Eating habits in a Web 2.0 world

Many aspects of our lives have been impacted by the internet. In our classes, we discuss and debate the effects of technology on the publishing, press, television and radio industries. Good and bad, these consequences have fundamentally changed the way we read, inform and entertain ourselves.

We love to share our favorite quotes and books, devoutly debate a particular piece of news with family or friends, and positively brag about the latest John Mayer album (yep, that's me!). But recently, we have also started to share our favorite recipes and pictures of edible art masterpieces!

Yes the food industry has incredibly benefitted from platforms such as Instagram and Pinterest. But I think there is a fundamental difference between both platforms, as they relate to food.
Instagram nurtures a "bragathon" spirit, where instagrammers snap a picture of their accomplishments and share it with their followers. Cheers and positive reinforcements are highly prized. Food bloggers can also include links with their pictures. Instagram is in fact an additional source of traffic for these blogs.
Pinterest, on the other hand, is the recipes and photographies aggregator - a communal bookmark of items online and offline. "Pinners" love to be challenged and love to learn. In fact, I would love to see some numbers that reflect how Pinterest has affected people's behaviors. One aspect in particular: how many people have taken on cooking or baking?

 

The end of coal?

Burger flipping is a deeply ingrained habit in the American culture. 4th of July, birthdays, engagement parties, a sunny weekend afternoon; any occasion is good enough to fire up the barbecue.

As the market leader, Kingsford Charcoal was comfortably holding 57% of the charcoal market share. Two main product lines - the regular "blue bag" and the instant "red bag" - were sold in different sizes: 10 lbs, 20 lbs, and 48 lbs for the first, and 8 lbs, 15 lbs, and 30 lbs for the latter. Market research and lab tests found the product to be of superior quality than the competition, which justified the price premium commanded. 

In 2001, Clorox's Kingsford Charcoal realized that some things had changed in consumers' habits. The most significant change was that they were now increasingly turning to gas as a substitute for coal. Gas grilling was increasing at a faster rate than coal grilling: between 1996 and 2000, shipments of gas grills increased by 46%, while shipments of coal grills increased by 20%. While grilling on charcoal provided a hands-on experience and greater flavors, grilling on gas presented many more advantages for the consumers:

• Convenience: switching on the gas grill was cleaner and faster than firing up the coal
• Control over cooking temperature
• Shorter cooking times
• Easy to clean up

The switch from coal to gas was also supported by several elements. The first was a general price increase in the charcoal market: between 1999 and 2000, the prices of Kingsford's competitors jumped by 10%. With a steady and almost stagnant price increase, Kingsford was being threatened by competitors' price alignment.

Secondly, companies in the coal market seemed to have strayed from advertising. Kingsford's Media Expense had actually decreased by 33% in 3 years. This meant that consumers' awareness, interest, desire and actions were at the mercy of in-store promotions and activities. 

Another elements related to advertising is in-store promotions: the general price increase left retailers and distributors with a bigger bargaining clout. The temporary price reductions and merchandising decisions were beyond the scope of Kingsford and their competitors.

The final element was truly uncontrollable for the market: the weather. Cold temperatures coupled with rain and snow were not optimal grilling/barbecuing conditions. 

While the current state of the market is the result of the interaction of several factors, Kingsford Charcoal needed to figure out which of the above-mentioned elements contributed the most to the market slowdown. From this analysis, they would be able to develop a strategy, and plan tactical actions. I see several ways that Kingsford could have approached their issue:

• Kingsford Charcoal could have invested in some market research to better define and delimit their product category: are they in the food industry? In the outdoor activities? In the seasonal products? Understanding consumers' perceptions would have helped them better cater to their needs.
• Kingsford Charcoal should could have increased the advertising expenditure and focused the message on the advantages of grilling with coal. As the market leader, this would have been  instrumental in strengthening brand leadership. With Clorox's reserve in increasing the current advertising budget, Kingsford Charcoal would have had to ensure that higher sales volumes would absorb and amortize advertising expenditures.
• Kingsford Charcoal had better increase their prices to sustain their market leadership and perceived product superiority. The most profitable way to increase prices is in fact a total line pricing increase of 5%. This means that consumers shopping at different retailers would encounter similar prices. This 5% price increase would result in the highest projected profits: $1.765 billion.

Works Cited:

Narayandas, D. & Berkley Wagonfeld, A. (2006). Kingsford Charcoal. Boston: Harvard Business Publishing.

Hot Smoke Barbecue Weather Forecast. Retrieved 02/09/2013, from: http://www.hotsmokebbq.com/001profile/weather_forecast.php

IKEA

We had a stimulating class discussion in MKTG 675 on the U.S. "invasion" of the Swedish giant furniture store: IKEA.
IKEA's key success factors include:

• Low prices
• Differentiated products 
• Large product line
• Original store ambience: child care, Swedish food/restaurants
• Strong customer involvement in shopping and assembly

In the highly fragmented U.S. furniture retailing market, it seems that any company wanting to secure and command a strong market share will face a wide spectrum of competitors, from Ethan Allen at the upper-end to Wal-Mart at the lower-end.
The U.S. market is also quite atypical from IKEA's known European markets: they want bigger and more comfortable furniture. They also require the dimensions to be adapted to their own standards: inches and cup sizes, rather than centimeters and liters.
The most challenging issue for IKEA remains an ingrained behavior in the U.S.: Americans fall in love with their furniture and are unlikely to switch to a "commitment-free approach to furniture."

With this status quo (IKEA's traditional practices and American attitudes and behaviors), IKEA's goals of opening 50 stores across the U.S. by 2013 could be more challenging than expected. Growth in the United States will be enabled by the following:

1. Adding the Voice of the Customer into their new product development strategy. When the case study was written in 2003, it seems that IKEA was presenting itself as the Apple Inc. of furniture retailing. However, strong negative reactions to their way of doing things had IKEA adapt its offering to cater the U.S. market's idiosyncrasies.
2. IKEA should accept that the Swedish way is not necessarily the only way. The furniture retailer should acknowledge divergent trends and practices and learn to accommodate and even include them in their value proposition.
   One example of such a possible change for IKEA would be to streamline floor plans and make it easier for customers to jump between departments. Another way would be to increase the number of salespeople on the floor to 

Works Cited:
Moon, Youngme (2004). IKEA Invades America. Boston: Harvard Business Publishing.
Zatel. IKEA. Retrieved February 2nd, 2013, from: http://www.memecenter.com/fun/105936/Ikea

Little brainstorming on the sales-driven social media strategy

This morning I woke up with the intention of truly starting work, but got a little sidetracked reading the New York Times' Technology pages (yes, I AM a proud geek).
I came across this superb article by Jennifer Preston on PepsiCo's bail out of the Super Bowl auction and I have been pondering for the past hour about this strategic choice.
Last year, the soft drinks giant opted to target smaller communities through social media platforms in order to offer something more meaningful than yet another celebrity-endorsed, mass-mediated ad. Their $20 million social campaign project was coined Pepsi Refresh, and they were giving away grants to help various communities see their dreams come true. Here is an example of a project which was enabled by Pepsi's involvement:

Pepsi took a step back and did not make this campaign about its brand, and truly focused on making these projects come together. With the Harvard Business Review stats showing that 1/3 of companies do not even bother measuring the effectiveness of their social media campaign, I cannot help but wonder whether it is really necessary to pick our brains and see how to turn social effects into business and financial measures. Philanthropy is inevitably there to build a greater brand equity and enhance the customer's lifetime value. So why can't we consider social media campaigns as an act of "e-lanthropy"?

By engaging in such actions, companies can show that can be more than a passively watched advertisement on a television, or a mere choice among many on the shelves. Giving the brand a more humane form is a whole new dimension that companies can take advantage of nowadays. It shows that the company truly understands the world in which their consumers live in, without being obtrusive; and what a great word-of-mouth galvaniser...
So, win-win for everyone?

Jennifer Preston's NYT article can be accessed from here: http://nyti.ms/g7YRtE

*Oh Mr Postman, give me a sign!*

The Holiday season this year has been highly disrupted with slushy snow, "arctic" temperatures and angry travellers. This year, I have decided to stay in London for Christmas and New Year's eve, to prepare for the lovely January exams. But for Christmas I decided to take a day off and join my best friend's house.

The Christmas preparation is actually going well, we have decided upon the way we wanted the turkey to be cooked, the Yorkshire puddings, the vegetables and other sides (and of course the millions of well-hidden snacks!). The Christmas tree is beautifully up in the corner of the room, with pretty shiny and colourful decorations and the lights are on almost every night (energy saving!!). Our Disney DVDs are all lined up for Christmas morning, as well as other classic Christmas movies (Miracle on 34th Street, It's a wonderful life, Jack Frost, etc.) Everything is READY!

Buuuuut wait a minute. Something is missing, right? Something that most of us would pretend to be "secondary" to Christmas, but really can't go without at Christmas. Where. are. the. presents?
This year, it seems like everyone around me decided to shop online. In appearance, it seemed more convenient: I simply refuse to fight my way through  the hassle of Christmas shopping for a pair of gloves.

Shopping online, removes all the undesirable "store effects": rapid stock depletion, huge crowds on Oxford Circus, longest queues in the world and irritated staff. For instance, in the case of Amazon, the products are stored in a massive warehouse, or are sold by individual sellers across the world and the only interaction between the seller and buyer is virtual, completed with a succinct online payment and rapid shipment of the products.
The most convenient part of this whole process, is that Mr Postman delivers it all to your doorsteps. However, this year, Mr Weatherman and Mr Postman are in a mood with each other. Planes are not taking off, trains are stuck, cars are not moving. What is this madness?

The sheer disorganisation caused by heavy snowfalls in Europe caused Supermarkets to fully stop online food shopping 2 weeks before Christmas. Many online stores - like ASOS who promised "next day deliveries" - are still facing heavy transport disruptions. They are helpless, and our anger is not groundless: evidently these events will be reflected in plummeting customer satisfaction rates. So, really, who should be blamed? Should fingers be pointed at anybody?
In the U.S, UPS forecast December 22nd to be their busiest day of the year, with 24 million parcels promised to be delivered across the world (Source: Wall Street Journal). Christmas temps and volunteers have been hired during the busiest time of the year, between Thanksgiving and Christmas, and 37,000 people were hired. UPS is one of the very few companies who would go out of their ways to deliver: "best services and lower rates". The UK's Royal Mail has a LOT to learn from private mail and package delivery companies, but also from past experiences; fair enough, we have not had this much snow in over so many years. Still, planning with contingencies, especially for a Holiday season that is always expected to be busy can only be beneficial.
Is the blame only on these companies we always rely on? Not really, maybe we should plan ahead when shopping online for our loved ones. However, in a time when airports have been turned into camping grounds and people are stranded thousands of miles away from home, the spirit of Christmas feels even more jeopardised.
Here's hoping that everyone gets home safe and warm; Christmas is nothing without the ones you love.

Image: ShopsLand.org

The day I discovered Mintcleaner - a little product review prior to usage

Although I am a freak about clean teeth and fresh breath, this is not yet another consumer product promising longer-lasting fresh breath and whiter teeth (although I did fall for it at first). In fact, this genius little gadget has nothing to do with teeth OR breath, it's more about the feet. And technology (another one of my little obsessions).

Mintcleaner, is a revolutionary automatic floor cleaner which only requires you to invest $249 (+ a little extra for the accessories) and never worry again about dust bunnies and annoying breadcrumbs on the floor.
My best friend and I suffer from what we like to exaggeratedly call hair loss and balding contemporary disease. I can't really tell you how many times I have changed my shampoo, serum or curl cream in the past 3 years, because truthfully, all I can remember is the amount of hair I have had to sweep or hoover off the floor (don't be grossed out, it's natural!).

So when I saw the ad for Mint, I started reconsidering my Christmas wish list. This, in simple terms, is AWESOME. . It combines every advancements and technologies which have been incrementally introduced in household cleaning products: it's silent, compact, intelligent and practical.

In a nutshell, we've come a long way from here:


This is also genius because, unlike this 1970s Hoover which glides on the surface, it is self-oriented by a technology usually employed in Marine electronics and sonar sounders.
So, ladies (and gentlemen), are you ready to spare some time? I sure am. Bring on Christmas 2011 already!!




Images from Mint

Ad of the day!

What a stunning commercial.

Every time I see Emily DiDonato's (that's her name) eyes, I melt. I don't think I have ever seen anyone with azure-coloured eyes, and I can officially announce that her - unnameable - color is natural! God I'm jealous...

I have been reading and studying some academic articles for my Marketing Research class and I am currently finishing Reynolds et al's (1998) article on laddering. Without boring you with the 30 pages of the article, it relates to the qualitative in-depth interviews designed to understand what motivates consumers' choices and purchases of a product or a brand. Although the article was published 22 years ago, it is still incredibly contemporary to understand consumers and start "classifying" or segmenting consumers, according to the values they derive from product attributes.

Well, that's the end of me showing off I did understand the article. But really, how does it relate to the Giorgio Armani ad? I wanted to test the theory on myself, to try and understand what drives my purchase of perfumes.

Although I am a huge fan of their adverts, I am not exactly a fan of the Aqua di Gioa perfume. I Actually have been spraying 5 magical drops of Nina Ricci's Nina everyday for the past 3 years. It was a beautiful gift from my father and I have become addicted to the red apple-shaped flacon.

The innocent-looking actress/model in the Nina ads casts the image of "Temptation". Ahhh... perfumes and their relentless drive to call upon the power of Myths to convince us! It's fairly simple, isn't it? We are presented with a modern version of Eve, captivated only by the apple-shaped glass flask hanging from a bare tree. The rest doesn't matter.

According to the above-mentioned theory, by looking into the product attributes, the consequences of these attributes on consumers and finally deriving the personal values attached, Marketers are able to understand our motivations. The article, however, fails to mention Maslow's Hierarchy of needs from his "Theory of Human motivation" (1943).

Ok, so enough theory for now. Hmmmm, so what do I like about Nina?

1) Well first of all, it smells nothing like an apple. I love the delicate and distinct the wood scent.

2) Nina isn't a strong perfume. When I compare it to fragrances like Dior Addict or Pure Poison, I like how "younger" it is.

3) After 3 years, I love that my friends and family recognise me with my perfume, and that whenever they smell it somewhere they let me know that they are thinking of me.

So what's the take-away? I think it's important to understand what each of us looks for in a product, and what benefits we derive from it. Most of the time, when asked "why does this product matter to you?", a common answer is "I don't know, I just like how it makes me feel".

I personally love to know what makes me tick, simply because it helps me understand what motivates me to spend (my scarce, student budgeted) money.