To be honest, I hated marketing before I knew what it does. I felt, marketing cooks up non existent value and packages it in a way people like to perceive it and rip people off their hard earned income. Simply put, I thought marketing was a means to cone buyers.
I will now tell you why I developed this notion and try to analyse if its a myth or a reality.
Myth 1. A bottle of Horlicks costs RS 225 for 1/2 Kg while a similar product, Pusthi powder containing a simple mix of Badam, groundnut along with a good mix of pulses, but doesn't sell for RS 100. Indeed the product is much more nutritious than most of the so called health drinks. I thought, this is a marketing gimmick. The same thing goes for Vicco Bajridanti, Girijan Honey and lot of other small products which get shadowed under the promotional blitzkrieg of the MNC's.
Buster: People actually buy Horlicks not because of the marketing blitzkrieg but because they see an identity behind the brand. If something goes wrong in Pusti powder, who is responsible? Whom can they reach? Whats the fair price for Pusti powder and who will vouch for its quality? Horlicks has created an impression in the minds of people that it has the answer for these questions. In effect, branding brings identity and accountability to a commodity. If Pusthi powder can bring in this perception of accountability, they might as well crack it.
2. A bottle of Coco Cola that costs the manufacturer around 30 paise per bottle but costs around 10 bucks when it comes to the consumer. I thought, had both the companies not engaged themselves in so much promotion and propaganda, they would have delivered the product much cheaper and made money on volumes.
Buster 2: There is something called the brand recall. When the competitor is advertising the products, unless you match him in scale and content, your brand might slowly fade away from the customers memory and risk falling into oblivion. So the guy who has started this hectic customer engagement war has to be given a KETA for this hare brained idea. If you are a market leader, despite margin pressures you don't want to commit your company to prolonged ad wars. Nothing to do with marketing!
3. I hate the way cosmetic industries created an obsession for fair skin. Despite knowing the fact that skin colour is the DNA of a person and that it cannot be changed, these advertisements make people crave for fair skin making those with dark complexion feel inferior.
Buster 3: This unfortunately is not a buster but rather a myth supporter. There is no escape for marketing here. It needs to take the blame. There is a concept called pain points. Advertisers target the customers and touch them where it hurts the most, just to drive home their point. Though not the elegant of the ways, it is very effective when it comes to creating brand recall. So advertisers use it to deleterious effect more than what is required. But some where a marketer needs to draw a line between ethics and effective marketing campaigns which have a negative social impact.
I will now tell you why I developed this notion and try to analyse if its a myth or a reality.
Myth 1. A bottle of Horlicks costs RS 225 for 1/2 Kg while a similar product, Pusthi powder containing a simple mix of Badam, groundnut along with a good mix of pulses, but doesn't sell for RS 100. Indeed the product is much more nutritious than most of the so called health drinks. I thought, this is a marketing gimmick. The same thing goes for Vicco Bajridanti, Girijan Honey and lot of other small products which get shadowed under the promotional blitzkrieg of the MNC's.
Buster: People actually buy Horlicks not because of the marketing blitzkrieg but because they see an identity behind the brand. If something goes wrong in Pusti powder, who is responsible? Whom can they reach? Whats the fair price for Pusti powder and who will vouch for its quality? Horlicks has created an impression in the minds of people that it has the answer for these questions. In effect, branding brings identity and accountability to a commodity. If Pusthi powder can bring in this perception of accountability, they might as well crack it.
2. A bottle of Coco Cola that costs the manufacturer around 30 paise per bottle but costs around 10 bucks when it comes to the consumer. I thought, had both the companies not engaged themselves in so much promotion and propaganda, they would have delivered the product much cheaper and made money on volumes.
Buster 2: There is something called the brand recall. When the competitor is advertising the products, unless you match him in scale and content, your brand might slowly fade away from the customers memory and risk falling into oblivion. So the guy who has started this hectic customer engagement war has to be given a KETA for this hare brained idea. If you are a market leader, despite margin pressures you don't want to commit your company to prolonged ad wars. Nothing to do with marketing!
3. I hate the way cosmetic industries created an obsession for fair skin. Despite knowing the fact that skin colour is the DNA of a person and that it cannot be changed, these advertisements make people crave for fair skin making those with dark complexion feel inferior.
Buster 3: This unfortunately is not a buster but rather a myth supporter. There is no escape for marketing here. It needs to take the blame. There is a concept called pain points. Advertisers target the customers and touch them where it hurts the most, just to drive home their point. Though not the elegant of the ways, it is very effective when it comes to creating brand recall. So advertisers use it to deleterious effect more than what is required. But some where a marketer needs to draw a line between ethics and effective marketing campaigns which have a negative social impact.
Comments