands at JCPenney and/or did you like the older/familiar brands we know and associate with the company?

I agree with Kara, JCPenny does need to listen to what the customers want -- not what they think the customers want. There was a great point made in the article that they had gotten rid of St.Johns Bay apparel line, which is a line some of their customers were loyal and kept coming back to JCP. This article is a great example as Prof King said "the right 20% change." Unfortunately, in recent years JCP has seemed to change the wrong 20% rather than the right 20% which is why they were doing so poorly. I do not think that Ron Johnson took into account that JCP is a completely different industry over Apple. I think when changing a brand a lot of factors come in to play and as stated in the article to target toward current customers and/or new ones is a decision the company has to make.

Well put ladies. As Kara mentioned, Apple is a one of a kind company... for now at least. Until specialized firms like Apple can successfully replicate the ability to predict market demand, it is unnecessary to take such risks, as JCPenny did with the removal of core brands, to boost sales. Although it is encouraged for firms to think outside the box in todays modern world, in order to grasp the attention of consumers along side multiple other stimulants, it is essential that firms do so in a cautious manner. This is a perfect example of the importance of "the right 20% change". Although it is unfortunate that JCPenny had to endure this experience, it has developed a significant message/ take away for the rest of the industry to learn from. It will take a lot for JCP to revitalize its image with lost customers, but I feel their history of strong customer service and attractive product lines will encourage benefit of the doubt in consumers minds. It is great that they are trying to reach new consumer markets, but JCP must not forget about those who got them to where they are today. They need to nourish previous relationships, while continuing to cultivate seeds within the upcoming consumers(younger families, young adults) to stretch their loyalty to JCP into the future.

I think all four of you nailed it! The last sentence of that article states "this will involve a lot of listening," and that is exactly what JCP needs to do. They need to listen to their most important voice, the consumer -- what do they want, not "what JCP thinks the consumer should want." Overall, as we have learned, you must start with the customer and build from there--this is what JCP needs to do to start moving in the right direction.

This was an interesting article that clearly showed that marketing plans are not one size fits all. What works for one company may not work for another, and JCP is an excellent example of a company that needed to do more research on their customers before implementing a plan. I was very surprised how little they did to look into what the customers were looking for. The troubles JCP is now experience is a warning to other companies to take a closer look at the consumer when creating new marketing strategies.

I think this article really brings up a great point about the importance of a physical presence for a brand even if it is for a limited time. It will be easier for an unknown brand to get potential customers walking by the store to come in and check it out, but online it would be much harder to lure in the potential customer to browse around. There is no such thing as an organic shopper online, as the article states. I think pop-up stores are a great way to gain brand recognition and create/strengthen brand perception.

It's very interesting that this is becoming a trend. I recently read an article discussing the future of retail may lie in kiosks! Pop-up stores are similar in some ways to kiosks, so maybe the trend is slightly off from what experts predicted?

I think this concept seems like a good idea especially for those brands that do not currently have physical stores. Being able to get a customer to interact with your product is a sure way to get them a step closer to buying is. I think it could also help drive people into the scarcity concept we covered earlier. If they know these stores are only pop ups and really like the products they may be more driven to come in store and buy more.

Pop up shops are becoming increasingly popular. At Vera Bradley we focused on pop up stores in resort towns that had temporary seasons. It is interesting that stores can target select locations that can deliver a high profit over cost for their temporary setting.

I completely agree with Angelo here. A company has the freedom to sell to whomever they want, it would be business suicide to try to make everyone happy, especially in a specialty clothing store such as Abercrombie. In this case I do understand the reasons this is a big deal, a CEO talking about "good-looking" shoppers should be said in a more delicate manner if that is the message the person is trying to convey.

I only partly agree. On Abercombie's side, making such a statement is really stupid since it doesn't change anything in a positive way. "Good-looking persons" are not more likely to buy because he said that and those persons, whom he deems as not fitting into his stores will be deterred from going there. On sides of the customers it really doesn't matter. If a shop does not have clothes that appeal to or fit a group of customers then they simply won't go there. This logic can be applied to any other firm as well. It is just stupid marketing in my opinion to puclicly announce certain customer groups as "not welcome" in their stores. Those customers that can't identify with the brand won't go there or by the brand anyway.

I agree with the previous statement completely! It is one thing for a business to have a specific market, but make a public announcement of whom does not fit in that category was a poor move. It creates a negative connotation with the store, and it may sit poorly with some of their current and potential consumers. Some of the customers have friends that may not fit the target market; do you think that they will be deterred from shopping at Abercrombie when they are with this friend or friends?

I am wondering for how long this green trend will persist. I mean, so many companies are starting all those fancy campaign now but will there be a point when consumers just don't demand it anymore because they are fed up with it? It is a good thing though to tailor promotion to appeal to the "green" part of consumers' minds...

I agree with Raphael... how long will it last? Is there a point where you cannot get any more "green"? I think it is interesting that the article mentions H&M regarding their new initiative for giving discounts on returned clothes. It is great that the initiative is working well for Patagonia, but what more can Patagonia do with the "green" initiative?...how can Patagonia build further on this?

I think that this positioning strategy is a great move for Whole Foods -- especially if they are successful. It seems more and more consumers value companies that have a positive impact on society and Whole Foods is doing just that.

Personally, I think this is great! Though the new Whole Foods in Detroit may not be in the best location or have the best reputation, I do think it is very important for everyone to have access to healthy food. I do believe this is a good move for Whole Foods and could have a very positive/successful outcome.

This article is really interesting because I was thinking the same thoughts about Whole Foods marketing strategy by establishing new stores in these areas. Since Whole Foods is thought of as a high-end grocery store, it is intriguing that they even want to expand into these low-income areas. I think this will definitely be a challenge for Whole Foods, but if they ultimately have success I think it will further strengthen Whole Foods' brand more so than any other grocer.

Apple makes a difference because they have made us brand advocates. However, after learning about the scandals going on - I double take. Can the brand we love do such terrible things? Makes me rethink the integrity of the company. The brand does seduce you but on the other hand I think that Apple is facing some merchandising management problems. There used to be buzz about new releases, but I heard a rumor that another phone will be released shortly? In my opinion they are loosing their merchandising management touch by releasing so many products consecutively. Apple is starting to lose its "make a difference" feel. How can Apple make a difference when there isn't even a difference in their products anymore.

I agree with Lina, Apple has gained a large following of loyal consumers, but there continue to be releases of their "new" iPhones and what not, but there is relatively few differences between the products. I was unaware of the scandals that Apple is a part of, and it makes me wonder if more people become knowledgeable about the situation will that reduce their customer loyalty and deter people from joining the Apple craze.

Agreeing with Ali, I loved this article and found it very intriguing! I had never heard about this company before but I loved reading about those 6 facts. The article states, "It hardly even has a marketing department, and it doesn't engage in flashy campaigns, as its competitors do..." and this is what does set them apart. I think it makes people want to know and learn more--a very different, but obviously a very successful business model for them. Great article!

The article is totally right! I worked for a year at a gas station next to my studies and we had these 'puy 9 coffees, get the 10th for free' cards, which we wanted to hand out to all taxi drivers, to make them visit our gas station frequently. Every second driver refused to take a card, when I offered them, because of the huge amount of other loyalty cards in its wallet (as Raphael already pointed out). Furthermore, I saw that we also have those cards for drinks at the HRC Store and I never took one, because I simply consider the drinks as too expensive to buy a dozen of them, just to get one for free!

This is a great article! It's very similar to a costco card or a sam's club membership. The only way a loyalty card like this would work is if the company had prices that beat juggernauts such as walmart or target. Most people on campus do have costco cards, so whether it's the Costco food or the ability to buy literally almost anything at the store, Costco seems to have found the solution.

I always expect a personalized customer service in a high end store. The store should make me feel important/special in order to create value. I also think that whether you are a VIP member or someone who stops in occasionally, it is important to treat the customers the same way. Burberry took a neat approach by incorporating the technology into their stores. (Although the store is huge for the amount of clothes actually offered.) It's a great start and I also think that technology that recognizes repeat customers would be highly effective in this environment. However I also agree when the article says "so what" to technology. These stores still heavily rely on the interaction amongst employees and customers so there is no way that technology can completely take over these high end stores.

This fits quite well in McDonald's global strategy as they do things like that in almost every country. In the Netherlnds for example, they sell the McKroket (http://www.mcdonalds.nl/sites/default/files/produits/477x355_0005_mckroket.png) and in Germany something like a "Bratwurst Burger" (Sausage Burger) ( http://www.burgerbusiness.com/wp-content/uploads/McD_Germany_Nurnburger.jpg ). Trying to adapt to local tastes might also have a downside, though, as people from that country might be disappointed by the McDonald's copy of a dish they are very proud of (e.g. it worked well in the Netherlands but didn't in Germany).

I think this article is really interesting because consumers do see McDonald's trying to expand into certain niches with their stores. Most McDonald's around the world have the same products, but the stores in Spain for example featured the McIberica which is similar to the McBaguette, but with a Spanish twist. I think that it is really interesting how the McBaguette is seriously taking off and am wondering if it will be featured at McDonald's in the US

I found this article especially interesting because I studied abroad in France last semester and I have actually tried this sandwich. I can attest to the fact that French people eat baguettes daily and you can literally see people walking down the street gnawing on a huge baguette so I can see how the McDonald's Baguette sandwich would be insulting to local bakeries. On the other hand I can see what Koffmann is saying when he says that the McDonald's sandwich seems fresher just because at local bakeries they make a bunch of sandwiches then set them out on display all day and if you go to get a sandwich later in the afternoon chances are it is not going to be extremely fresh. Which is also strange to think about...McDonald's having fresh food. I think this is a great move for McDonald's because it gives them a chance to delve into other cultures.

McDonald's innovation has always been astonishing not only to myself, but to the industry as a whole. It's quite interesting to take notice of its place as the clear industry leader, as other companies in its genre seemingly put as much effort into adapting to the market McDonalds has shaped to keep up with the titan as they have into development of innovative product campaigns to differentiate themselves. The introduction of the McBaguette is a clear example of this dynamic company's ability to mould themselves to cater to specific demographics in dramatically different cultural groups. Yet it still leads me to ask.. How did McDonalds become such an iconic brand in a way that Burger King, Wendy's and others did not?

I've been to a few international McDonalds locations, and I think what McDonalds is introducing with the "local" spin is important for the company. They need to stay fresh and appeal to French palettes. I believe the intriguing part of international McDonalds locations is the spin on our favorite, American items. I'm a shareholder in McDonalds and from a profitability standpoint, it's important to expand the French market if it's the second leader behind the United States. I wish they offered the item here - it looks good! I have an idea Prof. King - Retailing field trip to France! We need to try this!

McDonald's always seems to amaze me, I think it is very important to realize that any business that enters a global market needs to cater to that cultures needs and wants and McDonald's had done just that. I have been to a couple international McDonald's locations in the UK and Spain. What really stood out to me was the menu in Spain -- they offered beer and more chicken options! Although the McBaguette isn't a traditional baguette it seems that McDonald's as always caters to what the customers want.

I grew up riding horses- so naturally I didn't enjoy this article- but like Lina said above, I think it is important to recgonize how one brand image can really effect the whole industry. Because Tesco made this big error other brands are hearing the effects of their mistake- and I bet Chipolte is benifiting from it based on there new ad!

Yes, I am really curious about the next years and how far this whole e-commerce trend goes. Especially in Asian countries like Japan or Korea, where technique is always an important topic and Omnichannel shopping is also on the rise. It would be interesting to see whether they are going to surpass the US and western countries at some point or whether they stick to their traditional way of shopping.

Walmart absolutely made the right decision. They need to address this issue and I respect that they are changing to adapt to our more health conscious society. I think it is unfair that there is so much blame on CocaCola because they are not forcing us to drink it - we go and buy it. There are plenty of other drinks that are bad for someone too.. but that is a different discussion. I think this new image will help CocaCola in a positive way however they need to make sure they keep original drinks. I know that some of my friends or family who must have their diet cokes. I think the company is taking the right direction so that sustain a successful company for years to come.

"Mean girls" is right. Abercrombie can stick their preppy, "popular" noses elsewhere! I hope that Germany and Turkey, as Megan mention, read about this and stop shopping there. How embarrassing for Abercrombie.. they should feel humiliated for what they have done.

Wow. . . how embarrassing for Abercrombie -- shame on them. As stated in the article sales are down 10% and if they continue to act this way I can see people not wanting to shop there - especially overseas. No one likes "mean girls."

I think the appeal of Topshop will be the foreign quality in the United States. People will be attracted to the fashion quality and allure of the brand. I think being unique in the market will be attractive to US consumers.

I agree with Megan. I think the brand itself will appeal to customers, not just the layout of the store. I think the store layout is very unique from the pictures on the slideshow. It looks like an upscale version of H&M and Forever 21, which definitely appeals to me. I like all the different rooms and the vibrancy of the colors used. I think it screams "cool" and not at all boring, which some stores can be.

I agree with Paige, I love the idea of the various boutiques throughout the store. This new layout will allow shoppers to not only shop, but have a unique experience doing so. I feel like it will become an attraction rather than just a store, similar to what Ikea stores have become for shoppers.