Groupon Super Bowl Ad a Bust

Groupon offers daily deals to consumers for local products and services in a given area through email. The deal is available at the start of the day, and once a given number of people commit (the tipping point) the deal is secured. Groupon works with local businesses and national retailers.

Groupon is facing criticism in the aftermath of the Super Bowl, when the ads that were meant to be satire missed the mark with consumers, leading Groupon to pull the ads. Unfortunately, the satire was aimed at an especially sensitive subject: causes (and the celebrities that support them). For their first national advertisements, the Super Bowl is definitely a place to make a statement - if it is the statement you want to make.

In a separate scandal, Groupon and FTD are facing criticism for the way in which FTD tried to scam Groupon customers by only allowing them to use their Groupon deal on a special site with inflated prices.

Over the course of two weeks Groupon has faced considerable criticism and in both cases worked to make things right as quickly as possible. They have been around since 2009, they are struggling with national ad campaigns and working with national companies.

And now, the questions:

Did you see the ads? What was your reaction to them?

By choosing the Super Bowl to make their television advertising debut, did Groupon miss the mark? How much did they stand to gain if the ads were a hit, given the cost of Super Bowl advertising? Conversely, how much did they lose by missing the mark?

The bad ads were damaging enough but combined with the FTD debacle, what can they do to shift or reclaim the conversation about their organization?

Internally, what kinds of problems might Groupon have and what would you suggest as a fix?

Google’s new product “Online eBookstore” Launch

Google’s new product “online eBookstore” is likely to hasten the digitization of paperbacks and hard covers, dramatically increasing the availability of online books.

In addition to publishing titles from leading publishers, the company is also offering out-of-print books where copyrights may or may not have expired. As mentioned in the Bloomberg’s link, Google is entangled in legal warfare and the lawsuit claimed Google infringed copyrights by making digital copies of books without permission.

Overall, big publishers are happy with the arrangement and most have joined hands with Google already. For Google, this new product “online eBookstore” is a big deal, since this diversifies its revenue stream beyond search advertisements. It also has the potential to increase Internet usage on its Android-based devices.

Google is planning on splitting eBook profits in a couple of ways. The first is through the agency model; here the publisher fixes the price, keeps 70% of the returns and Google keeps the balance. The other way is the non-agency model; Google intends to fix prices based on market rates, offering a set percent of the publishers’ original list price to the publishers and keeping the balance.

Customers views the eBook as a cheaper alternative, so publishers are likely to eventually bring down prices. The pricing strategy appears sound. While Google’s eBook store is available from practically any device with a browser, including eBook readers, such as Barnes & Noble’s Nook, Sony Corp’s Reader, and Apple Inc’s iPads. It will not be accessible from Amazon.com’s Kindle.

Questions:

• As mentioned in the article, is this product launch to erode Amazon’s dominance of eBooks, or does Google have a bigger intention?


• Google intends to provide its books from the cloud, it plans on delivering ads that are timely and targeted -- will this ad-supported publishing model succeed?


• What do you think about the overall publishing industry? Most publishers have to drop their prices down; would they be happy about it?


• Although Google has not mentioned any specific benefits for Android devices, do you think this new product (eBookstore) will help Google’s Android OS to take-a-way some of the market share from Apple?

Social media: SMEs must wise up - Sales & Marketing :: Real Business - News & advice for business people

Social media: SMEs must wise up - Sales & Marketing :: Real Business - News & advice for business people

In this interesting article, Sage UK writes as Social Media Week comes to an end, about the state of unprepardness in small and medium sized enterprises for social media. Of 1200 firms surveyed, 83% of the firms believe customer service is critical yet only 1% of these SMEs believe engaging companies in social media is important in delivering customer serivce.

The importance of social media is evident everywhere, including in the bloq. The far reaching effects a social campaign can have on a firm have made it more important than ever for firms of all sizes to manage their presence on and off the network. Looking at the results to companies like BP, Neslte's palm oil campaign and Toyota, it is not hard to imagine the crushing results to a SME if their brands and companies become fixed in the cross hairs of social networks.

In reviewing this article,

What steps does your firm take to embrace social media?
Do you find your personal habits influenced by social media?
Do you find your professional habits influenced by social media?
Are you influenced the same with "local" social media efforts vs. "national or big brand" efforts?

How to Overcome Marketing's Mistrust of IT | Blogs | ITBusinessEdge.com

How to Overcome Marketing's Mistrust of IT Blogs ITBusinessEdge.com

This article is a great highlight of the interdependence of corporate functions and the impact a disconnect can have. With many organizations the Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) is charging with creating business systems to drive marketing projects. A Chief Information Officer (CIO) is often charged with responsabilities of all firm systems and infrastructures. When these functions do not relate well within an organization, as is highlighted in this article, the results frequently do not meet firm expectations.

As you think of your firm, can you think of any examples of business systems that do not communicate? Do you have any examples of a business system that does not support a function with in the firm? What is the result? What is the fix?

“Everybody On” makes HP different or does it?

The article explains how HP is launching its latest global marketing campaign. In their campaign, “Everybody On,” HP will try to show how they have enabled others’ pursuits through their technology; all types of pursuits, such as racing, fashion, music and modeling. “Everybody On” is a digital hub which will allow people to share their stories with each other.

I found this article particularly interesting that in an age where computers are virtually commodities with little differentiating technology, HP will try to use this web based communication method to differentiate itself from its competitors. I’ve often heard that word of mouth is the best form of marketing; it seems that HP is facilitating and encouraging people to spread their word via this web site.

Questions for thought:

With so many review sites, social media sites, music and video sites, will HP’s “Everybody On” be lost in the crowd?

The article also mentions how computers are no longer the center of people’s connectivity. People now use smart phones, tablets and cloud services. I only know HP for their computers and I imagine that is the majority view; do you think this method will adequately showcase HP’s other markets, such as smart phones and tablets? Do you feel it will adequately showcase HP’s competency in these markets?

Will competitors create similar avenues to spread the word?

Do you feel this approach may actually backfire if people want to share their negative experiences with HP or has HP mitigated this by directing people to only showcase how HP has allowed them to pursue their passions?

By the way, I'm using an HP while writing on this post.

Changes in Marketing Techniques with change in time

This article can be viewed at http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/innovation/top-11-technologies-of-the-decade

COVER

Top 11 Technologies of the Decade

The most powerful technologies take a while to mature. But when they do, they can rapidly retire mainstays that are decades old

By Philip E. Ross / January 2011

1. Smartphones 2. Multicore CPUs 3. Flexible AC Transmission
4. Social Networking 5. Cloud Computing 6. Digital Photography
7. Voice Over IP 8.Drone Aircraft 9. Class-D Audio
10. LED Lighting 12. Planetary Rovers Next-to-the-Best

Life was different a decade ago. Your phone couldn't contain your entire music collection, for example, or guide you to a restaurant in a foreign city. Bomber-reconnaissance planes invariably had pilots on board. And how's this for quaint: Your corner drugstore still stocked photographic film! The technology waves that washed away those realities spread from tremors that occurred years before: The first smartphone was unveiled by IBM in 1993, the first digital photo was taken in 1975, and the first drone aircraft flew during World War II. Clearly, the seeds of the next crop of technology staples have already been planted. Perhaps the first tender shoots can already be discerned among the pages of this issue.

For all of IEEE Spectrum's Top 11 Technologies of the Decade, visit the special report.E. Ross / January 2011

1. Is it important for marketing professionals to also be digital savvy to be more effective?
2. What are the parameters we have to take care of while using such devices?
3. Are we affecting the privacy of individuals and also culture while we market using the recent inventions?
4. How can we scale up our reach using these innovations?

McDonald's - A bad "wrap"?

Link: http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/MarketingTricksTotsTasteBuds.aspx

A study was recently conducted with 67 three-five year old preschoolers from low-income families. In the study, the children were presented with identical food items, one in a McDonald’s wrapper and one in an unmarked plain wrapper with similar coloring. Although the food items were from identical batches, an overwhelming 60% of the children preferred the items with the golden arches branding on the wrapper. Suggesting marketing reaches children at a very young age and earlier than previously thought.

The study comes at a time when fast food manufacturers are getting a lot of heat for contributing to the rising rate of obesity within this age group by focusing their marketing efforts to children.

Currently, McDonald’s only advertises Happy Meals with white meat McNuggets, fresh apple slices and low-fat milk, a healthy 375 calorie meal says McDonald’s. Also, McDonald’s recently launched a Shrek campaign geared towards children promoting healthier food items where Shrek, the green ogre, goes on a diet, McDonald’s adds they feel they are taking a progressive approach to responsible marketing.

1. Should the responsibility be placed on the fast food restaurants, such as McDonald’s, or the parents for purchasing the kid’s meals?

2. Is marketing geared towards children unavoidable?

3. Are the marketing efforts of McDonald’s ethical?

4. A suit was recently filed to ban toys in kid’s meals that contain low nutrient, high calorie food. Should the court be able to interfere with McDonald’s marketing?

App Stores Overload: It's Too Much of a Good Thing

App Stores Overload: It's Too Much of a Good Thing
By Brennon Slattery, PCWorld Feb 3, 2011 9:34 AM
http://www.pcworld.com/article/218614/app_stores_overload_its_too_much_of_a_good_thing.html




Smart phone applications (apps) have become quite a phenomenon over the past few years. Apple gave us our first real glimpse into the app world with the iPhone and since then millions of apps have been created. This article speaks to the oversaturation of apps in the market we as consumers have to deal with.

At present every major player in the smart phone industry (ie apple, android, and blackberry) has an app store and it seems as if there is an app for everything. These stores are growing every day because app markets, like Android’s, allow outside vendors to sell and distribute products with what seems like little regulations. Don’t get me wrong, I think apps are great because they allow me to customize my phone in a way to make my life better in some way. Weather I download games, shopping, or entertainment based apps I am literally choosing between tens, hundreds, or thousands depending on the category. Which should I choose? A few weeks ago, I was browsing the app store for a financial calculator.. So I typed “calculator” into the search field and over 2000 search results came up. If this is not oversaturation, I’m not sure what is.

Does the psychology behind the jelly experiment (from class) hold true in the app business? Will oversaturation slow this market down?
Should individual OS providers set limits to acceptable apps offered in their specific app store? Will this appease or discourage the consumer?
What marketing tactics could independent app creators do to differentiate from the competitors with similar products?

Jonathan Grysko

Logo Change

To many customers’ dismay, Starbuck’s may decide to change its logo. The word “Coffee” and “Starbucks” may be taken out of their cups and replaced by a symbol. Starbucks wants to be recognized by its symbol alone similar to brands such as Nike which is recognized by the “swoosh” and McDonalds by its golden arches. However, the Starbucks’ website and its tweeter sites have been inundated with complaints since this news was announced.
There are various reasons stated in the article has to why consumers prefer original logos. First of all, it is mentioned that some Logos are often “linguistically” challenging. It is hard for people to pronounce. A great example is the symbol which replaced the singer “Prince”. Other reasons include the large number of options and choices people are exposed to in today’s market place. In grocery stores for example, there are over 30,000 SKUs. As a result, consumers revert back to what is familiar. Additionally, consumers group themselves according to the brands they consume and create a sense of “community”. Furthermore, many companies have failed recently in their attempt to change their logos such as GAP and Tropicana.
Customer Loyalty is a critical component to a company success. The reaction of Starbuck’s customers reflect that “Customers have increasing power in a crowded market for goods..and it also reflects the sense that brands belong to everyone, not just to the corporations that nominally control them.” As result, if loyal customers are projecting their dislikes what should Starbucks do? Starbuck’s pride themselves as a company focused on servicing their customers. Should the power be taken away from them?
Will Starbuck’s total line be effected negatively with this change? Why or why not?
As discussed in class will the CLV decrease for some loyal customers? Or prevent new customers from enjoying starbucks?
How important do you think a Logo plays in a company’s success?

Socially Inept - Tracking Media’s Impact via Social Networks

This article from Advertising Age explores the issues marketers face when interpreting the population’s response to different forms of media, specifically how to measure impact and effectiveness through such an evolving medium as social networking/media.

Using the recent Super Bowl as an example, the author analyzes the ‘most remembered’ commercials (as reported by Nielsen and the like) and compares them to the ‘most talked about’ on the social networking sights such as Twitter and Facebook. His question, does not ‘liking’ something really mean you ‘dislike’ it? As the author finds, although your ad was memorable your company may receive the same lack of a response in the social media as if the viewer didn’t understand your message in the first place. On the same note, if your company is expected to deliver great advertising every year you would see a lack of enthusiasm on the social networks unless you significantly over delivered consumer expectations (Doritos, Pepsi, Budweiser etc). Conversely, if you have a very loyal base will they be quicker to express their feelings of dismay over your ad than if they were less loyal, as was the case with Groupon. What do these reactions mean and how does that generate to gains or losses in sales?

The author also briefly discusses what leads users to ‘dislike’ items they’ve ‘liked’ on social networks or why they chose to stop receiving email communications about products/services they once signed up for. His argument is that the consumer didn’t just stop using or purchasing the product, but they became tired of the method or message that was being communicated. This should really be the focus of marketers attention, rather than how many people are ‘liking’ or signing up for their communications in the first place. Are these types of communications meant to generate sales, keep sales static, and keep the core involved or are they ‘just being sent out’?

As marketers start to see this trend taking shape, the urgency is becoming a reality that without metrics and a method of analyzing what responses to media mean, marketers will struggle to communicate with and adjust their messages to their core consumer.

1) When you ‘like’ a product, are you a proponent for that brand/product/service or do you just enjoy it? Are all likes created equal?

2) Does an enjoyable ad lead you to buy products that you wouldn’t have bought previously? Is a boring ad that details product benefits more likely to ‘sell you’?

3) Are you more likely to talk about a provocative or comical ad in a social setting, or an impactful message (GoDaddy/Etrade vs. Chrysler Imported from Detroit)? Does this lead to a sale or just good conversation?

4) Can one ‘Super Bowl’ type ad devalue a brand’s image?

The Mouse that rocks the cradle

This article explores Disney's launch into the newborn market.  A Disney representative will visit a new mother in the maternity ward offering them a free bodysuit with Disney characters on it and try to get the mother to sign up for e-mail alerts on DisneyBaby.com.  This strategy is in line with Disney's approach to reach younger children, with the debut of a new channel for preschoolers later this month and licensing deals with Huggies.  There are those who oppose this marketing strategy, feeling that Disney is preying upon families at a very vulnerable time.

1.  How do you feel about companies like Disney seeking out their customers rather than vice versa?

2.  In your perspective, is this approach ethical?

3.  By targeting new mothers, is Disney hoping to increase their Customer Lifetime Value?

4.  As consumers, is your loyalty to a product or brand forged by free products?

Study Looks for, Can't Find Much Evidence of E-Health's Benefits

As part of Healthcare Reform and its 'Meaningful Use" Criteria, the healthcare industry as a whole are required to invest heavily in electronic medical records and e-portals for patient access to hospital records. Previously, investment into electronic medical records was seen as a strategic move to improve efficiency and care for a particular hospital or physician office. Some of these firms also used their electronic medical records as a marketing item--advertising their advanced safety technology and information systems to an increasingly tech-eager public. In the face of Federal requirements for electronic medical records, that competitive advantage and marketing differentiation are being taken away. A standard, out-of-the-box electronic medical record is being slapped into organizations and communities that may not be ready for them.

And then this article by Aziz Sheikh came out in the British Medical Journal. I have attached the Wall Street Journal blog posting on his paper for class, but I think the blog doesn't convey that the author conducted his research in Great Britain, a country with a long-standing national healthcare system that implemented an across-the-board electronic medical record. His findings show that slapping in a pre-fab system will not bring about safety gains. Not only will the healthcare industry as a whole not be any safer, but there can be possible detriments during the electronic learning curve.

So, this is a good lesson for the U.S. as we get ready to go the way of Great Britain in Healthcare Reform. The government is unlikely to get the benefits is seeks. Additionally, it is going to consumer capital dollars the hospitals may have used on items that it feels would be better for its growth or community. Additionally, previous differentiation advantages that led some firms to experiment and improve their own electronic medical records will not be seen as strategic any longer, and will cease. This may prevent individual forms of creating well-tuned, unique electronic medical records that really do add safety and improve efficiency.

So, this line of thought leads to a few questions:
1. Do other industries have such mandates from the government or buyers that make them act in uniform action with its competitors in the industry? What has happened as a result?
2. Do you think electronic medical records are important to healthcare consumers? Do you know which hospitals in your area even have electronic medical records? Are these systems enough of a differentiation to make you pick a hospital over another?
3. What drives you to choose a physician or a hospital to go to for your healthcare?

Superbowl - a National phenomenon ?!?!?

As we watch this year's superbowl it is very evident that superbowl has become a national phenomenon. It incorporates national anthems, celebratity viewers, half time shows and the advertisement. Every thing about superbowl is planned and forthought to create SUPERBOWL!!! Is this an accident or marketing genuis?

Can other games ( Soccer, Baseball, Basketballl, Golf etc.) create NFL/Superbowl magic?
Will Superbowl loose it's viewers?
What are Superbowl's challenges to demand the high viewership?

Goodbye To The Beerline?

Concession stands are a multi-billion dollar business and beverages are a significant portion of total sales and expenses. I chose this article due to the innovation, marketing and value proposition the featured product proposes.

The article is a quick read and there are 3 short videos (as short as 15 seconds). If you only want to watch one, scroll down and watch the last video, it's just over one minute in length and shows the entire offering of innovation, marketing (the logo and magnet) and benefits for the business owner and customer.

The innovation is as intelligent as it is entertaining. The marketing opportunities are numerous. The magnet at the bottom of each cup can have a brand logo or even a coupon for a pizza or car wash on it. For a concession owner this product is sure to provide lower labor costs for selling beverages as well as reduce waste. Customers buying the beverages will benefit from shorter wait times and not missing the action of the game. In addition customers will also gain a souvenir or coupon for a later purchase.

1. Consider one of the recent articles, "Building loyalty in business markets" and the six behavioral characteristics of business customers. Would you start with concession company's or beer distributors?
2. From an advertising perspective, which company's or what types of products would be interested in purchasing ad space on the top of the magnet?
3. Other than sporting events what are some other concession markets with long lines that might be interested in this type of beverage dispensing system?

Crowdsourcing: What and how big is it?

Crowdsourcing: What and how big is it?

I actually have two short articles on crowdsourcing for you to read.

Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/28/crowdsourcing-enterprise-innovation-technology-cio-network-jargonspy.html?partner=email

Bloomberg: http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/jun2009/id20090615_946326.htm

The first article in Forbes says that crowdsourcing is a myth, that the “notion of crowds creating solutions appeals to our desire to believe that working together we can do anything, but in terms of innovation it is just ridiculous”. The author claims that crowdsourcing is really just individuals motivated by obsession, competition, money or all three applying their individual talent to creating a solution. He further claims that in calling this form of innovation crowdsourcing, the image of a heroic inventor is being dealt a blow by creating the idea that companies can tap the minds of inventors on the cheap. Instead, he promotes that we need to nurture and fund inventors and give them time to explore, play and fail.

To support his claims, the author says that Jigsaw a community-created database of 16 million business contact IS crowdsourcing. Users add business contacts to Jigsaw’s database so they can earn points and get access to business contact entered by others. Jigsaw then sells this data to companies earning millions in revenue. Wikipedia is NOT crowdsourcing and if you take away individual creations you would have very little left. He also discusses how other large projects like Linux and Apache are virtuoso creations around which consortiums of experts have gathered.

The second article, in Bloomberg BusinessWeek, says that crowdsourcing is the future of the marketing, advertising and industrial design industries and that it could seriously depress wages for anyone in those industries. It says that current economic conditions have forced everyone to do more with less and that the unemployed are using crowdsourcing as a way to find fame and community (and sometimes earn cash prizes) and that it supplies a more efficient and creative way for companies to engage with and harness the crowd for help.

It also discusses the increasing customer demand for participation, and their expectations to co-create and lead innovation in a bottom up age, giving examples of Nike, Best Buy and Starbucks as companies that have created digital platforms that allow customer to help them create new products and initiatives. Further, in the first 14 months of the launch mystarbucksidea.com, Starbucks received 17,000 coffee ideas.

The article urges business to jump in and try crowdsourcing while being aware that: companies will have to shift from having a reactive culture to one that is proactive; customers, experts, and brand advocates will have to actively sort through ideas to stay on strategy; thought will have to be given to how to compensate people fairly for their ideas; and that advertisers and designers need to be aware of the potential effect on their wages.

General Questions:

Have any of your businesses looked for new ideas through crowdsourcing? What was the outcome? Can you share any of your thoughts about the process or the results? In my mind it seems that advertisers and designers would be an important part of the business side of crowdsourcing, was this the case in your company? Who had the original idea for crowdsourcing and who managed the process internally? Do you think the crowdsourcing hype generates a lot of new business for existing products in the search for innovative products.

Does crowdsourcing appeal to any of you as a viable option for creating a new product for your company? I was thinking of the Lear presentation in Cohort 1 where the company was looking for new automotive related product ideas for babyboomers, would this be appeal to you as avenue to generate innovation? I know I have seen commercials recently showing how a company’s technology is being used for different purposes thanks to consumer suggestions.

Finally, what are your general thoughts and even personal experiences with crowdsourcing? Have you ever participated in a company sponsored contest for ideas? Anyone won? Do you think crowdsourcing will displace funding for inventors or make it easier for them to get their products realized? Do you think crowdsourcing is truly the power of groups or individuals? Does anyone know how the compensation piece works if the company acts on a product idea?

The right marketing strategies for new Pharmaceutical companies

Summary of the article:
As in other industries, marketing plan for promoting products is crucial to pharmaceutical industry too. However, the pharmaceutical marketing strategies are different from other businesses because pharmaceuticals or drugs can negatively affect both- the end consumers or the patients and the health care professionals. In addition, the advertising strategies included in the marketing plan of any pharmaceutical company are not 'direct to consumer'. Any pharmaceutical marketing strategy targets the health care professionals or Physicians who in turn prescribe the drugs to the patients (end consumers) liable to pay for the products. However, a few countries (till date two countries- New Zealand and United States) allow Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTC advertising) for pharmaceutical products, which is a new marketing strategy for pharmaceuticals.
The right marketing strategy for any pharmaceutical company would be to build on proven strategic marketing principles, along with a focus on changing customer behavior. Use of digital media through Internet marketing plan is the best marketing strategy that can provide the basis for a changed business model. However, there should be some planning for using digital media for marketing too. It should be a multi channel marketing strategy but should identify the target audience. Every digital media used for all people cannot be called the right marketing strategy. The focus should be on the high value customer segment for pharmaceutical products.

Questions:
What is the need for new marketing strategies for pharmaceutical companies?

What differentiates marketing (advertising/promoting) strategies for pharmaceutical companies from those of other industries?

In your perspective what is the right marketing strategies for pharmaceutical companies?

Is there one right marketing strategy for all pharmaceutical companies or different strategies for different pharmaceutical companies?