"Buy the Way…" Insights on Integrated Marketing Communication

There is a famous saying that “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery”. In the marketing world, however, brands that imitates other brands are often frowned upon, often with good reason. From the more subtle “Chrisdien Deny” to the hilariously bad “Star F*cks Coffee”, copycat brands are just about everywhere nowadays. In 2007, a Bloomberg article coined the term “Brandjacking”, a combination of “branding” and “hijacking” for this kind of practices.

Brandjacking is an activity whereby someone acquires or assumes the brand identity of another entity for the purposes of acquiring that person’s or business’s brand equity.

Different from flat out copyright infringement and counterfeiting, the definition of the term brandjacking as a business tactic is actually neutral. Unfortunately, in reality most of the brandjackers attempt to copy the name of the brand or recreate certain features of the original product, but fail to pay attention to building a good, unique brand identity for themselves. Most consumers are able to see through these tricks and recognize the lack of brand personality and perceive the brands negatively as a result. Nevertheless, there are some companies who were able to use successfully brandjack and build extremely successful businesses, including the famous energy drink company Red Bull.

Red Bull is currently the best-selling energy drink in the US, and can be easily found at any night club, supermarket or convenient store. It is also closely associated with various extreme sports competitions, e-sports teams, as well as music and art events. As familiar as you are with the iconic blue and silver can of Red Bull, you may be surprised to learn that the company is actually based in Austria, and that the Red Bull drink itself originated from Thailand. 

In 1984, an Austrian marketer Dietrich Mateschitz bought a bottle of a drink called Krating Daeng in Thailand during his visit there and was surprised to find that it had cured his jet lag. Krating Daeng comes in small, 150ml medicinal-looking amber glass bottles that features two bulls charging at each other on its original packaging. The original drink contains caffeine, taurine, glucose, B-vitamins and various other ingredients and targeted blue-collar workers who frequently endure long hours as an “energy booster” and were sold in 7-Elevens, corner shops and curbside kiosks for a low price that was affordable for its target market. 

Mateschitz reached out to Chaleo Yoovidhya, the Thai founder of Krating Daeng, and made a deal that allowed him to start a company in Austria to sell the energy drink abroad, along with the rights to use the logo and formula. However, it took Mateschitz three years of careful planning and testing to develop a new formula, packaging and marketing strategy for the drink that would work for the Austrian market. The final product that was launched in 1987 used the English name “Red Bull” and has a tweaked formula to appeal to Western pallets. Much of the core ingredients and flavor remained the same but carbonation was added, which allowed the drink to be lighter and better serve as an alcoholic drink mixer. In addition, Mateschitz also changed the small glass bottle packaging into the iconic silver and blue cans that appeal to the western aesthetic. 

In 1987, the energy drink market was non-existent in the Western hemisphere, and Mateschitz understood that adopting a novel approach to marketing and advertising was necessary to carve out a new market. As a result, Red Bull was positioned differently from traditional sports drinks and strategically targeted an upper-scale market of fun-loving, young adventure seekers and party-goers, instead of blue-collar laborers or fitness-oriented consumers. It fully embraces the brand ideal to “uplift mind and body; it exists to energize the world”. From sponsorships, partnership to advertisements, Red Bull’s communication efforts are all about inspiring consumers to explore new horizons and experiences. One of the largest and most successful event campaign Red Bull sponsored was the Stratos project, in which Felix Baumgartner successfully jumped from the edge of space, after getting up to 102,800 feet in a balloon. 

Over the years, by establishing a unique set of brand personality: innovative, individual, unpredictable, humorous, and non-conformist, Red Bull has successfully differentiated, or even elevated its brand from the Thai drink Krating Daeng. Today, Red Bull has a global presence and has gained great customer loyalty because of its innovative and different marketing strategy. This story shows that brandjacking really isn’t all bad – taking inspiration from others is a perfectly normal thing to do. What is really bad is careless marketing efforts and lack of care to building the brand.

Can you think of any other company that did brandjacking right?

References:

Garbe, B. (2012). How a brand’s ideals can fuel its growth. Quirk’s Marketing Research Review.

Katai, R. (2018). 10 lessons Red Bull can teach you about marketing. Retrieved from https://robertkatai.com/red-bull-media-company/

Krausz, T. (2018). Story behind world’s top energy drink: How Thailand created Red Bull. Retrieved from https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/food-drink/article/2156996/red-bull-story-how-worlds-top-energy-drink-began-thailand-it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandjacking

Fortnite skyrocketed into fame over the past few years, dominating Twitch gaming livestreams, Instagram meme accounts, devoted subreddit pages and even working its way on to the dance floors of middle schools through the popular games derived from the games like “flossing” and the “Orange Justice.”

While the game seemed to suddenly make its way into the popular culture realm, a “careful confluence of factors” had been readying the game to propel it there (Lorenz). Not only is it a product that is free to play, which isn’t very common in the industry, but it also is open to all ages, is widely available (you don’t need a fancy system to play), and has a unique and fun format that has been described as unlike anything else in gaming. In addition, they weave popular culture references throughout the game providing lots of content for people to post and naturally and organic market the product to their friends and family.

This point of natural organic marketing is where most of their strategy lies. Through a perfect storm of conditions, they have set the game up to have so many elements for players to talk about to their friends or family and post on social media about. Once the ball started rolling on people playing and buzzing about the game, it just grew exponentially more powerful from there with celebrities like Drake joining in the hype and further amplifying the surrounding buzz. Rather than spending energy or efforts on creating marketing deliverables, Fortnite employed an alternative strategy: focusing on creating innovative and exciting changes or ‘Easter eggs’ within the game that would get people talking—and essentially do the marketing work for them.

Speaking to this, “Videos were crossing into genres including people and vlogs as well as entertainment; essentially, the renowned video game was appealing to both gamers and non-gamers alike, a feat which many video game publishers would kill to achieve themselves. And Epic Games did no traditional marketing to earn this attention for their game—the publisher basically sat back and watched the views flow in!” reported Tubular Insights.

Adhering to this strategy, Fornite’s most recent move sent ripples through both the gaming and marketing communities alike. Last week, following a cryptic tweet reading “The end is near”, when users attempted to log into their Fortnite server, they were greeted with the whole entire realm having disappeared, with a meteor having set off a chain of events and wiping out the whole map, leaving nothing but a black hole in its place. Players were continued to be shut out for two whole days, with them turning to various outlets to discuss what could potentially be happening and what could be in store for the game’s future—and if there even was one.

The Fortnite accounts didn’t offer any kind of explanation and just showed a live video stream of the black hole on the game on Twitter and their website (that garnered upwards of 57k viewers last Monday morning), their profile picture turned to just plain black, and they deleted all of the previous tweets posted on the account. Concerns arose about whether the game was over for good, and players who had stopped playing as frequently as they used to began to miss that option of playing the game if they wanted to. The classic notion of longing for something once it was gone was put into place.

Following the two days, much to users relief, the game was back with a brand new edition called Fortnite: Chapter 2. It had several new features, new island settings, new locations and more. Fortune reported on the incident saying “It was, of course, a PR stunt. But it was one that did exactly what it was supposed to. It put Fortnite—and its new release Fortnite Chapter 2—firmly back into the collective gaming conversation just as the game was beginning to lose a bit of its coolness factor.” Variety Magazine also wrote about it, dubbed this act a “masterful marketing stroke” and comparing it to similar hysteria induced by Taylor Swift before the release of her album Reputation when she briefly deleted all of her social media accounts.

Fornite, their past rise into the gaming stratosphere, and this most recent marketing incident serve as prime case studies for how successful organic marketing can be when executed and built off of correctly. However, after learning more about these stunts and the success of them I’m left with a couple questions. Firstly, what can the lifespan of a brand that solely relies on organic marketing be—will their be a point where they have to turn to traditional and will that, however, deviate from the initial integrity and culture of the brand? Secondly, how long people think this slight revival of heightened interest in Fortnite will last? As it was beginning to slip from everyday culture as the Forbes article mentioned, will its relevance once again begin to dip after people get bored with the slightly new locations/features and is there anything that may be able to keep it holding on at that point?

Sources:

https://adage.com/article/news/fortnite-returns-and-yes-its-blackout-was-marketing-stunt-wednesday-wake-call/2207831

https://fortune.com/2019/10/15/fortnite-chapter-2-launch-black-hole-faq/

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-fortnite-became-the-biggest-game-on-the-internet

https://tubularinsights.com/fortnite-marketing-youtube-facebook/

Victoria’s Secret needs a Massive Facelift.

The lingerie Mogul, owned by L Brands, is stuck in its archaic realm where it is desperately trying to peddle its traditional model of sexy, but it is not working any more. Same-store sales have fallen for the past three years, as women are desperately running away away from its bedazzled bras and underwear and opt for comfortable pieces in more neutral colors. A new group of start-ups led by Rihanna’s SavagexFenty are selling us the lingerie we need that is comfortable and speaks to the masses including a diverse range in the size, gender and colour of their models. Brands lke Adore Me, Third Love, Lively, Cuup and Knix are surging in popularity onsocial media platforms, especially Instagram and are winning over customers.

“The pivotal question on the stock is can L Brands rehabilitate the Victoria’s Secret brand image,” UBS analyst Jay Sole said in a memo to patrons, ahead of L Brand’s monthly sales report. He said he observed Victoria’s Secret’s January promotions had in fact “increased significantly” as compared to the promotions form over a year ago. This classically meant that the company did not sell adequate amounts during its holiday season and desperately needed to cut prices to lure shoppers in.

But even then, these hefty discounts and sales had more or less no impact. When it reported January sales earlier this year, L Brands said Victoria’s Secret same-store sales were down 1 percent, compared with an increase of 4 percent during January of 2018. Only looking at its brick-and-mortar stores, sales at Victoria’s Secret fell 8 percent in January, compared with flat sales in the year-ago period.

There’s “no real visibility to a turnaround at Victoria’s Secret,” Telsey Advisory Group analyst Dana Telsey said. “It’s not clear that incremental strategies to drive improved growth … and profitability are in place at this point.”

 “In five years, Victoria’s Secret won’t be able to market what they do today,” said Heidi Zak, co-founder and CEO of bra start-up Third Love. “I don’t know if they will carry larger sizes. I don’t know if that’s in their ethos. But change is being forced by more women and more companies.” This simple lack of diversity and unwillingness to change its ethos in a world that is fast ensuring that diversity is not just a publicity stunt, but is instead a core value indicates that companies like Victoria Secret no longer have a place in peoples mind. 

Brands like SavageXFenty and Third Love and many others are winning customers and patrons over as they have sizes for all the women and are not ashamed of it but instead are celebrating it! As these brands add more size options for women, provide tools that help to find the perfect size, and promote messages of “body positivity.”

 “It’s built around selling sex and sexy through a very specific lens,” she added, saying any turnaround approach is going to require “a change in their DNA.” said Joanna Griffiths, founder and CEO of Knix.

The imagery that Victoria’s Secret produces is tedious and wearisome. The same archetype of bombshell, vixen women are rendered as the zenith of beauty. The brand makes no attempt to skew even in the slightest to integrate fuller figures or females with different silhouettes. Accepting difference is now the new standard. VS needs to diversify, in every sense in the word, in order to sustain their business. It can learn a thing or two by way Ashley Graham and Rihanna both of whom make a major effort to endorse inclusion a centre it as their primary focus.

As it struggles to grow sales, the Victoria’s Secret brand has, meanwhile, gone through its fair share of management shakeups of late which has further jeopardised the company. Most recently, the brand’s CEO, Jan Singer, resigned, to be replaced by John Mehas from Tory Burch. The head of Victoria’s Secret’s teen and college-age brand Pink, Denise Landman, also recently resigned. “With new management only coming into the business early this year, 2019 could remain a transitional one for Victoria’s Secret,” Telsey said.

L Brands CEO Les Wexner and his team seem to have somewhat of a plan in place for the upcoming year to generate some excitement around the Victoria’s Secret brand again, but the details remain murky.

L Brands’ stock tumbled nearly 60 percent in 2018, making it one of the worst performers on the S&P 500. Shares were worth $100 roughly three years ago but today trade under $30. The stock is up about 3 percent so far this year, though.

Lastly the brand seems to make no attempt at being original, This factor is is the most salient especially as Victoria’s Secret starts to reorganise its marketing. VS also needs to restructure its identity without drawing or copying others. VS has been involved in a slew of lawsuits for allegedly stealing inspiration from artists and brands alike. Victims range in size from Pat McGrath to indie lingerie brand, Love Made. Hiring different, new creators who have a passion for designign underwear and lingerie will make a world of difference in the creation of a more forward-thinking company.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/08/victorias-secret-is-retails-latest-fallen-angel.html

https://hypebae.com/2018/1/victorias-secret-sales-decline-op-ed

Sponsorship, as a communication instrument, has been widely used across industries in various marketing communication platforms for decades. Sponsorship can be classified into mainly three categories according to the internal and external relevancy. A self-evident sponsorship, like Adidas & World Cup, is most likely to be considered as authentic for the sponsor’s product category is applicable to the sports event, thus produces a compelling connection. 

A seemingly self-evident sponsorship with external relevancy, like Shell Oil Company and the Ducks Unlimited wetlands conservation group, is more likely to receive controversial result. Though this sponsorship might seem as a good will towards environment and support sustainability. But as consumers have become highly suspicious of the commercialization of sponsorship, they might consider the company merely trying to convey an environmental-friendly image. Thus, high external similarity in sponsorship might lead to adverse evaluations.  

A seemingly farfetched sponsorship, like Danish pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk and cycling team, might considered to be an odd fit at first glance. In fact, the product the company produces, insulin therapies, cures the Type 1 diabetes and the cycling team the company sponsored are consisted with Type 1 diabetes riders. 

The communication channels and platforms are pervaded by impression-based sponsorships, like logo placement in Billboards, that generates fleeting impression. As consumers are becoming weary of the ubiquity of sponsorship and highly suspicious of the motivation of sponsorship. However, according to IEG’s report, sponsorship remains a market with highly undeveloped potential, $65.8 billion was spent on sponsorship globally in 2018. Thus, every sponsorship-linked marketer should answer the question, how to go beyond displaying the brand name and create an enduring impression?

Creating Authentic Sponsorship starts from answering the question “why is the brand here ?” Coca-Cola and McDonald both sponsored the Olympic games for years. Coca-Cola, as a canned soda producer, branded itself as a drink that removes the cultural and even geographical barrier that can be shared by friends and even competitors. In compared, McDonald hasn’t gone beyond the logo displacement. Thus, if the sponsorship seems faraway and has little similarities in product category, telling a story might create the association that last longer that simply advertising.

Engaging the Consumers forges an emotional bond that makes the sponsorship an experience instead of a fast fading impression. Levi’s Stadium, home of the San Francisco 49ers, has a Levi’s branded “501 Club” party room that hosts marketing events that create interactions with fans. When signing a title sponsorship, especially for events like, the brand should go beyond traditional impression-based name displacement and  create a space for meeting and engagement, either a pop-up store or a refreshment station. By creating additional links between the company, the event and the consumers, the engagement leads to the articulation of the sponsorship that leaves a stronger impression on the memory.

Changing the Sponsorship-as-Advertising Mentality starts with revising the ROI that doesn’t measure the consumer experience of sponsorship. In other words, the company should be aware of what kind of value and experience it tries to communicate at the very beginning of the sponsorship. This value is a combination or the characteristics of the sponsor and the characteristics of the sponsee that communicates through a genuine story and experience. 

Reference

https://www.ama.org/marketing-news/make-a-lasting-impression-how-brands-can-create-authentic-sponsorships/

Cornwell, T. Bettina. Less “Sponsorship As Advertising” and More Sponsorship-Linked Marketing As Authentic Engagement. Journal of Advertising. 2019;48(1):49-60.

Pappu, Ravi, Cornwell, T. Corporate sponsorship as an image platform: understanding the roles of relationship fit and sponsor–sponsee similarity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 2014;42(5):490-510. 

Tellegen, Cassandra L.  Sponsorship-linked marketing: the role of articulation in memory. The journal of consumer research. 33(3):312-321.

Imagine a concentrated market where three companies have the monopoly for long time, without any threat. Suddenly, a new competitor appeared, maybe another naïve company trying to break a monopoly guarded by high barriers of entry. The difference: after only one month in operations, the new actor led the exchange of customers between companies, capturing 22 thousands of clients who left the other three companies. Just in one month.

That happened three years ago in the mobile market in Chile when WOM, an English company, arrived to the country to threaten the leading companies (Entel, Movistar and Claro.) What happened? Quick answer: a remarkable marketing campaign. In a conservative country, the disruptive communication WOM used was the key to success.

First, WOM took the contingency and the corruption scandals the country was facing at the time to place the company in the “citizens’ side,” as they said. With phrases like “When the law is not at your side, WOM gets on your side” or “When they present you a joke (showing a politician discussing a new law initiative), we are in your side” the new company caught people attention…and people gave their support.

WOM presented itself as an irreverent company, a transparent one which said the things nobody wanted to say, and an inclusive firm which included sexual minorities in its ads. Even the CEO of the company appeared in TV spots like anyone else. Such a big difference in Chile. But it was another marketing strategy the most notorious one to the competitors: the challenging brand strategy.

Besides laughing about politicians and TV celebrities, WOM mocked the products of the competitors. Ans its ads as well. One of the most memorable spots was one in which WOM took an old TV spot from Entel (the biggest competitor) and reedited it to push a clients migration from Entel to WOM. In the original spot, there were three models dancing a song who said “1, 2, 3 Entel.” Fifteen years after that remembered video, WOM contracted the same models but this time they appeared wearing the color of Entel (blue) to switch their clothes to purple (WOM’s color) and dance “1, 2, 3, change to WOM (all after receiving a very bad service from Entel.) Entel was furious but the campaign was a big success.

“The spot makes a difference because for the first time a brand
appropriates clearly, obviously and explicitly the icons of another company. In Chile, this strategy is not very common, I would say that the only ones that have used are WOM and in its minute, Virgin,” said a national marketing expert at the time. Today, WOM is still growing and a recent national report showed the company led clients portability in 2018, which means that it received the biggest number of clients who left other companies.

In a recent interview, the chief of the brand marketing, explained the success. “Everything is born from a way of understanding the market and understanding customers and the offer as a whole; what there is more is the consistency between that identity and the campaigns that one sees, the offers, the ways of communicating them, the prices that we have and the integral experience that is offered to the clients ,” said Romina Galatzan.

The marketer concluded that “the communication of the brand has a lot to do with its strategy, which goes through commercial issues but also by the values in which the brand believes and basically advertising is a reflection of our identity.”

When asked about the creative process, she told: “It is a super organic process because in reality there are always issues that are on the table and one is taking, based on creativity as the script that may occur, at the times, but it is a process that never stops. That is, within our work dynamics, we are being attentive to the contingency and seeing how that can be adapted to something that generates interesting content for the audience we have. ”

Now, before our midterms are due, and after reviewing the Dove case this week and the WOM disruptive strategy described, let’s ask ourselves: What we can do to be perceived as different?

Good luck!

References:
https://bienpensado.com/wom-chile-y-su-publicidad-radical/

https://www.america-retail.com/chile/chile-wom-lidero-en-portabilidad-movil-en-2018-y-claro-fue-la-firma-que-mas-clientes-perdio/

https://bienpensado.com/wom-chile-y-su-publicidad-radical/

https://eltipografo.cl/2018/03/la-estrategia-detras-del-irreverente-estilo-publicitario-wom-sabemos-que-hay-ciertas-claves-de-campana-que-funcionan-mejor/

Before this year, I had never really thought about looking at the ingredient list on a Tampax box. Buying tampons and pads seemed to be a shameful chore that I had to go through every month. Usually, I shuffled to the “feminine care” in Target and picked up whatever I was used to, and shuffled out of the store with a shady paper bag in my hands.

For our curious gender counterparts, periods are, in fact, very uncomfortable. It is physically uncomfortable because cramps are no fun and bleeding is generally not a great feeling. It’s also uncomfortable to think about whether you’re leaving blood stains on your pants or your seats. It’s even worse when you really can’t say anything to anyone because women’s reproductive care is just nasty for everyday communication apparently.

But if it is not inherently obvious, it’s very uncomfortable for a blood-soaked fiber product to be stuck close to your private parts at all time.

In classic P&G fashion, Always, Tampax, and other brands have made claims like it’s soft, it’s dry, it’s absorbent for years. If you look at the feminine care aisle at Target, there are tens if not hundreds of product in similar packaging and make very similar claims. If you look at any feminine care commercials, they all feature the same happy lady jumping around (one exception would be Always’ like a girl campaign).

Yeah that woman you see on a tampon ad jumping around with a big smile? She’s for sure not on her period.

But what I am trying to get at is that existing big feminine care brands are all very similar. This is a category, according to Youngme Moon’s book Different, that has gone through some serious augmentation, where brands and product keep adding claims and benefits due to competition, that eventually there’s no way of differentiating. They are similar in functionality, in benefits, in packaging, communication, and everything else. Existing, established brands are trying everything just to take single-digit percentages of market share at a time.

And in comes Lola.

If you just look at Lola, it’s already different. In stores, its outer packaging refuses the conventional plastic cube of a component. It packs pads in a nice, thick bag, and tampons in a elegant transparent tube.

Inside, pads and tampons are all pure white inside and out. No blueish “core” in the middle, no flower patterns, no fragrance, nothing. Why? Because it is made of 100% organic cotton. On the outer packaging, it says, chlorine-free, no synthetic pesticides, dyes, or fragrances.

That’s when you stop and question what kinds of ridiculous things we’ve been using, and why we haven’t asked these questions earlier. Big tampon brands do not disclose their ingredient lists on packaging, but people have done tests to see what chemicals are in there. The results are concerning to say the least.

And then you again look at Lola’s pure and simple products, how can you not?

To further differentiate themselves, Lola adopted subscription boxes. If you don’t want to shop period stuff in public, you can choose what you need every month, and get it delivered to your door. But with that pretty packaging, I honestly prefer going to Target.

Lola also sells products for period cramps and sex life, and have put together a “first period kit” for mothers who have young daughters. They ship a box of various products and their instructions, as well as an introduction to the female body to guide girls through their body changes.`

That’s something I wish I had when I got my first period.

As far as marketing goes, Lola is the most active on Instagram, which is also where I first learned about the brand. The brand’s posts feature many stories and testimonies from women, as well as funny jokes and mood posts. It’s a collection of positive body image, period talk, and positive sexuality discussion. It’s messy, unlike the overall appeal of the brand. However, it feels real. Perhaps it is the testimonies at work, or perhaps it is just a fact that periods are messy.

Now we look at the Instagram accounts of Kotex and Tampax, They look great. Neat and clean, featuring pretty women of diverse backgrounds. But they are all happy and candid, just like their usual happy-during-period advertisement. Every photo seems like the perfect Instagram picture, captions are boring and generic. To me, it does not seem like they are authentic because, again, periods are terrible.

Hi brands, stop telling me that I should be happy, especially when I’m on my period. Thank you.

Of course, now that I am a big advocate for Lola, I might be completely biased. But if you tell me a year ago that I would be an advocate for a tampon brand, I would never have believed you. The single fact that I am a big fan of a brand in such a mature and crowded category says that Lola is doing something right.

And I think here’s why.

At the core of Lola is the statement “By Women For Women.” It signifies a brand that is built around its users and not its product. Everything about it is clean. It cares, and it gets me.

Yes, Always’ “Like a Girl” campaign is great, but no good marketing beats a comprehensive, integrated strategy where products, services, and communication are all designed with the customers in mind.

And if you ask me, but how does it feel when you use them?

Ladies, it’s 100% cotton, and it’s good cotton. It’s the most comfortable thing I’ve ever used in my life. Just like what Moon would say in her book, Lola is a disruption brand in the category because it strips away all those superfluous things that years of augmentation and competition have brought about. Lola returns to the very simple, and it is so incredibly refreshing. The first time I tried it on, I was amazed at how I could’ve lived without it for this long.

I remember thinking, “So this is what I’ve been missing.”

Soul Cycle, the New York-based indoor cycling company, has been facing an increasingly difficult quarter as they attempt to rebound from a very public boycott. Soul Cycle, founded in 2006 in the Upper West Side of Manhattan, seemingly enjoyed overnight success by creating spin studios with a distinct vibrancy. Soul cycle’s price structure, studio locations and amenities offered have created a cult following of wealthy millennials.

However, in 2009 The Related Companies, a real estate development firm, bought a majority stake in Soul Cycle through their ownership of Equinox. The Related Companies founder, billionaire Stephen Ross, is also the owner of other popular millennial brands such as Equinox Fitness, PURE Yoga, numerous fast casual restaurants and the Miami Dolphins NFL team. Yet, before 2019 the political ethics of Stephen Ross were not apparent to the consumers of the brands he owns. Furthermore, numerous customers of Soul Cycle were unaware of the connection of Stephen Ross and Soul Cycle. Which is why Stephen Ross’ fundraiser held for President Donald Trump’s re-election was met with immediate backlash.

A core consumer base of Soul Cycle is the LGBTQ+ community, people of color and women. All groups that have faced considerable pressure under the Trump presidency. Therefore, when Stephen Ross held a fundraiser in support of the President’s re-election, these groups were understandably upset and immediately boycotted Soul Cycle and other Ross owned companies. Celebrities and activists joined in, calling for the boycott of the spin company. This caused a 12% decrease in the amount of classes booked in the month of August, whereas the year prior only saw a 4% decrease in the same month.

In response, the current CEO of Soul Cycle issued a press release stating that the views of Stephen Ross do not reflect those held by Soul Cycle. But, will apologizing for the views of an owner be enough for Soul Cycle to rebound?

CEO Melanie Whelan has been on a campaign around the United States visiting each Soul Cycle location to hold frank discussion with staff to show solidarity in her commitment to making sure Soul Cycle remains an inclusive fitness company. Yet, many complain that not much has been done to alleviate the now strained relationship with the customer. In fact, Soul Cycle continues to open more studios both at home and abroad.

Prior to the recent controversy, Soul Cycle was already under fire for what many saw as pricey fees for classes thus limiting the opportunity for many to participate. Does the current socio-political culture allow companies like Soul Cycle to cater to an audience that seems to be in direct opposition of owner Stephen Ross? Can a company successfully distance itself from ownership views? Does Soul Cycle need to do more to demonstrate their commitment to the communities they serve?

Halzcak, S. (2019, September 17). $30 for a Single SoulCycle Class? Not When a Recession Hits. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-09-17/more-than-30-for-a-soulcycle-class-not-when-a-recession-hits.

Parisi, D. (2019, October 1). Inside SoulCycle’s expansion to be a fashion brand. Retrieved from https://www.glossy.co/fashion/inside-soulcycles-expansion-to-be-a-fashion-brand.

Read, B. (2019, August 8). Unfortunately All These Millennial Brands Have to Be Canceled Too. Retrieved from https://www.thecut.com/2019/08/stephen-ross-owns-more-millennial-brands-than-soulcycle.html.

Reader, R. (2019, September 19). After boycotts over a Trump fundraiser, SoulCycle customer numbers plummet. Retrieved from https://www.fastcompany.com/90405922/soulcycle-customers-take-a-dip.

When you pass by a Tiffany shop this month, don’t be surprised to see more men than women there. But you should be surprised when you find out that these men are buying Tiffany’s products for themselves.

The well-known jewelry brand announced the launch of its first full men’s collection on August 15. Though Tiffany has sold some items for male consumers in the past including cufflinks, rings and money clips, this new offering spans nearly 100 different designs across jewelry, home goods, and other accessories.  

For many people, the conventional persona of a Tiffany customer may be a young woman who has great passion to pursue fashions and certain economic power. But actually, according to data provided by Tiffany’s chief artistic officer Reed Krakoff, half of their consumers are men while most of them are buying women’s jewelry for their partners.

The idea is that for male consumers, they’ll now have more products to choose from if they’re shopping for themselves, which a growing number probably are. According to data from market research provider Euromonitor International, sales of men’s luxury fine jewelry rose nearly 22% between 2013 and 2018, reaching roughly $5.8 billion. The firm projects those sales will increase to about $6.6 billion by 2023. The idea is also considered by many people as part of the Tiffany’s strategy to attract younger shoppers and pump up sales, which have been dampened by a decline in spending by tourists from China and elsewhere.

Before this, every time Tiffany is connected to males, it is used as an example for students to distinguish two similar definitions- the target audience and the target consumers. But right now, it seems that its strategies are going to erase the line between these two. For Tiffany, the launch of this new product line is not only aiming to explore a new market, but also to find and motivate new needs. According to researchers, men are becoming more and more aware of their performance in appearance and clothing, and their interest in the beauty industry is keep increasing. Men are more “delicate” than ever and their needs have been underrated for a long time.

Will this action lead to an increase in Tiffany’s revenues or a complete change in its brand image? Many people concern that this product series for men may lead to a temporary increase in revenues but it may have a long-term negative effect on the distinction between Tiffany and its competitors. But as far as I’m concerned, what has changed is not the brand itself, but the era and consumers. When we first mention Tiffany, the first thing that occurs in our mind is still its unique brand color, and the high quality and good taste behind it. It’s still using right and unified strategies to approach the right people.

On the other hand, this strategy successfully makes me, a man who barely pays attention to this company, become interested and write a blog about it. Whether people like me will buy its products in the future or not, at least we begin to know about it, which means massive potential opportunities.

Resources:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/17/men-are-a-multibillion-dollar-growth-opportunity-for-the-beauty-industry.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/04/tiffany-says-sales-to-chinese-tourists-are-plummeting-because-of-the-trade-war.html

https://qz.com/quartzy/1688143/tiffany-launches-its-first-full-mens-jewelry-and-lifestyle-line/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/08/15/tiffany-co-launches-mens-jewelry-collection-bro-bling/2017233001/

About two months ago I occasionally learned that one of my favorite bands was going to give a concert in Los Angeles, I was quite thrilled and planned on booking a ticket immediately.  I vaguely remembered that someone had told me about a ticket app called SeatGeek, so I downloaded it and searched for the concert tickets. Suddenly it occurred to me that SeatGeek is the ticket company that sponsored David Dobrik, a YouTuber who records his crazy and hilarious daily life, to go to Las Vegas and to surprise his friends with brand new cars as presents. I was really in a great mood because I also remembered that David had a promotion code that could save me $20. To be honest, I didn’t expect that I could remember all these details from a YouTube video. When I tried to find the exact promotion code, I discovered that SeatGeek was a quite a frequently-mentioned apps in Dobrik’ s videos, which might explain why people who only watched 3 or 4 of his videos and didn’t even follow him on YouTube, like me, could remember the name of the ticket company. It turned out SeatGeek had successfully made its name stick in its potential consumers’ minds through cooperating with Dobrik.

As marketers all began to realize that influencers’ recommendations were much more effective than stories told by the brand, some of them also found that simply paying numerous influencers to post similar content was not enough, and some influencers were also worried about the tricky balance between promoting sponsored products and maintaining followers’ trust. In the case of Dobrik and SeatGeek, it seemed that a more effective way of influencer marketing that provides long-term benefits could be developed. Instead of directly promoting SeatGeek in his video, Dobrik presented SeatGeek as a nice sponsor who made all his unexpected and exciting stories happen, which was consistent with his usual style. And SeatGeek didn’t just appear once or twice, actually, it had sponsored over 20 Dobrik’s videos. As Ian Borthwick, the influencer marketing director of SeatGeek said, when an ad was repeated multiple times, the audience was more likely to remember them, and the influencer also felt more comfortable doing it. The decision made by SeatGeek to establish a long-term partnership and give the influencer much more creative control proved to be quite a success.

While the “more than a one-off deal” strategy worked well in Dobrik and SeatGeek’s cooperation, from my point of view, it might not be universally applicable. Numerous cases have proved the effectiveness of repeated advertisements in making people remember, including my personal experience mentioned above, but without the interesting plots created by Dobrik, the repetition of SeatGeek might seem annoying and just leave a negative impression. Even if the brand is lucky enough to find a creative influencer who could consistently present similar content without making people feel bored, the outcomes might still vary with brands.

For ticket companies like SeatGeek, the main marketing purpose should be converting viewers into potential customers, since most people won’t buy concert tickets immediately after watching an ad — they only buy tickets when they need to. Therefore, it is important to make “SeatGeek” the first name coming into consumers’ minds at this moment, which exactly the repeating ads’ strengths. However, for products that are more of the “buy-by-impulse” type, like beauty products, the priority is to make consumers press the “checkout” button. In this case, investing money in repeating ads may not be worthy, as the sales growth generated by one or two sponsored videos of one influencer might be approximately the same as that generated by over 20 videos of the same influencer. Besides, the brand also risks leaving a bothersome impression by taking this strategy.

The long-term and repeated cooperation with influencers actually reminds me of the repetition ads in traditional media, a technique adopted by many advertisers to increased people’s familiarity or even “force” the audience to remember. Although this technique keeps proving its success in gaining people’s attention and becoming an “idea that sticks”, complains about this type of ads never stop. When a similar marketing strategy is introduced into influencer marketing, more factors such as the distinct features of social media platforms and the content creators’ own styles are involved. While Dobrik and SeatGeek’s cooperation seemed to be a success, do you think this strategy can be widely adopted by advertisers?

Resource:

The most popular soda brand in the world, Coca-Cola, has been well-known for its marketing strategies. Based on consumer insights and social needs, it has launched plenty of successful campaigns to strengthen its brand equity and value, such as the “Share A Coke” campaign in 2011 which used personalized bottles with consumers’ names to motivates them to post pictures on social media.

The leading position of Coca-Cola

As the top 1 most valuable soft drink brand, Coca-Cola has always been ahead of its other competitors. The reintroduction of Diet Coke in 2018 has made this trend increasingly dramatic and in 2019 its value of 💲36.2 bn has doubled the second leading brand Pepsi’s value of 💲18.5 bn. However, more attention has been paid to health issues nowadays, which could be a great challenge that Coca-Cola has to face.

Coca-Cola accused of deceptive marketing

According to the report on October 2, 2019, two pastors in Washington DC condemned Coca-Cola for misleading consumers without informing them of the health consequences caused by sugar. This seems an accusation of original Coca-Cola but is diet Coke as healthy as expected? How are the statements of no sugar and zero calories reliable? This has also been doubted by researchers as there is uncertainty about the harm of artificial sweeteners. For instance, some studies indicate that they would work as incentives for increased appetites which would result in more food intake and is detrimental for those who attempt to lose weight by drinking diet coke. Under this circumstance, although Coca-Cola claims that they value their consumers’ health and try to provide them with better choices, this could just be their marketing strategies to secure the leading position in the soft drink market.

How long will such strategies work in the future?

Personally speaking, as a consumer, I tend to choose diet coke because of its “zero calories” which is attractive for a person who always struggles to lose weight like me. In other words, Coca-Cola’s marketing strategies work effectively for its target audiences. Nevertheless, after seeing the study result of potential harm brought by artificial sweeteners, I become aware of the fact that there is no significant difference between original coke and diet coke. As a result, it is necessary for me not to use diet coke as an excuse to escape the need for sugar quitting and fall into the trap of Coca-Cola. In addition, such awareness will contribute to a negative impression of this brand. We can imagine that with more studies on diet coke, the public would obtain more knowledge about its potential risks and this may harm the brand equity of Coca-Cola. Faced with this inevitable challenge, is it still the optimal approach to continually express its belief in health? Or should it just sincerely recognize the existence of health issues and target those who purchase its products for taste rather than health? I guess these questions remain to be answered in the future.

https://www.beveragedaily.com/Article/2019/07/12/Diet-Coke-helps-boost-Coca-Cola-s-brand-value-Brand-Finance-rankings

https://www.law360.com/articles/1205327

https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/food-wine/116111114/are-diet-soft-drinks-better-for-me