Promotion Analysis — Promotion: It is the first step to inform and aware the general public or the target group of customers about a product a particular company is offering. The five energy drink companies — Speed, Tiger, Shark, Sting and Boost; all of them are between the introduction and growth stage of their product life cycle.
This is blatantly untrue.
In fact, good products are as likely to fail as bad products. Betamax, for instance, had better picture and audio quality than VHS video recorders.
But it failed disastrously. Brands are more likely to succeed than fail. Brands fail every single day. According to some estimates, 80 per cent of all new products fail upon introduction, and a further 10 per cent die within five years. By launching a product you are taking a one in ten chance of long-term success.
This myth can be dismantled with two words: As this book will show, big companies have managed to have at least as much failure as success. No company is big enough to be immune to brand disaster.
In fact, many of the examples in this book highlight one of the main paradoxes of branding — namely, that as brands get bigger and more successful, they also become more vulnerable and exposed. Strong brands are built on advertising.
Strong brands protect products. This may have once been the case, but now the situation is reversed. Strong products now help to protect brands. As the cases show, the product has become the ambassador of the brand and even the slightest decrease in quality or a hint of trouble will affect the brand identity as a whole.
The consumer can cause the most elaborate brand strategy to end in failure. Why focus on failure? Brands which set sail with the help of multi-million dollar advertising campaigns shortly before sinking 8 Brand failures without trace are clear contenders.
Welcome, then, to the brand graveyard where companies have either put their flagging brand to rest or have allowed it to stagger around with no direction in a state of limbo.
It is hoped then, that this book will provide an illuminating, if rather frightening read. Introduction Classic failures 9 Some brand failures have proved so illuminating they have been discussed and dissected by marketing experts since they first happened. The reason it bombed was down to branding alone.
Coca-Cola had forgotten what its core brand was meant to stand for. It naively thought that taste was the only factor consumers cared about. In fact, all the examples in this chapter highlight fundamental marketing errors which many other brands have replicated since.
These errors include such basic mistakes as setting the wrong price, choosing the wrong name, and getting too paranoid about the competition.
However, these failures also illustrate the general unpredictability of all marketing practices. No matter how strong a brand becomes, the market always remains elusive. The best any brand manager can hope for is to look out for any likely pitfalls which could catch them out.
It is in the interest of identifying these pitfalls, rather than for the sake of schadenfreude, that the following classic failures are explored in some depth. Yet in the Coca-Cola Company decided to terminate its most popular soft drink and replace it with a formula it would market as New Coke.
To understand why this potentially disastrous decision was made, it is necessary to appreciate what was happening in the soft drinks marketplace.
In particular, we must take a closer look at the growing competition between Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola in the years and even decades prior to the launch of New Coke.
The relationship between the arch-rivals had not been a healthy one. Although marketing experts have believed for a long time that the competition between the two companies had made consumers more cola-conscious, the firms themselves rarely saw it like that.
Outside the courts though, Coca-Cola had always been ahead. However, during the next decade Pepsi repositioned itself as a youth brand. This strategy was a risky one as it meant sacrificing its older customers to Coca-Cola, but ultimately it proved successful.
By narrowing its focus, Pepsi was able to position its brand against the old and classic image of its 14 Brand failures competitor.Planning identifies and builds on a company's strengths.
D) Brand personality. C) Differentiation. D) Positioning. E) Competitive advantage. 62) The SWOT analysis identifies strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Strengths are those factors which are internal to the organization and positive, while weaknesses are those.
b) What are the strengths and weaknesses of the brand’s existing personality and image? Strengths Snapple has a very affluent brand image.
One of the major factor on which their brand image was based was the availability of quality natural flavored drinks. product differentiation and premium prices. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the brand’s existing personality and image?
Answer: The roots of Snapple Corporation date back to in Brooklyn. natural ingredients and the slogan ‘the best stuff on earth’. Step 2 -- Define the Objectives -- Using a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) or SMAART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Audience Specific, Relevant, and Tied to Business) approach, ensure each objective is tied to real needs.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the brands existing personality and image? Snapple’s brand image can be characterized “New Age” (pg. ). Snapple was a nationally recognized brand on the rise in the beverage industry.
Published: Mon, 5 Dec Coca-Cola Company had been with many of fights before it became which now is. Its years begun in in which a pharmacist of named Atlanta Juan Pemberton raised with a water of the drink, a cane sugar syrup, a caffeine, kola nut and cola leaves extracts.