Page 12 of 22 FirstFirst ... 27891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 431
Like Tree137Likes
  1. #221  
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post

    That was a management failure - Was their market:

    • The value consumer, looking for a good deal?
    • The Business person - which was Palm's previous demographic?,
    • The Sports fan?, The Student?, The 'Mom'? (remember that one ugh!),
    • Even worse, 'the Mobile Accomplisher'? (whatever that was supposed to be)
    • The geek?
    • The Yoga loving, Riverstone carrying nature guy?
    • People attracted to the Borg Queen?



    C
    What you are listing is not marketing. It is research.
    mister2d likes this.
  2. #222  
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    Read the links, they will explain everything.
    They don't actually.

    Why not answer the question as you asked me to do?
  3. #223  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    Please stop with your incorrect, self important insults.
    Not intended to be an insult. You used the analogy of a horse and water. It is a good metaphor. Marketing identifies who would be a thirsty horse, the advertising component leads it the water. Without good marketing, you can get horses, but they are not thirsty ones.

    How is that insulting after you've told a number of us how we don't understand business, marketing or sales when all of my comment are consistent with references I have posted?

    So not an insult (I will apologize of you feel insulted), not self important (verified by definition), and correct (also by definition). So if this is all you have, there is no use in going further.

    I'm saying HP failed on a marketing and management level. You disagree? Make your case, and leave out the name calling.
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  4. #224  
    What are you claiming was the pitiful marketing - if you are separating it from advertising?

    What do you believe was the advertising component?
    Rnld, you are flailing. There is clearly a difference between the two with advertising being part of an overall market strategy. Cheer up. I used them interchangeably before also. After this bit of knowledge I will try not to make that mistake again.

    C-Note, I have to disagree with you slightly on this one. In the case of the Pre, both the marketing strategy and advertising were pitiful. What did any of the activity the weird bleach white lady in the commercial was doing have to do with selling a phone? What was the point of those commercials anyway? Sprint's commercials were better, but their marketing demographic was to woman, particularly Moms. The TouchPad commercials were slightly better, but the marketing strategy was off. HP should have stuck to marketing the TouchPad to prosumers and not consumers since it obviously could not compete in that app crazy environment. HP should have concentrated their efforts on email, document editing, point of sales software, security, administration, and specialty apps. Prosumers place higher value on items that are business related, which would have justified the cost of the device.
    HP was well suited for that market and Apple was not which would have leveled the playing field in their competition with each other. Slowly introduce consumer related services and apps (like they are doing now) and prosumers would have rejoiced from getting more use out of the device instead of dealing with consumers saying "it's about time" or "it's too late".

    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
  5. #225  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    What you are listing is not marketing. It is research.
    From the Wiki entry:

    Marketing is used to identify the customer, satisfy the customer, and keep the customer.

    I think that is research.
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  6. #226  
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    Not intended to be an insult. You used the analogy of a horse and water. It is a good metaphor. Marketing identifies who would be a thirsty horse, the advertising component leads it the water. Without good marketing, you can get horses, but they are not thirsty ones.
    You don't seem to understand product marketing. The marketing of a product is actually encompasses the entire "release".
  7. #227  
    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    From the Wiki entry:

    Marketing is used to identify the customer, satisfy the customer, and keep the customer.

    I think that is research.
    Whoever wrote that has never marketed a product to retail or been part of a marketing department.
  8. #228  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post

    C-Note, I have to disagree with you slightly on this one. In the case of the Pre, both the marketing strategy and advertising were pitiful. What did any of the activity the weird bleach white lady in the commercial was doing have to do with selling a phone? What was the point of those commercials anyway? Sprint's commercials were better, but their marketing demographic was to woman, particularly Moms. The TouchPad commercials were slightly better, but the marketing strategy was off. HP should have stuck to marketing the TouchPad to prosumers and not consumers since it obviously could not compete in that app crazy environment. HP should have concentrated their efforts on email, document editing, point of sales software, security, administration, and specialty apps. Prosumers place higher value on items that are business related, which would have justified the cost of the device.
    HP was well suited for that market and Apple was not which would have leveled the playing field in their competition with each other. Slowly introduce consumer related services and apps (like they are doing now) and prosumers would have rejoiced from getting more use out of the device instead of dealing with consumers saying "it's about time" or "it's too late".

    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)

    Good point, I think it got better by HP time, but the market identification was so much worse, the ads were not going to be able to help.

    Imagine if they would have gone after the business user with a solid device and even just a solid core suite of business tools? They might be flipping places with RIM right now, taking the majority of what they have been losing over the last few years.

    Problem with the Touchpad is that outside of e-readers and entertainment focused stuff, there is not much of a market. So it either make your own e-reader (that is partner with an Amazon BEFORE they decided to go for it), or do the loss leader thing to gain marketshare. Apple owns the entertainment market hands down, that is what HP tried to go for. It was a mistake.

    C
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  9. #229  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    Whoever wrote that has never marketed a product to retail or been part of a marketing department.
    Yeah, and every business school in the country (and most dictionaries) are wrong too.
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  10. #230  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    Rnld, you are flailing. There is clearly a difference between the two with advertising being part of an overall market strategy. Cheer up. I used them interchangeably before also. After this bit of knowledge I will try not to make that mistake again.

    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
    I'm very cheerful and making a claim that I am flailing is laughable.

    It's my bad however as it appears that I am "arguing" with students.
  11. #231  
    @K4ever,

    Let's move this to a higher plane. What do you think would have be a better marketing plan than the one they Palm /HP chose to use? Obviously, anything would have been better

    C
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  12. #232  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    Rnld, you are flailing. There is clearly a difference between the two with advertising being part of an overall market strategy. Cheer up. I used them interchangeably before also. After this bit of knowledge I will try not to make that mistake again.

    C-Note, I have to disagree with you slightly on this one. In the case of the Pre, both the marketing strategy and advertising were pitiful. What did any of the activity the weird bleach white lady in the commercial was doing have to do with selling a phone? What was the point of those commercials anyway? Sprint's commercials were better, but their marketing demographic was to woman, particularly Moms. The TouchPad commercials were slightly better, but the marketing strategy was off. HP should have stuck to marketing the TouchPad to prosumers and not consumers since it obviously could not compete in that app crazy environment. HP should have concentrated their efforts on email, document editing, point of sales software, security, administration, and specialty apps. Prosumers place higher value on items that are business related, which would have justified the cost of the device.
    HP was well suited for that market and Apple was not which would have leveled the playing field in their competition with each other. Slowly introduce consumer related services and apps (like they are doing now) and prosumers would have rejoiced from getting more use out of the device instead of dealing with consumers saying "it's about time" or "it's too late".

    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
    Times are a changing...

    'Bring your own device' programs give Apple a boost in the enterprise | TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog

    It goes back to what I have been saying. Build products that are simple to use, built well, and just works and you will have a successful product. And now with companies starting to allow people to use their personal products at work, what you were saying about what HP should target with prosumers wouldn't work out so well.
  13. #233  
    Quote Originally Posted by nusome4 View Post
    Times are a changing...

    'Bring your own device' programs give Apple a boost in the enterprise | TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog

    It goes back to what I have been saying. Build products that are simple to use, built well, and just works and you will have a successful product. And now with companies starting to allow people to use their personal products at work, what you were saying about what HP should target with prosumers wouldn't work out so well.
    Perhaps, but there are more than one path to success. Apple and Google followed different strategies and both have found success. But point well taken, the fact that software bugs are early Palm products is typically improved with updates shows that they could have just as well got the software working before they put stuff out. Crappy hardware is inexcusable.

    I'd have to agree on the prosumer thing, It would be a tough market to crack. In the tablet space they would have to create it. A tall order for a company that can't keep a release schedule.

    K4ever, if you mean prosumer like in cameras ,for example, they would need to build in features beyond what are in mainstream tablets to justify the tag.


    C
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  14. #234  
    That's just your opinion, not everyone's opinion.



    Give some examples of a mediocre product that succeeded over a product that failed that was supposed to be better.

    Please don't use Apple, because a product is more than just specs that are better. Apple makes products for the masses that are easy to use, well designed, and just works and not for geeks that want to tinker.

    Just for added clarification, JD Power and Associates does surveys on all kinds of products from the masses on how they rate the products they use...

    Gadgetbox - iPhone again No. 1 in customer satisfaction: J.D. Power



    I don't think a mediocre product gets rated highest 6 times in a row.

    Looking forward to your list.
    Despite your attempt to limit my choices, I will still use Apple in my example. Windows succeeded despite being buggy and deeply flawed from the beginning. Microsoft used some very shady tactics to get costumers and keep them, strong arming hardware makers and stealing technology from competitors that were too weak to challenge them in court. Windows 1 through 3 were disasters. Windows 95, 98, and ME were only ment for stand alone computers and lacked the security required to connect to wide area networks. It wasn't until Microsoft designed a desktop operating system (Windows XP) around there network operation system (Windows NT/2000) kernel that we started to see the stability and security that other operating systems had. Which they promptly screwed up with Windows Vista and fixed by removing some of the overhead to make Windows 7. Mediocre product line, excellent and cut throat management, excellent marketing, highly successful.

    Apple has for the most part always made great desktop computers and dominated the field early on. However, do to poor management decisions in the late '80s/early '90s they lost that dominance. Their market share plummeted to 4% of the total PC market and stayed that way for close to 15 years. The products were superior in ease of use, security, looked good, and were ahead of their time in some aspects, yet they were relegated to a niche market. They were not resurgent in the PC market until 2007. They are still way behind Windows PCs today despite the resurgence. Great superior products, poor management (until Jobs regained control of the company), non-existent or little advertisement, not successful (4% of market share vs 90%).



    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
    C-Note likes this.
  15. #235  
    Good point, I think it got better by HP time, but the market identification was so much worse, the ads were not going to be able to help.

    Imagine if they would have gone after the business user with a solid device and even just a solid core suite of business tools? They might be flipping places with RIM right now, taking the majority of what they have been losing over the last few years.

    Problem with the Touchpad is that outside of e-readers and entertainment focused stuff, there is not much of a market. So it either make your own e-reader (that is partner with an Amazon BEFORE they decided to go for it), or do the loss leader thing to gain marketshare. Apple owns the entertainment market hands down, that is what HP tried to go for. It was a mistake.

    C
    I always wondered what happened to the 500 enterprise related apps that HP engineers were suppose to have ready for webOS once new device were released. Remember that statement/promise?


    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
  16. #236  
    Quote Originally Posted by k4ever View Post
    Despite your attempt to limit my choices, I will still use Apple in my example. Windows succeeded despite being buggy and deeply flawed from the beginning. Microsoft used some very shady tactics to get costumers and keep them, strong arming hardware makers and stealing technology from competitors that were too weak to challenge them in court. Windows 1 through 3 were disasters. Windows 95, 98, and ME were only ment for stand alone computers and lacked the security required to connect to wide area networks. It wasn't until Microsoft designed a desktop operating system (Windows XP) around there network operation system (Windows NT/2000) kernel that we started to see the stability and security that other operating systems had. Which they promptly screwed up with Windows Vista and fixed by removing some of the overhead to make Windows 7. Mediocre product line, excellent and cut throat management, excellent marketing, highly successful.

    Apple has for the most part always made great desktop computers and dominated the field early on. However, do to poor management decisions in the late '80s/early '90s they lost that dominance. Their market share plummeted to 4% of the total PC market and stayed that way for close to 15 years. The products were superior in ease of use, security, looked good, and were ahead of their time in some aspects, yet they were relegated to a niche market. They were not resurgent in the PC market until 2007. They are still way behind Windows PCs today despite the resurgence. Great superior products, poor management (until Jobs regained control of the company), non-existent or little advertisement, not successful (4% of market share vs 90%).



    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
    This may be the best post of the day!
    "Sometimes I feel like an OS-less child..."
    (with apologies to Billie Holiday )
  17. #237  
    Times are a changing...

    'Bring your own device' programs give Apple a boost in the enterprise | TUAW - The Unofficial Apple Weblog

    It goes back to what I have been saying. Build products that are simple to use, built well, and just works and you will have a successful product. And now with companies starting to allow people to use their personal products at work, what you were saying about what HP should target with prosumers wouldn't work out so well.
    I agree with what your are saying in the second sentence of your last paragraph.

    Consumers have always tried to bring their products to work, only to be denied by management. If the product lacks the security features required by IT, it is not getting on the corporate network unless it is heavily sandboxed. Plus if you are on the network, you lose some of your rights to the data stored on your device because if there is security violation IT reserves the right to remote wipe the device and you are required to be in compliance with all of the software policies regarding the network. Now if you just want to bring your device to the office and do some light work, that has always been alright. However if you want to access the corporate server, all bets are off. These stories are great, but are hardly the norm. Apple has been putting out stories like this for a while now, especially with the iPhone.


    ---Sent from my HP TouchPad using Communities (a great webOS app!)
  18. #238  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    What you are listing is not marketing. It is research.
    Yes, in order to decide your marketing strategy (who you are marketing to, what does that group require from your product) you need to do research. Once you decide who you will market to, tailor your advertising and product towards that demographic. Palm and HP did not have a clear marketing demographic. They were all over the place.
  19. #239  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    You are incorrect. The marketing of a product may be advertising heavy, but it's still the marketing of the product.
    But advertising is part of marketing a product. They are two different things. One complements the other and is part of the other's strategy.
  20. #240  
    Quote Originally Posted by rnld View Post
    Whoever wrote that has never marketed a product to retail or been part of a marketing department.
    From businessdictionary.com:

    marketing

    Definition

    The management process through which goods and services move from concept to the customer. As a practice, it consists in coordination of four elements called 4P's: (1) identification, selection, and development of a product, (2) determination of its price, (3) selection of a distribution channel to reach the customer's place, and (4) development and implementation of a promotional strategy.


    What is marketing? definition and meaning

    and...

    advertising

    Definition

    The activity or profession of producing information for promoting the sale of commercial products or services.


    What is advertising? definition and meaning

    Advertising is part of the promotional strategy for the product, which is an element of marketing, not marketing as a whole. Advertising is part of the overall marketing strategy, but it is not marketing.

Posting Permissions