Direct Mail vs. Electronic Marketing

Typically when new technology comes in, it replaces old technology. However, for some reason e-mail and the internet have failed to completely phase out our aging system of snail mail. There are many factors that play into snail mail's resiliency, but in any case the fact of the matter is that it is still practical. This is proven in the article "...Snail Mail Marketing" in which certain companies profiled their success with snail mail. Based on the examples from the article, snail mail still offers a more personal and harder to ignore form of advertising. In the article, one business owner says "I think it's easier to delete electronic junk mail without taking a second look."
Although many companies still stick to snail mail, there are many new forms of advertising that seem very promising. Barcodes are one of the latest trends to take off in marketing, they have yet to become a staple in advertising but they are certainly on the rise. Barcodes use the technology in modern day smart phones to automatically link customers to products companies are trying to advertise. The technology is fantastic, and I think it is a great form of marketing. As American's we live in a world of convenience and instant gratification, what is more convenient and instant than seeing something you like, scanning it and being able to buy it right then? I think that barcode technology is a great way to advertise, but it unfortunately limits itself. The only customers that a company is marketing to when they use barcode advertising are those customers that have smart phones, and although that number is growing daily, it is still limiting. I think that electronic forms of advertising are certainly on the rise, but I do not think that e-marketing will completely phase out traditional forms of marketing. I think that as long as people are reading newspapers, magazines or any other forms of paper, traditional forms of marketing will still be around.

Advertising on Ice Hockey Boards

Recently while watching a hockey game on TV, I noticed a digital advertisement on the glass boards around the outside of the ice. After thinking for a minute, I realized how great of an idea this was. The rink pays little to nothing to actually digitize the company's logo and show it on the boards, while reaping full benefits of a normal advertisement. The advertising is extremely flexible because nothing is actually physically on the boards and advertiser's logos can be changed at a few key-strokes of a computer. I think that this will inspire alot more of this type of advertising because it essentially creates advertising space where there is none, and any television network can't turn that down. Do you think we will be seeing much more of this type of digital advertising? Do you think it is as effective as conventional advertising?

Apple's New IPad... Jewel or Junk?

Apple recently released its newest creation this month, the Ipad which is a multi-use, portable tablet. The Ipad is a touch screen computer very similar to the Iphone but much larger. The Ipad is roughly the size of 4 Iphones put together and its intended use is as a personal computer. Critics and the media have met the Ipad with mixed, but mostly negative views. The reason that the Ipad is not being accepted well is it's lack of functionality, it basically is capable of the same functions as an Iphone and is not as portable. I have to question the marketing department at Apple with this creation as to who their target audience was. The Ipad is not small enough to fit in a pocket, and at the same time, does not have a large enough screen to be enjoyable for use at home. It also remains in limbo as far as its uses, it is not capable of as many functions as a home computer or laptop. Basically, what Apple has done, is created a larger, less portable Iphone that isn't really sure what it wants to be.
Usually Apple can be counted upon for great products such as the Iphone and Ipod, which have both changed the way the world works. However, Apple's latest concoction just doesn't seem to make sense. It is possible that Apple sees a niche for this product that the rest of the public hasn't seen but as it stands, this product appears as though it is set-up for disaster. The rest of the marketing was equally surprised with Apple stock dropping as Steve Jobs was making his key-note speech introducing the product. Hopefully Apple can recover from this bobble and continue to make great products. Do you think the Ipad has the potential to succeed or is it doomed for failure?

Slap And Chop!

I've seen the funniest infomercial ever, and its for the Slap and Chop....




What I find funny about this infomercial and many others like this one is the way that they push these products. The fact is that usually the products that they are trying to sell are actually good ideas and are very useful products and the way that they market them makes them seem opposite. When I see informercials, I automatically think that the product is a piece of junk and the fact of the matter is that some of these products are not pieces of junk. I think that some of these products limit themselves by advertising in an infomercial format and I think that if some of these products marketed themselves in stores, they would make more profit. Do you think that the products you see on infomercials are better off advertising in infomercial form or in stores?

NBC's gratuitous use of the Luge Death

I'm sure we've all heard about the tragic death of the Georgian luge competitor during the olympic trails. Over past couple of days since the accident, I've spoken to a couple of people about the ethics of whether or not NBC should be showing the footage of the crash on national television. I thought that this was an interesting tie to marketing as well because we all know that as humans we have a sick tendency to desire to view these type of things, and I believe that NBC is using that to their advantage. I don't think it is necessary or ethical for NBC to be showing footage of the crash on national TV, there is a level of respect which I think is being dishonored by exploiting the video to increase ratings. Do you think it is ethically correct for NBC to be showing footage of the tragic accident on national television?

Honda FCX Clarity

Electric cars have been around for a long time, but for one reason or another, have not been able to break through and compete with regular gas cars. Reasons for this could be argued about all day, some say oil companies do their best to stop electric cars from becoming a reality because it would reduce sales of oil. I partly agree with this theory, but at the same time, I think that a large part of the reason for the lack of success in the electric car market is the way that the cars have been designed. Americans have been driving gas powered cars for about a century now, and over that time, we have evolved a dependency for our beloved automobiles. Our dependency is centered around the immediate gratification of being able to travel farther. In other words, when we run out of gas, we can simply go to the gas station, get more, and we're back on our way, electric cars do not allow us to fit this lifestyle. The way that electric cars have been designed takes a step in the opposite direction we want to go as American car users. An electric car will go as far as it can go on one charge, and need to be charged again for a considerable amount of time.
What is miraculous about the Honda FCX Clarity is that it is an electric/hydrogen powered car which will allow us to continue living the lifestyle we have become so accustomed to. Instead of requiring a lengthy charge after each trip to the grocery store like most electric cars, the Clarity simply needs to be re-filled with hydrogen which in turn powers the electric motor. The FCX Clarity is taking a step in the right direction because it is marketing to every person in America who already owns a car, as opposed to electric cars, which market only to those willing to put up with a drastic life style change. Where do you think the future of transportation is going? Will the FCX Clarity catch on, or will it disappear like the electric car?

Superbowl Advertising

The superbowl is a massive day for advertising every year. Year after year, the game attracts record numbers of viewers making it one of the top 3 most watched sporting events consistently. The only two events that beat it, don't take place every year, the FIFA World Cup Finals and the Olympics. Advertising time at this years superbowl will range from 2.6-2.8 million dollars per 30 second bit. Advertising during the superbowl is a bold decision for any company to make, and in this post I'm going to talk about what types of companies would benefit most from a superbowl ad.
A company that is going to benefit the most from a superbowl ad, is one that believes they have a truly great product that has the potential to take off. Being that a superbowl ad will reach millions of people, it can be the jump start that a product may need to launch it into success. If you really do have a great product, once the people who you reach with the ad try it out, word will spread naturally and the product will thrive. If your company decides to take out a superbowl ad, they must be sure that their product is the better than all the competition. If the product or service is not better than the competition, you may see some revenue from the commercial initially but once the hype dies down, you will not be left with a loyal customer base. Do you think that there were any companies that advertised in this years superbowl that shouldn't have?