Re: better product wins
Jerry,
----- Original Message -----
From: <jstory at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca>
To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
Subject: better product wins
> As I said in a previous message, my theory of marketing is:
>
> Rule 1. Between unequal products, the better one wins.
> Rule 2. Between equal products, the first one wins.
Sorry -have to disagree. Even Mr Spock once said that logic is not the end
but the beginning of the road to wisdom. You're selling reason to people who
think it's a good buy when dog food is 50% off, even if they don't have a
dog.
> The word "better" in rule 1 has to be properly understood.
> It means better for the customer's purposes. Different customers have
> different purposes. And their purposes are not necessarily what the
> creator of the product thinks their purposes ought to be.
Usually, it means better as the customer has been led to believe is
profitable and fulfilling, preferably under the impression that it was
her/his own great idea. This is not incompatible with good products, but
neither is it related.
> Obviously these rules assume that a product is advertised enough so that
> people know of its existence, and is accessible so people can get it if
> they want it, and is not prohibited by law.
You mean, like drugs?
> Al Ries and Jack Trout believe that whether a product wins has nothing
> to do with quality of the product.
This is called 'positioning', quite the rage these days. Theory goes that it
doesn't matter how good the product is, or even what it is or does, but if
enough idiots have brand and logo stamped repeatedly into their willing
brains (a mark is born every day, not really a new notion), enough products
will sell regardless their qualities, usefulness and even price. Why do you
think most marketing these days is aimed at children and preteens?
> ADVERTISING:
> Can an inferior product be successfully advertised so that it wins over
> the superior product, thereby invalidating Rule 1 ?
> David Ogilvy was probably almost the ultimate guru on the subject of
> advertising. He speaks from experience as a professional advertiser.
> He says that if he puts his mind to it, he can write an advertisement
> that will sell an inferior product. Once. As soon as people find out
> that it is an inferior product, they stop buying it. In fact the more
> money is spent advertising the inferior product, the quicker people
> find out that it is inferior and the quicker they stop buying it.
> Therefore his policy was to advertise only the best products.
> Not even the great master of advertising, David Ogilvy, Himself, could
> violate my rule number one.
David Ogilvy may be a moral guy, or maybe he just has made his pile already
and can afford to look moral. Before people realize the product's inferior
and stop buying it, you have the replacement ready and 'positioned' in their
minds. Does anyone ever really investigate what's new in a 'New formula!'
detergent?
> MICROSOFT:
> Can rule number 1 be violated by means of enough market-domination,
> such as Microsoft has?
> No. Not even Microsoft can violate rule number one, keeping in mind
> a proper understanding of the word "better".
> ( BTW, Microsoft spends something like half a billion a year finding out
> what people want. This fact demonstrates that Microsoft understands the
> meaning of the word "better" in rule number one. )
Do you really think you can assert that, seeing that a huge majority of the
world's PC users have at most a vague idea that other OSs and application
suites exist, most of them not as pretty (read, good) as Microsoft's? What
Microsoft has done is an excellent job of convincing everyone that there's
no alternative, unless you're a freaky weirdo geeky nerd. I have no
intention to spend a single buck on Office 2000, when my (free) StarOffice
5.2 can read all 2000 formats perfectly well. How many people do you think
I've convinced? Do you really think that Windows is better than Linux or
Solaris? That Word is better than WordPerfect or StarWriter? Mind you, I'm
not taking sides, just pointing out that 99% of the users haven't even had
the chance to compare, so how could they choose the better one?
> As evidence that even Microsoft can't win with inferior products, I
offer:
>
> http://www.independent.org/tii/news/990921/IBD.html
>
>
> Jerry Story
Sorry, it has moved. What was it?
Gerardo
PS. Cheer up. These are the good old times you're gonna miss twenty years
from now. 
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
