Ross Simons Final Exam 1A.) Aaker Brand Equity: Awareness: Real Madrid has a high awareness which is comprised of recall and recognition. In Spain alone about 60% of soccer fans follow Real Madrid (recall) and one can only assume they have much higher recognition rate. Outside of Spain, one can assume their recall and recognition is high as well: 11 out of 12 countries in exhibit 3 cite Real Madrid as a top soccer team; www.realmadrid.com reaches 1.5 million unique users a month (with only 28% coming from Spain) up from 200,000 in 2001; Madrid has 6 million tourists a year, some of those just to see Real Madrid play. Association: This is a lot of what you’ll see in the answers to the questions after this, associations like: spain, championships, pride, belonging, superstars, legacy. Quality: Given Real Madrid’s winning heritage, their plethora of superstars, and the team oft-‐cited as a leading team, it’s clear they are one of the highest quality teams out there. Loyalty: As loyalty is derived from the strength of awareness, association, and quality, Loyalty for Real Madrid is also very high. Other Brand Assets: Besides the standard logo, uniforms, brand colors, etc. Real Madrid has a few brand assets that really allow for success. The first is that since they have superstar players, this results in a lot of endorsements for individual players, and by extension, the Real Madrid brand. Second, they really utilize their channels well to reach the audiences, particularly their website and TV channel. Last, the fan clubs of Real Madrid help to create a worldwide community amongst the fans, a very important aspect of the CVP. Brand Architecture: Real Madrid has an interesting brand architecture. Though it’s primarily a Branded House as evidenced by brands like realmadrid.com and Real Madrid TV in which Real Madrid master brand is the driver and .com or TV is just a descriptor. There are cases of other brands under a House of Brands andstrategy such as Sociedad Mixta, but it seems that it is a Branded House architecture mostly. The reason the architecture is interesting however is that it contains ingredient brands. An ingredient brand is, as it sounds, a brand that is an ingredient of another brand. For example, Chrysler—in addition to its many recent branding efforts—has recently introduced Beats by Dr. Dre audio in some of its cars. Though both receive benefits out of this scenario, it’s really hard to say which brand is the driver. Traditionally, when both brands seem to have an equal driver role, you would call it a subbrand. However ingredient brands clearly are not subbrands. Where you encounter this with Real Madrid is through its players. The players are massive brands in their own right complete with their own revenue streams, their own “customers” and clearly their own driver role. The players benefit from playing with Real Madrid as they are playing with many other superstars on a team that provides a fantastic chance
Ross Simons Final Exam for huge success. They get to share responsibility for victory with other stars and get to leverage the prestige of the Real Madrid name to increase their own revenue streams. At the same time, having a team of superstars allows for further success for Real Madrid and supports its core. There is a co-‐driver relationship here as both brands support the other’s success, but this could not be considered subbranding (just as Intel processors in an Apple computer is not subbranding). Risks: There are a number of weaknesses and risks I see with their equity and architecture. The biggest risk is that soccer clubs’ success is on a precarious edge. For many of the top teams, winning is in their core. If teams begin to lose (as Manchester United did), they risk decreasing brand value. If Real Madrid were to go on a bad losing streak, it would lose a lot of brand equity in association and quality. Another big risk is the strength of the players. With these ingredient brands contributing significant value to the master brand, they are at risk of players leaving the team, being headhunted by others, or doing things that tarnish their personal brands off-‐field. Any of the above scenarios would decrease the brand value of the master brand. The above two risks are relatively hard to control for, so they’re not conducive to suggestions for improvement other than to make sure their front office is staffed with the absolute best talent scouts and negotiators to insure that the team keeps winning, acquiring and retaining superstars. Another very significant risk is dilution of the brand through the various brand extensions they are undertaking (restaurants, merchandising, etc.) In the case they explain that they must insure “a branded item is not too far removed from soccer (e.g. tablecloth or wallet), yet the case says that mugs and watches are sold. If this situation is the norm, it does not seem as if the brand has a grasp on what is “not too far removed from Soccer”. My suggestion would be to clearly define what constitutes a viable extension that does not violate the identity of Real Madrid and make sure that they any proposed extension fit the acceptable criteria. And last, with fan clubs and channels of distribution being very valuable brand assets that provide a huge return on investment and a competitive advantage within their equity and architecture, it’s important that they strengthen these particular brand assets as they look to expand.
Ross Simons Final Exam 1B.) Specific Players Stadium Logo Website Brand Colors Spain -‐Heritage Spain -‐Winning League -‐Superstars Merchandise Uniforms Soccer Retail Stores Fan cards Rationale: Real Madrid has a storied heritage as a 101-‐year old soccer team that has met great success. It is one of the most winningest teams in the world, and in the soccer world winning is vital. It is this winning heritage that allows Real Madrid to continue success. It becomes clear that winning is vital to Madrid’s (and any top-‐tier soccer team) brand using two examples. The first is when an industry observer explained that a team’s market capitalization could drastically drop after only a single bad season. This assertion is then proven later when the case explains that when Manchester United lost a game in the final minute—keeping ManU out of the quarterfinals—it was forced out of the Champion’s League and was expected to lost ~$18.23 in revenue as a result. This shows the clear connection between a brand’s success and their wins; losses will drive down the value of the club and thus winning is a part of the core identity.
Ross Simons Final Exam Central to Real Madrid’s brand is having a team of superstars as well. I’ve put “specific players” in the extended identity because specific players do not belong in the core as Real Madrid can continue to thrive without specific players (ex. If Ronaldo left, Madrid would still succeed). However it is dependent on having superstars. A team of superstars creates wins, drives heritage, and attracts fans. With the way the soccer world is set up, those teams who are not capable of multiple superstars do not achieve the level of success that Madrid does. Further, each of the superstars are their own very strong brands in their own right, so they bring their own brand assets and “customers” (fans) with them and allows the brand to rapidly appreciate in value through acquisition of superstars as well as expand. The value of Madrid’s talent can be seen during Lorenzo Sanz presidency of Real Madrid. He regularly sold players to cover expenses and the team began to decline on the field and off the field. The last thing I feel must be explained is the placement of soccer in the extended identity. Though soccer is important, I do not feel as if it is a part of the core identity. As the Madrid management puts it, they “are a content provider”, not a soccer provider. By having soccer only a part of the extended identity, this allows them to expand into things loosely connected to soccer, if at all (such as movies, or themeparks, etc.) Customer Value Proposition: • Appreciafng Stock Funcfonal • Entertainment • Compeffon • Excifng games • Pride • Belonging Emofonal • Hope ("We turn down the lights and people dream") • Bragging rights • Camaraderie • "I am a Madrismo, a global community." Self-‐Exp. • "I am a winner." • "I am a proud Spaniard, from my family to my futbol."
Ross Simons Final Exam Brand Personality: Aaker: Aaker would argue that the Real Madrid has a personality of Excitement (causes hope, exciting sport, innovative organization), Competence (trustworthy, winners, leadership, influential, successful), and ruggedness (masculine, athletic, tough-‐to-‐beat, will fight for a win) Kopp Gestalt Model: "I can trust Real Madrid. By "Real Madrid is a team started being a fan, I am a part of a in 1902 that has a long history huge community worldwide of of winning, superstars, and a people just like me. They are a huge fan base that spans the part of my idenfty and when enfre globe. It wins games year they win, I win (as my friends in and year out" know when I brag to them.)" "Real Madrid for Real Success."
Ross Simons Final Exam 1C.) Segmentation: I believe that Real Madrid has four main segments as well as sub-‐segments (keep in mind, there is some overlap. For example, there are some international socios abonados but international and socios abonados have their own segments as they require separate strategies and are exclusive, even if there is overlap): 1. International (non-‐European) segment: a. This looks to be the segment with the most growth potential, especially in the U.S. and Asia. It is a separate segment because it will require a different strategy to grow the brand amongst this segment. i. I believe one of the best ways to grow amongst international segments is to go after the most popular players in the specific regions. This is evidenced by the sales of Real Madrid jerseys in Britain shortly after the announcement that Beckham would be transferred to Real Madrid. They can also tour significantly in the regions they want to grow the brand in. Beyond that, they could get placement on local television stations, placement in movies, extend their usage of restaurants, insure strong advertising of major games (like RM vs. FC Barcelona) on the major sports networks, create a huge online system filled with really high-‐quality training and skill videos and market the system internationally, sponsorships, amongst other things. 2. Age-‐related segments: a. Children i. Follow the Manchester United approach and sell products (e.g. toys, bedding, shoes, backpacks) that are catered to children. In addition, they can create cartoons (as McDonald’s is famous for doing), get their stars placement in very popular kid’s shows, soccer camps, youth competitions, as well as deep ticket discounts for young children to encourage parents to bring them, etc. b. Teenagers i. They can do much of what they would do for children, just targeted to an older segment. c. Adults i. Very high-‐quality and expensive apparel, further expansion of fan clubs with strong incentives, half-‐time competitions, etc. 3. Members (Socios): a. Paying (Abonados) i. They should first create multiple-‐tiers of paying members. Paying members are undoubtedly more loyal as people tend to want to “get what they pay for”. However, paying members currently receive rights to go to every game, discounts on seats, and a right to vote in elections. This seems like it comes with
Ross Simons Final Exam a high dues cost. Through offering multiple tiers, you can maintain exclusivity of upper tiers while being more accessible. Second, they should create more non-‐ match day opportunities as match day ticket sales account for just a portion of revenue. Potential ideas: hold events in the stadium on non-‐match days that only members are invited to, offer meet and greet sessions with the stars, ability to vote on merchandise designs, member-‐related apparel (i.e. member’s jackets) to heighten the self-‐expressive benefits, etc. ii. Non-‐paying (non-‐abonados): I foresee the biggest growth potential for this segment is international. Through the implementation of really great fan clubs that inspire people to join, they can heighten the camaraderie and belonging benefits associated. Registered socios abonados would get special information and rights to the best fan clubs 4. Fans (non socios): a. People who list the team as their favorite but are not members of the club: i. The best way to go after this segment is to continue to improve, win championships, and expanding into other channels. 1D.) New Brand Personality Statement: “Real Madrid is a big-‐time team from a humble beginning, started by a few Spanish soccer fans in 1902. It’s remained member-‐owned as it’s grown to one of the most successful teams in history through its talent acquisition and willpower. Ever on the rise, we continue to attract the highest-‐level players to insure that we remain competitive for our huge fan community that’s comprised from all over the world, all united by their support of Real Madrid.” Risks: It could be a brand positioning statement could emphasize the soccer team aspect of the club entirely too much and limit expansion potential. The threat of new, very rich team owners that are willing to pay exorbitant amounts of money to headhunt talent from other teams could drive up the salary costs for talent and limit the talent pool available for Real Madrid and other teams.
Ross Simons Final Exam 2A.) In the two articles given in the exhibits, I believe it is nearly impossible to claim that no one loses in the scenarios presented. As a matter of fact, when reading the first article, I couldn’t believe that Versace really sold their brand through H&M; I was dumbfounded. Personally I love H&M; it is probably my favorite clothing retailer. Though American Eagle has a higher market share of my closet, H&M is undoubtedly my favorite consumer brand, even if I do not buy most of my wardrobe there. This is primarily because of its aspirational nature. H&M, for me—and im sure many others—represents accessible high fashion. There’s something about going there, seeing the well-‐dressed mannequins with their perfectly fitted dress shirts and skinny ties, pants that fit around the thigh tight, and yet lightly, and falling just at the top of the shoe. You step into H&M, and the clothing catches your eye all around, and not only makes you feel like this is a store that represents high fashion at its core, but when looking at the prices you’re inspired that dressing nice is not only for the people with a lot of money. When looking at the Versace deal from H&M’s perspective, it was a fantastic idea. To sell an accessible line of Versace through its store fits with its CVP and identity to the core. They were undoubtedly able to build some excitement behind the brand with this move, and I hope they continue pursuing such strategies while the economy is still weak and designers are willing to consider it. If they can, I expect their brand value to continue going up the Interbrand rankings. Versace’s decision on the other hand is…dumb. That is the most direct way to say it. I’m sure there was some logic behind the decision: I expect they wanted to prop up their margins in a weak economy, as well as try to attract new customers that would continue buying Versace at full price afterwards. However, they undoubtedly ran their white gloves through the mud and muck. The first of Versace’s transgressions is selling through H&M in the first place. Like I said before, the key emotional benefit of H&M is that it’s aspirational. I believe one of the key self-‐expressive benefits is “I am a snazzy dresser, even if I cannot afford designer labels. I know how to dress, and I’ll make sure I dress well even if I spend little money.” This does not mesh with Versace’s customers who do not care that much about value. The second transgression is that many of these customers that purchased the items are not current, nor future customers as they intend to take the items and proceed to sell them on eBay, an auction site, for higher prices (though probably lower than Versace prices overall). Therefore, Versace did not actually receive many new customers through this line of clothing. A quick look over at eBay reveals a pair of Versace for H&M skinny jeans selling for a little over $80 and dresses selling for ~$250. Those are Abercrombie and Fitch (jeans) and Banana Republic (dresses) prices. The last transgression is that as a retailer brand, they put a potential wedge in future negotiations with retailers. Retailers such as Saks or Neiman Marcus will be concerned about the cheapening of the brand, as well as the prices they are being charged to sell Versace items. Versace potentially set a bad precedent as retailers in the future will call for lower prices on Versace-‐branded
Ross Simons Final Exam items or refuse to sell them at all if they are really concerned about consumer perceptions about the brand. They really put their future negotiations with retailers at risk with this move. To some extent, I think the retailer brand Missoni made an even bigger mistake. The differences between Target and Wal-‐mart are similar to the BC’s of Massachusetts: Babson College and Boston College. Yeah, one is a little better (though I will not say which), but overall it’s about the same in quality level. Further, the consumer who shops at Target is most likely much more mass-‐market than an avid H&M shopper. The fact that Missoni sold in a channel in which you can place their items into a big red shopping cart, along with Skechers shoes, a pound of Bacon, and motor oil reveals the error of its decision. Target, a consumer brand, is a winner even if it did meet operational issues. It was a pretty big retail day I presume, with a large contribution to revenue. Further, Target got a lot of buzz even from celebrities. The one risk I see with Target continuing to pursue a strategy is that they may raise consumer expectations about what quality of clothing they expect from the brand and may find they are unable to meet expectations. 2B.) The key takeaway from the WSJ article on AdSpend is that brands are decreasing spending in a bid to increase the bottom line. This is a mistake on numerous fronts. The first is that while it is nice to have short-‐term profits, perhaps to prop up your share price, it is at the sacrifice of long-‐term market share and success for shareholders. By lowering adspend, they risk decreasing sales as consumers must really limit the breadth of their purchases. In addition, brands who conform to the predictions in the article are subject to two other issues in regards to the Shroer Model. The Shroer model explains that in order to gain market share, you must ad spend at a 20-‐30% premium to the companies with higher market share for an extended period of time—a minimum of about 18 months. The first issue they have is that they limit their ability to gain market share. When the economy is in a recession, a company should actually spend more in advertising based on Shroer’s model combined with game theory. One can expect, as history as shown, for many brands to decrease their spending as a response to a slow economy. Understanding that this will happen, a company should increase their spending to maintain a premium as other competitor’s decrease their spending. If they can maintain this spending level for at least 18 months, they can see high gains in revenue as well as market share. The second issue is that by decreasing their spending during a recession, they put themselves at risk to other brands who understand the Shroer model and aggressively outspend the brand, resulting in a lower market share for the brand that decreased spending. Brands have a lot to gain from spending during a recession and it is probably the optimal time to gain market share as decreased ad spending from competitor’s is expected. The brands that conform to the predictions in the article are not leveraging the shroer model to increase their market share as they should be doing.
Ross Simons Final Exam 2C.) In the case of Skippy Peanut Butter, utilizing DSS tools would be very helpful to find out what is causing the slide. The first thing I would use is the Trial-‐Repeat Model, a predictive and diagnostic tool to begin diagnosing Skippy’s problems. This would be primarily useful because you see at exactly what point in the B2C relationship it begins to break down. For example: Is there a low distribution percentage? Meaning you aren’t getting Skippy in the stores that Skippy’s consumers are shopping at (though for a large, successful brand, I do not expect there to be major distribution issues that went unnoticed). Is there low awareness? Are you not advertising enough to drive consumer recall of the brand name, and thus you should begin advertising more in an effort to increase awareness. Are consumers just not trying the brand? Is it priced to high? Is it not at good eyesight levels on store shelves? In that case, you should consider increasing trade allowances to get favorable shelving, as well as promotion devices such as on-‐pack premiums (such as a small jar of jelly). Are you not receiving repeat customers after trial? Well then you should consider utilizing repeat-‐generating promotional devices such as bonus packs or coupon plans. An effective usage of the Trial-‐Repeat model would allow Skippy to diagnose at which point from awareness, distribution, trial, and repeat that they are weak on, and they should be able to meet success by creating solutions that overcome those weaknesses. I would also utilize conjoint analysis to understand what values consumers place on the attributes of Skippy Peanut Butter (i.e. fat content, taste, brand name, caloric content, price, size, crunchy vs. smooth, etc.). Using conjoint analysis, you may find that even though Skippy Peanut Butter is perceived to be a quality peanut butter in the marketplace by consumers, consumers are beginning to prefer to buy healthier foods with a lower fat content for themselves and their children. With this knowledge, you could emphasize the benefits of polyunsaturated fats vs. saturated fats in an “All fats are not created equal, don’t skip out on Skippy” ad campaign. The above is but one example of a problem and solution that could be identified using conjoint analysis to get at consumer preferences as opposed to just consumer perceptions and when coupled with the Trial-‐Repeat Model should result in a gain of market share. 3A.) Based on my knowledge of Brand Management, I advise that Saucony does not create a brand extension, nor should it create a new brand. They certainly should not create a new brand. First and foremost, creating a new brand typically requires the potential brand to be a big idea in a big category (though niche brands can certainly operate as a big idea in a small category). Were this a truly innovative idea (but it’d have to be new technology that represents a fantastic leap forward from the competitors), it would make sense to introduce a new brand as it would not limit the opportunity for the new product to maximize it’s potential. In addition, the brand’s success would create a new beachhead which could then be subject to brand extensions. It’s a big category, with brands from Mizuno to Nike that operate in the volleyball segment of the footwear market. However it is not a big idea as I would suspect brands typically introduce newer versions of shoes that are lighter, with better
Ross Simons Final Exam traction, and better cushioning properties. With this in mind, as well as the costs associated with a new brand launch (typically 3X times the price of a brand extension), it would be a mistake to introduce it as a new brand. Introducing it as a brand extension would be a mistake as well. From our discussions in class, it seems as if the strategy decision chosen by Saucony was just to focus on the running segment, using a Rie’s approach. A quick look at the website of Saucony confirms this assertion (besides the walking shoes portion). This is a good decision as Saucony operates in a niche, and would do well to focus and reach further success in the high-‐performance running niche. As other competitors enter the niche market Saucony operates in (ex. Vibram Five Fingers), they should insure they have the resources to retain/gain market share. A brand extension would be a mistake as it would spread the resources thin of a company that already does not have a large marketing budget. Further, a brand extensions has the potential of harming the masterbrand. In the case of Saucony, they are somewhat in a brand image trap, but for better not for worse. An extension of Saucony to volleyball shoes would likely be unsuccessful, harm the masterbrand’s associations, as well as potentially lead to a path in which the brand extends even further, becoming distracted and losing a lot of brand value in the process. 3B.) The case that best illustrates the “Silver Bullet” strategy would be Diesel. Diesel had a lot of issues it wanted to resolve: the biggest issue is that it’s consumers still had the Diesel Identity (edgy, irreverence, creative, and trendy) but they were older and more sophisticated. It also did not have products to reach the new emerging high-‐end casual wear market and did not believe that Diesel alone could reach those customers. In addition, it was concerned that if the older customers were to still wear Diesel, it would increase the diffusion of the brand taking away Diesel’s exclusiveness, prestige and take away the youthful image of the brand. And last, but not least, Renzo was concerned that his designers’ creativity was being stifled by the overall mainstream nature of the Diesel Brand. With that, Diesel created a single brand, StyleLab, meant to go after all of those. It was to be a more expensive brand of casual wear that would appeal to customers who wanted refinement, exclusivity and most of all, innovation. The designers would be able to flex their creative muscles with their designs and use innovative materials such as thin metal mesh. The price point would create exclusivity (an expected $150 for a pair of casual pants). Successful designs would also trickle down to the Diesel brand in some shape or form. This was to be effective because it allowed it’s designers to be happy through creation of products that were attractive to customers who were trendy, and wanted cutting edge fashion and were willing to pay for it. The new brand would lower the diffusion of D-‐diesel, and as StyleLab designs made their way to Diesel it would allow Diesel to continue to be trendy and have prestige. It was a silver bullet strategy that would’ve worked had it been introduced as a new brand and not a brand extension as up-‐market stretches are rare.
Ross Simons Final Exam 3C.) Having done a quick look at Drambuie online, it looks like one of the primary concerns with Drambuie was that its customers were dying off < http://video.forbes.com/fvn/cmo/drambuie-‐for-‐a-‐younger-‐crowd>. Of the customers still alive, they are the grandmothers and grandfathers of the world, with Drambuie on the shelf next to their denture adhesive. This shrinking customer base represented a key risk for Drambuie. To offset this, it needed to appeal to a younger generation. The attempt to appeal to a younger generation is what you see in the advertisement. “There are after dinner drinks” is put at the top because after-‐dinner drinks are not really young and exciting; it’s a very traditional and old-‐fashioned idea. You see a person, one can assume an older person, out on the still water, sun setting, and probably after a full day of fishing. On the bottom part of the advertisement, you see a much more exciting advertisement. The water is at full churn, you can clearly make out the young people’s faces in the image, they’re doing a very exciting activity, a lot of intensity, and they look like they’re having a lot of fun. Even more so, the activity isn’t standard—not a lot of people do it—and it’s truly an experience and the imagery on the bottom is meant to contrast starkly with the imagery on top. The ad is most conducive to an analysis with Aaker’s Brand Personality concept as there’s not quite enough information in the ad to perform a high-‐quality Gestalt Model that’s mutually consistent between both the thinking and feeling based thoughts. Aaker says that Brand Personality is “a set of human characteristics associated with a given brand”. Jennifer Aaker argues that this can be further broken down into five key human characteristics: sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication, and ruggedness. While Drambuie used to have the traits of Sincerity and Competence, it’s clear that they are aggressively moving away from that based on this advertisement. The key trait they are putting forth is excitement as evidenced by their new exciting, flashy, and adventurous depictions in this ad. The other key characteristic they’re putting forth is ruggedness, as it’s male-‐dominated, athletic, and very outdoorsy. 5.) Green Bay’s Hottest Stock – Wall Street Journal < http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204903804577082524238902912.html> There are few cases that I believe are quite as intriguing to analyze from a brand management perspective as the Green Bay Packers stock. As one of the few publicly-‐owned sports franchises in the world, it has recently began its fourth stock offering in its 92 year existence. It is an interesting case to look at as public ownership of Green Bay has little financial incentive; you do not receive dividends, the stock never appreciates in value, and it is not traded. As financial investments go, it is one of the worst. And yet, they have no problem selling the shares. The team had sold $43 million worth as of ~9:00 a.m.
Ross Simons Final Exam on December 9th, just since going on sale Tuesday. There are a couple reasons why this case is particularly interesting: 1.) It seems to refute many of the traditional models that discuss price. Kopp in particular emphasizes that a CVP is comprised of Functional + Emotional + Self-‐Expressive Benefits + Value. However, Green Bay stock with virtually zero functional benefits, wouldn’t seem to have much value vs. benefits. This is especially true as the number of shares an individual owns increases. When a person owns one share, you could possibly have a balanced CVP as they can be given as gifts, the Green Bay Packers do have emotional and self-‐expressive benefits that you would be purchasing through ownership, and you do have minor voting privileges at the annual meeting. However, regardless of if you own two shares, or three shares, or 200,000 shares (the limit for shareholders to own), you do not have any special voting privileges. You do not necessarily gain rising benefits as your purchase costs rise. You get the same amount of benefits for one share as you do for 100, and yet people will still buy more than one share. For that reason, it provides an exception to any model that emphasizes a balance between benefits (functional, emotional, self-‐expressive) and cost. 2.) It is a product that has zero functional benefits, possibly other than gifting, and even then the person who receives the gift gets very little functional benefits. It is a product that takes the idea of a balanced CVP and disregards it, only offering emotional and self-‐expressive benefits solely. The Green Bay Packers have a core identity of what I believe to be Heritage, Winning, Competitive Spirit, and 12th Man (referring to the fans participation in the franchise). People who purchase the stock are paying to own a team they may have grown up watching with their family, that they watch every Sunday, that embodies toughness and willpower having won many, many games in the mid-‐1960’s without stars, only a team (much like the Patriots first Super Bowl win of the 21st century) that stuck together and fought it out to win, win, and then win some more. People who purchase them can feel as if they are a part of something bigger, as if they are winners themselves. It is a product that is propped up entirely on its emotional and self-‐expressive benefits. Under the same line of thinking, it’s a fantastically successful product being sold that operates primarily on the top rung of the Emotional Ladder (i.e. values: pride, belonging, ownership, and winning for GB). For that reason, it takes an untraditional top-‐down approach to the emotional ladder. I picked this particular story because I know that many people will talk about how Olive Garden has had their share of hardships and why they think that may be, or they may talk about how Olympus (camera) recently had a multi-‐decade investment scandal, or other things. The underlying theme with writings such as those is that they continue to support the models. With the Green Bay example, it provides what looks to be a very rare exception to those models that have an emphasis on functional benefits and value.
Ross Simons Final Exam 6.) For New Idea Confectioners I recommend that they go forward with the “Fluffernutter” brand name for their new candy. The research performed by the New Idea Company and others have concluded that in the marketplace the candy tests very well across many different age demographics. As they have a quality product, they are at risk of not succeeding through a lack of awareness about the product. By using the Fluffernutter brand name, consumers immediately understand what they can expect the candy to taste like, and using the name Fluffernutter will have nostalgic properties dating back to the 1960’s. As many consumers have strong, ingrained associations with the name, they can use this form of Judo Brand Diversion to piggyback off of those associations. Upon research, we found that “Fluffernutter” is a registered trademark of Durkee-‐Mower, Inc. who is the manufacturer of the most popular brand of fluff in the marketplace, simply branded “Marshmallow Fluff”. However, this should not be something to be concerned about. If they sue the company, they will gain a lot of awareness, particularly as I expect many people and news outlets to be surprised that the term is actually trademarked. This will undoubtedly result in a slew of news stories that will provide free marketing and awareness to the brand. In addition, a potential lawsuit is defeatable. First, trademarks are subject to becoming generic terms for society which negates their legal protection. There are plenty of examples of this happening: Aspirin, Dry Ice, Escalator, Thermos, Yo-‐Yo and even Webster’s Dictionary. As the trademark for Fluffernutter (serial number 75175400) was registered just in1998, years after Fluffernutter was a generic term to describe a sandwich comprised of peanut butter and marshmallow fluff. In addition, the trademark is only for “printed recipes sold as a component of food packaging and cookbooks” while they will be selling candy, far from what the trademark entails. The company may not even take it to court as it could be cost-‐prohibitive for a small northeastern company that has somewhat of a weak case for the trademark. If they do plan to pursue it all the way to court, you could simply change the name to something like “Fluffenbutter” and take the awareness gained and move on. In addition, as a candy company introducing a new brand, it is likely that they will take a House of Brands approach. Though Judo Brand Diversion often neglects the white glove approach, the brand harm is minimized with a house of brands strategy as its simple enough to drop the brand and introduce a different one. Though there are risks, the benefits of leveraging the generic term fluffernutter as a brand name outweighs the potential risks.