During my vacation I recently visited Bulgaria, tourist-filled but cozy Sunny Beach to be exact. Sunny Beach is a vibrant resort sprawling with numerous albeit mostly homogenous bar&restaurants. And like in every other major tourist resort, the streets of Sunny Beach were riddled with stalls and over-eager people trying to get you to buy stuff/into their restaurant. It didn't take long before I readied my marketing eye and really started to consider their activities from a proper marketing perspective. What could be learned? How would I develop their marketing? Hence my shot on best-practice street hussle marketing.
A good businessperson knows that a quality offering is the basis of everything. Each restaurant more or less offered the same foods, even though their communication mostly loudly promoted the wide scope of their variety of foods. I realized after a day of walking through the congested boulevards of Sunny Beach that same stuff; pork, veal, chicken, pizza, was served everywhere. Thus we can deduce that the "product" was the same among all competitors.
It was not a surprise that differentiation in communication and promotion were the keys to success. My favourite bit of differentiated communication was "Michael Jackson is going to dance in two minutes", shouted to a group of tourists by a employee of a beach restaurant. A bit inappropriate, gross even, considering the recent passing of the King of Pop, but I laughed (and went to have a dinner the next day). The same employee also always managed to keep a (genuine?) smile and vigorously seached for eye-contact when approaching prospective customers in the street - winner traits were positivity and genuinity. In one hand I saw many tired and apathetic, and on the other hand happy, but irritantly unsurprising marketers, but their energetic and exertive competitors were easy to spot. Not surprising: the importance of empowered people doing right things was again proven.
Flyers were the other key marketing tactic of the beach restaurants. Almost all listed the same boring typical meals offered and were filled with flashy pictures of their spaces and meals. Some had maps to illustrate the location of the restaurant. Like with husslers, they were monotonous and easily forgettable. I wondered how could the best marketers stand out of the competition if they all had more or less similar flyers? Of the dozen or two of flyers I collected, just for this blog post, only two or so included actual example prices of their meals. This is hugely important for prospective customers to assess the price level of the restaurant when making a quick decision where to get a dinner or a lunch. Even billboards standing next to restaurant exits rarely had the prices of typical meals. Customers were not given a chance to measure and compare adjacent restaurants. Horribly inconvenient and time and effort consuming for the customer!
Location and the facade were other important marketing aspects for the restaurants, but where the restaurants eager to improve their marketing, I'd believe aforementioned communication would the easiest (and cheapest!) aspect to develop. Starting with a bit of innovation in flyer and billboard design and seeking out the best employees to work as husslers would help many restaurants stand out in a crowd. Maybe then there would be more than one restaurant, Djanny, in Sunny Beach with a queue in the rush hours of the evening. It was however word-of-mouth recommendation that led me to Djanny..
Showing posts with label case study. Show all posts
Showing posts with label case study. Show all posts
Business cases that never were
I am always told that hindsight is unconstructive, mainly negative and energy-consuming. It should be avoided at all times – after all, you should always look to the future and its possibilities and not waste energy on looking back.
Or should you?
I’m starting a series of blogposts about Business Cases that Never Were – writings and discussions that make use of hindsight and unexecuted, perhaps even unrealized opportunities. I am doing this just because to disprove the myth of hindsight’s negative aspects, and to generally inspire creativity and innovative ideas. The first case is simply called Flickr – powered by Kodak.
Flickr – powered by Kodak
I was reading Lovemarks – Future beyond brands by Kevin Roberts (CEO Worldwide of Saatchi & Saatchi) the other day. Lovemarks is a compelling, vibrant book about the next level of branding, lovemarks that attract “loyalty beyond reason” in their customers. On pages 150 to 152 Kevin Roberts discusses a certain case of Kodak where the firm between 1999 and 2005 strived to connect with teens, enhance its brand position among them and capture the market of disposable one-time-use cameras in this segment. In the case study, their main fear seems to be (in addition to losing to their competition) becoming a disposable themselves, a fad like Polaroid.
The case study goes on about Kodak’s extensive marketing tactics that succeeded in reaching their target audience and steered (in their own words) Kodak towards a Lovemark. Their continuous goal is to remain authentic and relevant to the teen segment. The case sums up nicely how a certain Lovemark-oriented marketing perspective helped Kodak connect with teens, but I was left thinking about a lost chance for Kodak. Now, its 2009 and disposable cameras sound a bit from the leftfield. Sure, they are the low-budget choice, but teens love their digital cameras, because of their big memory cards and ability to share and edit their digital pictures – their life. The industry where Kodak operates, production of imaging and photographic materials and equipment, is in a world of trouble. I have clients in that same industry and discussions with them turn darker year after year, and digital photography is one of the main reasons. Retailers face bankruptcies as customers no longer develop their pictures but enjoy and store them in digital formats. And to boot, people increasingly purchase their photographic equipment from an often cheaper source, online.
How would we upgrade Kodak’s marketing efforts to 2009 while keeping in mind their business goals, continuous authenticity and relevance, brand preference and increased sales, presented in this case?
Life’s about sharing
Flickr is an open, free online photo and video management and sharing application where people can store and show off their magnificent pictures to the Internet. It’s hideously popular, and for a reason, thanks to its ease and (non-) cost of use and vibrant social community. Launched in February of 2004, it now hosts more than three point six billion images and videos. And it’s owned by none the other than Yahoo.
Kodak’s goal in Lovemarks’ case was to increase their share of market in photography equipment, in this case, one-time-use cameras, by connecting with a potential market of teens. For this example, we will disregard one-time-cameras and focus on other more relevant equipment.
What if Kodak had launched Flickr in 2004, or acquired it before Yahoo on March 2005?
What has been relevant to internet users in general and youth in particular since 2000? That’s right, social media, emphasis on social. In Roberts’ case study, Kodak claims to have gotten to grips with the youth market. In the past years Internet has become a major social playground for teens, a major part of their life. Kodak would’ve needed to be there too, should it want to remain relevant. And what is Kodak known for? Photography. Those Kodak moments.
What would it be/what would it have been?
In the fall of 2004, some exec in Eastman Kodak should’ve had a brain explosion. Realizing the same opportunities as we, he would’ve driven Kodak to the social internet community based on their main competence - photography. By creating a thriving community around their main business, they could attract customers and prospective customers. Kodak could have launched Flickr as a semi-independent, authentic, separate brand, being careful not to over-commercialize a service intended among others for sharp youth. Keeping it free and easy to use, just reminding that all this fun is powered by Kodak. Business-wise, their goals could have been to:
1) offer users easy possibility to develop their best images – direct them to their nearest Kodak retailer or even put out a service where people can develop their photos online by the nearest retailer
2) offer free advice to better photography, useful information on cameras and equipment (something Kodak does already, atleast in their UK website)
3) offer a easy, cost-competitive channel to purchase said equipment
This way, multiple benefits could have been reaped
1) Increase in crucial retail business
2) Major boost to brand awareness – “the little Kodak logo on every Flickr page”
3) Retained deep connection with youth – authenticity and relevance
Think about it: People sharing their Kodak moments online?
Or should you?
I’m starting a series of blogposts about Business Cases that Never Were – writings and discussions that make use of hindsight and unexecuted, perhaps even unrealized opportunities. I am doing this just because to disprove the myth of hindsight’s negative aspects, and to generally inspire creativity and innovative ideas. The first case is simply called Flickr – powered by Kodak.
Flickr – powered by Kodak
I was reading Lovemarks – Future beyond brands by Kevin Roberts (CEO Worldwide of Saatchi & Saatchi) the other day. Lovemarks is a compelling, vibrant book about the next level of branding, lovemarks that attract “loyalty beyond reason” in their customers. On pages 150 to 152 Kevin Roberts discusses a certain case of Kodak where the firm between 1999 and 2005 strived to connect with teens, enhance its brand position among them and capture the market of disposable one-time-use cameras in this segment. In the case study, their main fear seems to be (in addition to losing to their competition) becoming a disposable themselves, a fad like Polaroid.
The case study goes on about Kodak’s extensive marketing tactics that succeeded in reaching their target audience and steered (in their own words) Kodak towards a Lovemark. Their continuous goal is to remain authentic and relevant to the teen segment. The case sums up nicely how a certain Lovemark-oriented marketing perspective helped Kodak connect with teens, but I was left thinking about a lost chance for Kodak. Now, its 2009 and disposable cameras sound a bit from the leftfield. Sure, they are the low-budget choice, but teens love their digital cameras, because of their big memory cards and ability to share and edit their digital pictures – their life. The industry where Kodak operates, production of imaging and photographic materials and equipment, is in a world of trouble. I have clients in that same industry and discussions with them turn darker year after year, and digital photography is one of the main reasons. Retailers face bankruptcies as customers no longer develop their pictures but enjoy and store them in digital formats. And to boot, people increasingly purchase their photographic equipment from an often cheaper source, online.
How would we upgrade Kodak’s marketing efforts to 2009 while keeping in mind their business goals, continuous authenticity and relevance, brand preference and increased sales, presented in this case?
Life’s about sharing
Flickr is an open, free online photo and video management and sharing application where people can store and show off their magnificent pictures to the Internet. It’s hideously popular, and for a reason, thanks to its ease and (non-) cost of use and vibrant social community. Launched in February of 2004, it now hosts more than three point six billion images and videos. And it’s owned by none the other than Yahoo.
Kodak’s goal in Lovemarks’ case was to increase their share of market in photography equipment, in this case, one-time-use cameras, by connecting with a potential market of teens. For this example, we will disregard one-time-cameras and focus on other more relevant equipment.
What if Kodak had launched Flickr in 2004, or acquired it before Yahoo on March 2005?
What has been relevant to internet users in general and youth in particular since 2000? That’s right, social media, emphasis on social. In Roberts’ case study, Kodak claims to have gotten to grips with the youth market. In the past years Internet has become a major social playground for teens, a major part of their life. Kodak would’ve needed to be there too, should it want to remain relevant. And what is Kodak known for? Photography. Those Kodak moments.
What would it be/what would it have been?
In the fall of 2004, some exec in Eastman Kodak should’ve had a brain explosion. Realizing the same opportunities as we, he would’ve driven Kodak to the social internet community based on their main competence - photography. By creating a thriving community around their main business, they could attract customers and prospective customers. Kodak could have launched Flickr as a semi-independent, authentic, separate brand, being careful not to over-commercialize a service intended among others for sharp youth. Keeping it free and easy to use, just reminding that all this fun is powered by Kodak. Business-wise, their goals could have been to:
1) offer users easy possibility to develop their best images – direct them to their nearest Kodak retailer or even put out a service where people can develop their photos online by the nearest retailer
2) offer free advice to better photography, useful information on cameras and equipment (something Kodak does already, atleast in their UK website)
3) offer a easy, cost-competitive channel to purchase said equipment
This way, multiple benefits could have been reaped
1) Increase in crucial retail business
2) Major boost to brand awareness – “the little Kodak logo on every Flickr page”
3) Retained deep connection with youth – authenticity and relevance
Think about it: People sharing their Kodak moments online?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
