I seem to be hung up on Apple. Recently came across a mention of Apple being retailed at Wal-Mart!
Is this consumerism or what? There is a line, and I do think that it is a thick line, between repositioning and dethroning. Wonder why it is difficult to tread the line then?
We live in a world of balanced equations. This balance is not brought about by natural symmetry but by balancing variables. 'x', to put it simply. Whilst repositioning a product line, this equanimity is artificially induced. The variable 'x' is what adjusts itself to maintain the balance. A lot of marketers fail to acknowledge the impact of x. X for Apple, might well be the process of dethroning the iPhone, a product at its infancy state, in terms of PLC.
A lot of purchases are linked to the “aspiration” rationale of the customer. Apple happens to be an enterprise which feeds on such aspirations. The Apple iPhone is just that. An aspiration, a must have, a bling gadget, a connoisseurs possession. The grapevine has it that Wal-Mart is in talks of retailing the iPhone. It has been brought to my attention that the model on the shelf would be pruned version of Apple’s original masterpiece, as this would be a 4GB communicator priced in true Wal-Mart tradition at USD 99.
A lot of purchases as I had mentioned earlier are based on exclusivity. While you might come across a lot of ‘me-too’s’, post the launch of the iPhone, it still has managed to beat competition hollow. That is a commendable feat, considering the average ‘recollection coefficient’ in the telecommunication market, is comparable with that of Drew Barrymore in Fifty First Dates. That it still able to garner attention is commendable.
But, liquidating its exclusivity for deeper penetration might not be called for. To my recollection, competitors include, Research in Motion’s Storm and Samsung’s Instinct. Both are laggards with respect to brand value, design, or penetration. The move to my understanding can be termed tactical; however the need of the hour is Strategy. In today’s market being tactical is akin to being tacky and instinctive.
Echoing Motley Fool’s sentiments, sacrificing profitability and high-end appeal, for a greater market share might turn out to be hara-kiri. Nokia, a market leader in terms of market share, has discovered that the hard way. The smart man learns from other's mistakes. And Job is smart to say the least. Unless he can prolong his Midas touch (w.r.t shareholder returns) with this move as well, Apple would be doing itself and its stakeholders a lot of good, by abating their twitching tentacles.
By coming out with stripped down versions, the life cycle of the original product receives a shock, welcome or otherwise. Its natural trajectory gets interrupted and this creates ripples in investor returns. That a futuristic product such as the iPhone needs this kind of duplication within its ranks is not easy to comprehend. For the sake of a company as revolutionary as Apple, I hope I do not start a rant some time in future muttering, 'I told you so....!'
Is this consumerism or what? There is a line, and I do think that it is a thick line, between repositioning and dethroning. Wonder why it is difficult to tread the line then?
We live in a world of balanced equations. This balance is not brought about by natural symmetry but by balancing variables. 'x', to put it simply. Whilst repositioning a product line, this equanimity is artificially induced. The variable 'x' is what adjusts itself to maintain the balance. A lot of marketers fail to acknowledge the impact of x. X for Apple, might well be the process of dethroning the iPhone, a product at its infancy state, in terms of PLC.
A lot of purchases are linked to the “aspiration” rationale of the customer. Apple happens to be an enterprise which feeds on such aspirations. The Apple iPhone is just that. An aspiration, a must have, a bling gadget, a connoisseurs possession. The grapevine has it that Wal-Mart is in talks of retailing the iPhone. It has been brought to my attention that the model on the shelf would be pruned version of Apple’s original masterpiece, as this would be a 4GB communicator priced in true Wal-Mart tradition at USD 99.
A lot of purchases as I had mentioned earlier are based on exclusivity. While you might come across a lot of ‘me-too’s’, post the launch of the iPhone, it still has managed to beat competition hollow. That is a commendable feat, considering the average ‘recollection coefficient’ in the telecommunication market, is comparable with that of Drew Barrymore in Fifty First Dates. That it still able to garner attention is commendable.
But, liquidating its exclusivity for deeper penetration might not be called for. To my recollection, competitors include, Research in Motion’s Storm and Samsung’s Instinct. Both are laggards with respect to brand value, design, or penetration. The move to my understanding can be termed tactical; however the need of the hour is Strategy. In today’s market being tactical is akin to being tacky and instinctive.
Echoing Motley Fool’s sentiments, sacrificing profitability and high-end appeal, for a greater market share might turn out to be hara-kiri. Nokia, a market leader in terms of market share, has discovered that the hard way. The smart man learns from other's mistakes. And Job is smart to say the least. Unless he can prolong his Midas touch (w.r.t shareholder returns) with this move as well, Apple would be doing itself and its stakeholders a lot of good, by abating their twitching tentacles.
By coming out with stripped down versions, the life cycle of the original product receives a shock, welcome or otherwise. Its natural trajectory gets interrupted and this creates ripples in investor returns. That a futuristic product such as the iPhone needs this kind of duplication within its ranks is not easy to comprehend. For the sake of a company as revolutionary as Apple, I hope I do not start a rant some time in future muttering, 'I told you so....!'
No comments:
Post a Comment