Battle Of The Brands
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Battle Of The Brands

on

  • 1,665 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,665
Views on SlideShare
1,663
Embed Views
2

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
106
Comments
0

1 Embed 2

http://www.slideshare.net 2

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Battle Of The Brands Battle Of The Brands Presentation Transcript

  • Gavin D. J. Harper
    • Miller et.al (1998) identify three stages in the development of consumption research:
      • Stage 1 60’s – 70’s
        • Consumption as an emerging field
      • Stage 2 70’s – 90’s
        • Study of consumption as it’s own sub-field
      • Stage 3 90’s – Today
        • Development and refinement of the field
    • Brands are the sum of a consumers experiences and perceptions of a group of products of services.
    • Sometimes, in the pursuit of market share, large companies use unethical / unsustainable practises to pursue consumers.
    • ‘ Anti-Brand’ sentiment can reach the point where a niche is created in the market for a product with ideals that are diametrically opposed to that of the brand.
    • Small companies are well placed to enter the market by exploiting this niche, created by the big firms, challenging the dominant discourse within that market sector and building a business based on consumer feedback.
    • Kumar (2006) cites five reasons for the growth of the anti-brand:
      • Increased Communication (Internet, Forums, e.t.c)
      • Growing Lack of Trust in ‘Big Business’
      • ‘ Individualistic’ Consumer Materialism
      • Environmental Consciousness
      • Ethical / Human Rights Consciousness
  • “ When people go shopping, economists tell us that they will usually buy the best quality products that they can afford … Sometimes, however, people might boycott a particular brand or company … They might also chose a fair trade coffee label due to a concern for ‘developing countries … Ethical purchasers may, therefore, have political, religious, spiritual, environmental, social or other motives for choosing one product over another” (Harrison et al 2005, p2)
  • “ The act of buying is a vote for an economic and social model, for a particular way of producing goods” (Ellwod 1984, p8) Ethical Consumerism
    • Sustainable Food – Innocent Smoothies
    • Sustainable Transport – Tesla Roadster
    • Sustainable Electronics – VIA Processor
    • Sustainable Cleaning Products - EcoVer
    • Full of Sugar
    • High ‘e-number’ content
    • Not particularly nutritious
    • Not particularly high content of ‘natural’ ingredients.
    • Sustainability not given a second thought in the production process.
  •  
    • Natyrox - Heard in the news today that the makers of Ribena admitted today that their drink has absolutely no vitamin C when some scientists at a university in New Zealand tested the drink. They have been fined £100,000 pounds for misleading the public. They said they changed the formula to increase shelf- life, but reduced the amount of Vitamin C.
    • DEV1L - Harsh I think they got off easy they should have been fined millions. When I'm hungover I get Ribena for the vitamin C in it the b$%£&*s no wonder I don't feel any better I'm going back to sunny delight :mad: but I will probably find out that has no vitamins next :(
    • PyroZania - Sunny D used to/may still have carcinogens in it.
    • ALEXnkF1 - Why would you want Ribena when you can get Innocent fruit smoothies.
    • Source:
    • http://community.eu.playstation.com/archive/index.php/t-72232.html
    • [Corrected for spelling / grammar]
    • ‘ Innocent Smoothies’ challenged the dominant brands by producing a product that is all natural fruit, pasteurised and bottled.
    • The product contains no additives of ‘nasties’.
    • The product aligns itself with values of sustainability and health and the production processes employed and business processes aim to be sustainable.
    • Thought has been given to making the packaging from 100% recycled material.
    • The business embraces themes of resource efficiency and sustainability within the core of their business model.
    • The company engage with social enterprise sharing some of their profit with good causes and projects.
    • Performance at any cost
    • High fuel consumption
    • High Carbon Emissions
    • Luxury at any price
    • No thought about sustainability
  •  
    • An electric vehicle produces ‘zero emissions’ at the point of use.
    • Electric motors generate high-torque, this makes them suited to performance applications.
    • The limitation with competitors electric vehicles has been the battery storage technology.
    • The conventional automotive industry are wary of electric vehicles.
    • EV prototypes and low-production vehicles tended to use Lead Acid and NiCd / NiMh batteries – giving poor performance.
    • Traditional automotive clusters are centred around Detroit in the U.S. motor industry.
    • Tesla developed a radically different concept using Lithium Ion batteries, technology used in cell phones and consumer electronics.
    • The company developed this vehicle ‘off the radar’ of the conventional automotive industry, by basing themselves in ‘Silicon Valley’ home of the high tech.
    • No compromise was made on performance, positioning this vehicle in a radically different segment to it’s EV predecessors.
  •  
    • Market leaders Intel & AMD focused on a policy of competing on performance at any cost.
    • Increasing chip speeds exponentially leads to high costs for Research and Development.
    • As speed increases so does power consumption – no thought given to energy use / sustainability.
    • VIA pursue an alternative strategy of ‘Performance per Watt’ – getting the most performance from each unit of energy.
    • This is in tandem with removing lead from their products.
    • This strategy has resulted in processors which do not generate a lot of heat – this means they have found more applications .
    • The following chart compares the number of trees that would be required to sequester the carbon generated from the energy consumption of three different processors over their lifetime.
  • http://www.linuxdevices.com/files/misc/via_treemark.jpg
  •  
  •  
    • Cleaning products typically use lots of ‘nasty’ chemicals.
    • Cleaning products are generally synthetic.
    • Little thought is given to the sustainability of the processes used to produce them.
    • The packaging of products is given little thought.
  •  
    • ECOVER look at how to use ideas from nature to inspire cleaning products.
    • There is a focus on the sustainability of the processes used to produce their product.
    • Packaging is recyclable wherever possible.
    • Natural ingredients are used in the manufacture of their products.
    • Their business embraces concepts of energy efficiency in the manufacture of their products.
    • Small companies can often challenge the orthodoxy of large brands successfully.
    • The agile nature of the small-firm makes them well positioned to respond to the demands of the market with an innovative solution that defies ‘big brand’ logic.
    • Existing brands may have an unsustainable/unethical connotation which makes it hard to change consumer perception, but new startups have a ‘clean sheet’ on which to build their brand.
    • Do we view Anti-Brand sentiment as ‘consumer misbehaviour’ or do we accept that with increased flows of information, brands must respond to consumer feedback.
    • Behaviours are labelled ‘deviant’ (Denegri-Knott 2003), but should they instead be labelled ‘innovative’.
    • Denegri-Knott, J. (2003) ‘Consumers Behaving Badly: Deviation / Innovation’.
    • Kumar, A., (2006) ‘Brand Attack – Anti Branding’, ‘Business Cogniscence’, Jan. 2006. Vol. 2 Issue 8.