Branding

From: Damon Kirschbaum <damon_at_damonkirschbaum.com>
Date: Mon 24 Feb 2003 08:38:31 -0600

on 2/21/03 4:05 PM, Rob Lewis at rob_at_marketingphysics.com wrote:

> "lowest price" is NOT a branding strategy. It's a distribution
> strategy. In fact in Europe you can't even legally state lowest
> price unless you can provide specific proof to back it up.
>
> A brand is a noun you want to own in the mind of your target
> audience. Something that is differentiated and defensible from
> your competition. Take a look at it from your target customer
> perspective and try to find that noun you bring to party that
> others don't or don't do as well.

Lowest price is not a branding strategy? Tell that to Wal-Mart
<http://www.walmart.com/>--"Always Low Prices!"

on 2/21/03 6:00 PM, Rob Frankel at rob_at_robfrankel.com wrote:

> Agreed. Price strategy is no strategy. In fact, when the economy
> dumps into the toilet, the price cutters are the first to get
> flushed. Those who have invested in brand strategy take their market
> share, since their users know there's more to their offering than a
> low priced commodity.
>
> When you build a brand properly, you give users more reasons to
> purchase your goods, which essentially removes price as the primary
> purchase decision criteria. The more reasons you give, the less
> important price becomes.

Price strategy is no strategy? The price cutters are the first to get
flushed? Tell that to Wal-Mart. You have just glibly dismissed Wal-Mart,
Dell Computer, and every other company that has built a successful business
based primarily upon being the lowest cost provider of a product or service,
and BEING KNOWN as the lowest cost provider of a product or service.

Ron and Rob, you obviously have a strong opinion about what branding is, but
that does not mean that you are correct and that anyone that uses the term
differently than you is wrong. You do not possess the Platonic Ideal of
Branding. Your marketing ideas may be brilliant, but you are not the
guardians of the definition of what a brand is.

Branding is a concept. It is an idea. It is not definitive. We cannot touch
it, hold it, measure it, or weigh it. It most certainly is not a noun. (I
assume that Rob L. was being metaphorical when he wrote that it was a noun.)
It is silly to argue about what branding is or is not without being as
specific as possible. Words are ambiguous. The words "brand" and "branding"
can be used in many different correct ways.

Here is a definition of branding that I found with the help of Google at
<http://www.marketingfix.com/archives/the_definition_of_branding.php>:

> Branding allows a company to differentiate themselves from the
> competition and, in the process, to bond with their customers to
> create loyalty. So a position is created in the marketplace that
> is much more difficult for the competition to poach. A satisfied
> customer may leave. But a loyal one is much less likely to.

Being the lowest cost provider of a product or service is an excellent way
for a business to differentiate itself from its competition, and to bond
with its customers and create loyalty.

Karen G. Laughlin's strategy of being known as the lowest cost provider of
whatever it is that she sells is definitely an effective way of
differentiating her business from her competitors, and bonding with her
customers and create loyalty, especially if the product or service that she
is selling is a commodity. If your definition or understanding of branding
does not incorporate the strategy of being the lowest cost provider, then
your definition or understanding of branding is seriously flawed.

How would you define "branding"?

Regards,

/s/ Damon Kirschbaum

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Damon Kirschbaum's Investment Advisory Service
<http://www.damonkirschbaum.com/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------





Received on Mon Feb 24 2003 - 08:38:31 CST