By Molly Sunderdick
Motorola Chairman/CEO, Ed Zander had some harsh words for Apple regarding the simultaneous release of the iPod nano with the Motorola ROKR, but, more importantly, he had admonition for his own brand as well. Having a lot of previous success with the RAZR, the ultra sleek and stylish flip phone, Motorola believed it had permission to take the next step in production: phone + music. What Motorola failed to recognize is that brand permission relies upon the perspective of the customer, not product offering.
Zander publicly admitted, “People were looking for an iPod…we may have missed the marketing message there.” The moment a small handheld device is paired with iTunes, consumers expect no less than iPod. There is no replacement for the “sexy” design of the iPod, and with the release of the nano, an even thinner, elegant shape, the ROKR was left looking “like another cell phone.” RAZR was successful because it was a cell phone that challenged the design of cell phones; it was a brand that claimed, “you can do better.” Consumers were even more disappointed when they discovered the ROKR only held 100 songs (because their iPods held at least ten times that much). In fact, research shows that the phone is being returned at a rate three to six times the industry average.
At a glance, the TV advertising for the ROKR was misleading as well. Actors in the commercials walked down the street listening to music while their shadows and reflections danced in the background. When the phone rang, the shadows and reflections returned to normal. While clever and pleasing to watch, the commercials mimicked the iPod/iTunes commercials too closely, bringing the images of the black silhouettes against the simple colored screen backgrounds to mind. Immediately, the customer set higher brand standards than the ROKR could ever achieve. The customer wanted iPod.
Even after selling a quarter of a million ROKR phones in the third quarter, the ROKR is still seen as a failure because customer beliefs and trends were not considered. As a result, behaviors were not inspired to change. Motorola does not have the same permission of the iPod. iPod completely redefined an entire category (MP3s), becoming the must-have music player within the marketscape of electronics. In fact, if the idea of phone + music was the real vision, iPod should have then branded a phone. In this case, the brand needs to be iPod in order for the customer to feel important and identified. Motorola’s focus was completely upon product benefits. Motorola needs to understand that product offering is what it is; brand is what the consumer is.
At Stealing Share we heavily promote the concept of brand strategy over the table stakes of price, product attributes and sales propositions. Table stakes may work for a short time, but eventually everyone makes the same offers, asks for the same amount of money and satisfies market demands in order to merely stay above water. Brand trumps this stagnant consumer cycle, adding personal connection, commitment and identification to the purchase decision. If Motorola had a stronger brand, or continued to create products more like the RAZR, perhaps the time would come when the brand was able to diversify into the music realm. Right now, Motorola is a phone model offered by cell phone providers such as Sprint and Verizon. Motorola would need a completely new position in order to break free from a purely product-driven existence. Apple achieved a higher brand status upon the release of the iPod. With an actual brand identity in addition to a reputation for creative, innovative design, Apple was able to branch out and produce the iPod. Brand is what allows differentiation and long-term loyalty; it allows iPod to be iPod by no other name.
Soon, Apple Computer will get a taste of Motorola’s predicament with iTunes, but on an even larger scale with Intel processors. Incorporating the Intel Inside technology into Apple’s model will prove both challenging and potentially dangerous to the Mac brand. What will Mac need to do with its brand messaging to include Intel, an already potent brand coursing through the market space? Will they need to downplay Intel in order to maintain the integrity of their brand? Or will Mac slowly be converted to an Intel brand? It will be intriguing to see whether the Intel Mac will be a ROKR, RAZR, or iPod. It is difficult to predict whether or not Mac is truly ready for this new addition.
Thus, the battle between brand and product is no fair fight. The success of a product remains in sales numbers while the success of brand expands into every fiber of the business and the consumer. Brand, by nature, will always have the upper hand because it does not stand alone or next to the competition. Brand is placed above product and category with an army of consumers to bolster its every movement within the market.
Molly Sunderdick
Brand Strategist
Stealing Share, Inc |
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Molly_Sunderdick
