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.