Market Coverage

I personally think it is best to have a selective level of distribution within the market coverage. That way, consumers have to do some shopping around but overall it is convenient to find the product and the consumer doesn’t have to go out of their way to make the purchase. If it is too limited where to find the product then it will be a hassle to find the product or will have the consumer put of buying the product rather than grabbing it while they’re out.

Intensive really isn’t probable for all types of products because televisions are not going to be sold at gas stations. However, I do not agree that products should be exclusive. Having to buy a product in a specific place is trying to make the product seem of higher value and make the customers want to try and attain the product. The product can still be kept in an exclusive price range but it does not have to be kept in exclusive stores. More would be sold if it were easier to buy.

For example, Pandora used to be exclusive. Now they are carried in smaller jewelry stores not just at exclusive Pandora stores. The price has not changed but the popularity has increased. This is due to the fact the product is seen by more people and appeals to them when they are browsing in the jewelry store. Consumers may have never thought to purchase one before because they had not seen it. Having Pandora sold in more locations has definitely increased their sales and has been beneficial. I do not think you would lose clients just because additional stores were carrying the products, because the price is still the same, just more convenient to purchase. 

Which market coverage do you think is the most effective? Do you think it varies with the type of product? Is it more about the exclusivity than the actual product? 

Response to Sean's Question: Out of all these principles I just mentioned, which one do you believe is most important for small businesses and why?

I agree with all of the principles Sean included when it comes to small businesses. I think the most important would be getting your name out there. I think this leads to all the other principles. Once the business name is out there clients will be drawn to the company. They will then purchase products. If the product is of good value the customer will then become a repeat customer and the business can build a relationship with the customer. This will then have the customer recommend the business to others, which will cut out the need to focus on a target market due to the right target market being recommended from other customers. This will benefit the business because they will better use their resources since not as much advertising will be necessary to promote the business. With strong relationships with the customers and valued products the customers will bring in more business.

            A small business will need to mostly focus on the start up of their business. When the opening of the business occurs they need to be sure to get their name out there. I think in the end the rest will take care of itself especially in a small town where everyone talks. Getting your foot in the door is really what will determine if the business will survive the first year or have to close its doors.

What is the highest cost to businesses when starting a business? Do you think businesses should better distribute their costs into the different principles Sean had mentioned?            

Response to Matt's Post: Social Media Marketing

I think it is smart for Corporations to use Twitter and Facebook. I think especially

Facebook because the user can have pictures of the business, entertainment they have have to offer and have had in the past, contact information, present deals and specials, and upcoming events. I do not have a twitter so I cannot speak about the Twitter aspect but I feel either would be beneficial especially how Matt pointed out that it is free of cost to advertise your business. However, I do understand the aspect of it becoming too informal and jeopardizing the reputation of the corporation. I think the corporation would have to decide if this type of advertising was appropriate depending on the product or service they provide. If it is too informal or low key then I would suggest other types of advertising.

I think especially small local businesses would benefit because they have less money to spend on advertising than corporations. I also do not think small businesses would jeopardize the reputation of the business because it allows them to reach out to their customers in a more personal way. Small, local businesses will be able to have the social media support of those in the town and with positive reviews and “likes” on Facebook others may be prompted to go to the business.

Fritz could post their daily specials and those following might be more likely to go into the restaurant that day because the special sounds good, where they otherwise may not have thought to go to the restaurant that day. Also, being on social media keeps the business relevant and will keep Fritz on the minds of the people so they will be more likely to want to go to Fritz over another restaurant they may not think to go to. It also adds a personal touch opening up to the public and connecting with the locals who give them their business. I know I have “liked” many businesses from my hometown to show support and it is good to see what is going on and the deals.

What would be another downfall of having a company on social media? Do you think the benefits outweigh the potential downside? 

Dr. Pepper 10

Dr. Pepper 10 is a product put out by Dr. Pepper. In class we talked about how they received a lot of negative attention because the slogan was “It’s not for women.” I can see how this can be taken offense to, I however thought it was part of the commercial with how the scene was a man doing a lot of “manly” things. I thought it was pretty clever so guys would want to try it because it still had all the bold flavor as original Dr. Pepper and they would not feel out of place drinking a lighter soda.

I do think it was too far to make more commercials based off that. I completely understand how they were trying to market diet soda to men by calling it Dr. Pepper 10 instead of Diet Dr. Pepper. I even agree with changing the can so it does not undermine the original soda. I do think they could have had additional commercials that were more generic, targeting any gender.

But what I don’t understand is I have seen plenty of men drink diet coke. Coke is such a popular brand and flavor that diet or original is satisfactory depending on preference. Maybe Dr. Pepper isn't a popular enough soda to try to also had a diet soda and an original. I also think men don’t typically drink diet soda because they do not care as much about their figure as women. I do not think any marketing would make men drink Dr. Pepper 10 unless they were trying to lose weight and really loved Dr. Pepper. If the company was looking for ways to target men they should look into other aspects.

Do you think companies would be more successful if they market towards one gender only? Does the product come into effect, is it who is more likely to purchase the product to begin with?

Response to Sean's Question: What is the Biggest Edge one Business has Over the Other in Marketing?

The biggest edge one business has over the other in marketing is creative ideas. Whichever company can gain consumers interest more effectively will gain a larger profit and do better than their competitors. Time is also a key factor. The quicker a company gets their product into the market the quicker they earn money and the greater edge they have over their competitors who take longer to market their products. I agree with Sean when he said having a group of marketers is more effective because they can pool their ideas. This also goes along with having an edge because the more ideas, the more creative ideas, and the faster they can market their products.

Can companies rely simply on consumers buying or do they need to make the consumers feel they need to buy what they are selling? Is that why consumers are less likely to buy in this economy because they are unsure of what they actually “need”?

Places and the Products Being Sold

Our group project has made me think about how important it is to sell the right product, at the right price, in the right place. Where I live in Wolfeboro, NH everyone assumes those who live there are wealthy and or on vacation. The stores in our downtown consist of fast food restaurants or fancy restaurants and souvenir shops. Everything is over priced and there are no necessities. The downtown is geared for tourists. I could not tell you where to buy a pair of socks in my town, which makes it is very inconvenient. I understand our population triples in the summer so the town caters to those visiting where there is room for a large profit to be made, but in the winter you would think prices would drop and or more useful items would restock the Lake Winnipesaukee T-Shirts that no one who lives in Wolfeboro would actually wear. There is nothing I would purchase in my town unless it was a gift for someone. 

In the past few years the economy has not been as strong and it shows because there is less traffic in town during summer compared to later years. So one can assume the businesses are not doing as well because there isn’t the same volume of people coming into their stores. I would think the businesses would start to swap out some of their inventory for the locals who are always there and looking to save on gas money when they just need to pick up a few things. (Closest stores are about an hour away.) 

Do you think the businesses would be more profitable if they change their prices and or products? Do you think it is good for a town to only rely on tourists to earn profit? Do you think the businesses have to comply with an all or nothing change?

Response to Drew's Question: Has a family member or social setting influenced you in purchasing a certain product?

Yes I have had a family member influence me into purchasing a product, multiple times. My mom and I are very close so I trust her opinion. Whenever I have a problem I typically take her advice. Pertaining to cosmetics, I have very dry skin and she suggested Olay products. I will never again buy another face lotion due to how well their product works. I am willing to pay more than a cheaper drug store alternative because I know it moisturizes my face without it being oily or breaking out. Social media has also influenced me because if I see people "liking" a page or talking about certain products I will be more likely to try them. Anytime I hear another person using a product and see them give it good reviews I will definitely give it a shot.

That is why it is important for a company to have good customer service and strong products. Ways for a company to earn business isn't just through marketing it is after the marketing has gotten a consumer to try the product and satisfying them so they will recommend and speak highly of the product. I think a lot of people hear about products this way and not even through advertisements. Word of mouth travels quickly so a company can only hope they have prepared enough that what is being said earns them more customers to gain revenue. 

Do you think companies earn more business from advertising or from customers recommending and spreading the word about a product?