Re: Branding and marketing

From: Geri Stunz Konstantin <geri_at_virtualadv.com>
Date: Mon 22 Jan 2001 13:47:55 -0500

LARRY RAUBACH <larryraubach_at_hotmail.com> WROTE:
> As I said previously, a brand transcends the
> product. Let me repeat that in case it was missed the
> first two times: a brand transcends the product. Write
> it down if you have to.

Only based upon the assumption that the brand is a
"good" thing, could a brand "transcend" a product.
Look at Firestone.

> Geri then defies PATRICK CARLSON by writing that FedEx,
> AT&T and Yahoo! are in fact not brands and continues
> to again tell us that one does not brand a service,
> only products. Puhleez. FedEx - a service - is easily
> one of the most powerful brands in the world. Easily.
> To dispute this is total ignorance.

You obviously have not read all my previous posts. I
expressed my views based upon my experience working
with many BRAND Managers, not PRODUCT Managers, that
the word Brand is used too loosely today. You have
missed my point. Maybe in Canada they call services
brands. Every foreign country has their own methodology
for formulating advertising and differences in word
definitions. In some countries you don't even do
Branding. It wouldn't work. In some countries you can't
even sell shampoo because they don't understand the
product, let alone any brand.

> To follow up on Geri's example of Tide owning the word
> "clean". It does not own the word "clean." Clean is a
> functional benefit of the detergent which is Tide. All
> detergents clean. That is like American Airlines trying
> to own "air travel" and Ford trying to own "automotive
> transportation."

I guess you haven't been following Tide's advertising
in the US and that of the "washing wars" since the
early 60s. If you had, you'd know what I meant. You are
obviously taking the word "own" in a different context
than was intended. Look at Tide's advertising over the
last 30 years and compare it with the competition's and
then come tell me I'm wrong...

LARRY RAUBACH <larryraubach_at_hotmail.com> WROTE:
> Geri then goes on to say:
> >> Consumers will not necessarily pay more for a brand.
>
> Consumers WILL pay more for a brand. That is a
> fundamental tenet behind a brand and branding.

NO- sorry Larry, customers will NOT NECESSARILY pay
more for a brand. (And I won't even bother to respond
to the Hyundai thing cause you proved my point with
your answer).

> Brands are built upon emotional benefits - intangible
> benefits. They are, however, often destroyed by a lack
> of tangible benefits. Brand loyalty is the end result
> of effective branding.

Yeah - Sure.... I get really emotional over my
toothpaste and deodorant..... And when I wash my
dishes, you can be sure that's really emotional too..

And Larry, old dogs don't need to learn new tricks when
their knowledge base is solid and their advertising
works.

PS: How cold is it in Ottawa? I heard it's 52 below in
North Bay and you're practically on the same parallel
--- brrrrr. Can you go outside yet?

Geri Stunz Konstantin
Stunz | Konstantin
Boca Raton, FL





Received on Mon Jan 22 2001 - 12:47:55 CST