If you are the `LAST PERSON ON THIS EARTH'....what would you do????

If you are the `LAST PERSON ON THIS EARTH'....what would you do????

Adam was the first person ....

Imagine a situation , a very hypothetical one , all the people in the world have vanished and you are the sole survivor on this planet, The last person!!!

What comes to your mind in such a situation, what would you do???

let your thoughts flow.... :))

I guess that would be an excuse to finally watch some movies such as - "Castaway", and finally pay attention when watching "Terminator 3 - Rise of the Machines" .

Then grab all the books of the "Rama" series by Arthur C Clarke & Gentry Lee and read them at leisure. Diligently flip through "Contact" by Carl Sagan, etc.

However, on more serious note after reading all the previous posts I was intrigued by the lack of companionship that people would feel in such a situation. Hardly, anyone mentions family or friends or displays any empathy on whatever may have happened to them. Everyone seems to be thankful that they finally get to be alone... Quite an interesting though very subtle and implicit comment on our global society, since this is a global forum.

"Mercy killing of Brands... Pros & Cons"

A really thought provoking issue. Secondly, what a question... probably good enough for a Phd dissertation in marketing.

Anyway, to keep it simple and see other viewpoints also. My take is fairly simple - business is there to provide a return on capital employed, when there is no significant return on the capital employed either in the short or long term the business should be liquidated. Obviously, this is a very simplified scenario, hopefully all due diligence is done and all tangible and intangible cost benefit scenarios have been objectively evaluated.

If after doing all the above there is a negative trend for future ROI yes by all means the brand should be killed, otherwise it will negatively impact the overall business, giving a perception that not just one brand is doing poorly, but the entire business is also subject to the same malaise.

To touch upon GM, in my opinion they were too slow and too late in pulling the plug on - Oldsmobile, and even to some extent are doing the same with Buick now. GM makes some of the best vehicles around technology wise, but their perception is that of a stodgy car manufacturer.

The reason you think of "mercy killing" or using the proper term in my opinion "euthanasia", for a brand at-least, would be mainly because the product, service, and it's communication is no longer relevant to the market audience the - consumer. So removing any support would not really have a backlash from the customer. If enough consumers really wanted to use the product or service you wouldn't be thinking about "mercy killing" a brand.

If you look through the marketing history of the major FMCG organizations worldwide there are numerous instances of killing off various brands and not all of them mercifully! In 1993 Phillip Morris Companies, killed off their corporate name when they renamed themselves Altria.

Sometimes there are perfectly good reasons to initiate the killing of established brands, this may sound quite shocking, but look at the marketing from Microsoft which has a history of such behaviour. BTW, I do not want to get into discussing the merits of the product itself.

In 1995 they purposely killed "Windows X.1" OS to introduce "Windows 95". Then in 1998 they killed "Windows 95" to introduce "Windows 98". In 2000 they killed "Windows 98" to introduce "Windows ME". In 2001 they killed "Windows ME" to bring out "Windows XP", and this year they officially killed "Windows XP" to introduce "Windows Vista".

In each cycle of killing off a major brand MS had a perfectly good product at the stage and an established revenue stream that generated billions of dollars, yet they chose to start completely afresh rather than create a line extension.

The above was done as part of a planned strategy known as phased obsolescence, which is based on the theory that if one rests on their laurels too long someone will come and eat their cake, so rather than have that happen one eats their own cake and goes out searching for more. Again another simplistic viewpoint, but it should get the message across.

Hopefully, that provides some fodder for thought. There will never be a right or wrong answer to a query like this, only hindsight will make us comment more on the merits and demerits of each.

"What Consumers Want... As a Marketer if you had the power to know..."

As a professional in the "Product Development" business I get to hear and know all the time, directly from consumers, middle men, sales reps, etc.; what kind of products and services the consumers want and desire.

However, as a person with operational and fiscal responsibility towards my company I have to evaluate objectively whether I 'can' and more importantly 'want' to respond to those demands by putting out a product/service that is financially viable for us, and meets the needs to the consumer also.

In my opinion the reason the marketing landscape is littered with stories of failed products and services is because marketers put too much faith in listening to what the consumer wants. Most marketer's also forget way to often and conveniently how fickle the consumer is and what they want and need is a puzzling dynamic to the consumer themselves.

If you see the most common and basic service almost all consumers want across the globe is 'good supportive customer service', however almost every major global organization fails to deliver on that one service repeatedly. Even the ones that have failed or are failing on this count were once evangelical about the merits of deploying good supportive customer service, yet have in the long term determined that 'not' offering good supportive customer service does not alienate customers once a significant user base has been built up. Is there a certain loss of dissatisfied users - absolutely, however the gain from new customers more than offsets the potential losses due to consolidation and lack of competition that is now becoming rampant in various industries.

What all consumers want is choice, but due to market dynamics and governmental regulations we keep limiting that option. So in the end do we really want to listen to the consumer or just use that as an excuse to gain false empathy with the consumer, similar to the way Mel Gibson used his powers in the movie? Point to ponder....

"Brands on Steroids"

Brands on 'roids' quite an interesting concept...

Brands are built and nurtured in relation to the corporate business philosophy to execute a business plans, having said that let's examine the concept.

Usually, a branding plan is strategic in nature and to introduce a new greenfield product / service a 'nurturing' approach strategy may be employed to gain market traction in response to whatever opportunities and constraints that may have been evaluated by the business unit.

Sometimes a branding plan may be tactical in nature, to either be a offensive or defensive response to market opportunities, due to this issue you may see the emergence of - 'Brands on Steroids' syndrome. Sometimes the defensive or offensive tactical moves may open up significant opportunities for the brand to move in the limelight and from a tactical launch it may morph into long term strategic role, but still employing the original tactical moves that brought it in the limelight. The above would be the disciplined and rational explanation to the 'Brands on 'roids' syndrome.

However, as mentioned there are definitely situations when due to a change in management focus or to maximise short term revenue generation you may observe the same syndrome. When you see 'Brands on 'roids' in such a scenario quite often they follow the way of 'Humans on 'roids' , a brief spark and glimpse of a meteoric rise and then discarded and forgotten in the depths of oblivion once the spark is extinguished.

How can the next president better help small business and entrepreneurs thrive?

Ravi Deva wrote: On 9/20/07 11:27 AM, Ravi Deva wrote: -------------------- Thank you for your personal response. I wasn't expecting any kind of acknowledgment from anyone, but it gives me a glimmer of hope that quite possibly some is at-least willing reach out and hear the opinions of the masses in an uncontrolled setting. Who knows I might even vote for Mr.Obama, he seems to be the most viable candidate out there right now in the Democratic party, plus he represents Illinois my home state. Thank you, Ravi On 9/20/07 10:56 AM, Barack Obama wrote: -------------------- Thanks for participating in Barack's question on LinkedIn Answers – we apologize for the delay in response. We received an incredible number of thoughtful answers, and our campaign will continue to review all of these answers in the days ahead. Barack is committed to helping small businesses and believes they are at the heart of the American economy. He is committed to expanding opportunities and easing the everyday pressures so many businesses face by cutting their health care costs, improving access to capital, and investing in innovation and development. He plans to fix our health care crisis and enable more small businesses to provide affordable care to their employees. He will expand loan programs for small businesses and create a national network of public-private business incubators. He also will invest in women-owned businesses, increase minority access to capital, increase supports for businesses in rural areas, and work to close the digital divide that limits the growth potential of many urban and rural small businesses. We appreciate immensely your willingness to share your insights and suggestions on these issues and your help in achieving these goals. For more information on Barack ideas for improving America visit: www.barackobama.com/issues Thanks, Scott & Becky @ Obama HQ On 9/13/07 9:41 AM, Ravi Deva wrote: -------------------- For small business to truly survive - create a level playing field for all entrepreneurs and businesses. Just because big business has the deep pockets to hire lobbyists and propel their agenda through the executive branch is the biggest impediment for the survival of small business. Create an environment where there is oversight in the real sense for "MEGA" corporations so that they cannot create barriers for free and fair competition with their smaller rivals with the help of big government. Small business does not require sops and platitudes, most of the people who start small businesses do so not because big business is incapable of providing new services, but because it will "NOT" provide new services in a reasonable manner and also because it is too busy trying to protect its turf. Fix the Financial System and Commerce Policy! We are the world's biggest economy, but our fiscal and commerce policy is worse than that of the under-developed nations, not because we do not have the resources, but because we do not have the will to do the right thing. We have been lurching from one financial disaster since almost the last 25years - the S&L crisis, Stock market crash '87, business downturn and internet bubble '90's, and now the real estate and mortgage crisis. What gives? You really don't expect us to believe that big government didn't see this coming to prevent it from happening. Not that I want big government to interfere in everything, but it still does so for the most useless of scenarios so it might as well do so in things that matter! Stop the outsourcing and off shoring of everything otherwise in the long term the entire country will be a hollow shell with no economic activity. How can a small business thrive in the this country when it has to abide by the laws on the this state against a business that thrives in an environment of chaos overseas, without any regard to US protections for safety, environment, respect for personal dignity, etc. That is not fair competition. What will large corporations do next when the cost for off shoring and outsourcing to China and India become sky-high. Move those services and manufacturing to the poverty stricken African continent or some other low cost place because they can do it for cheaper than the Indians or Chinese? Think of the long term when making decisions not just for the duration of your - Presidential Term! Ravi Question Details: -------------------- How can the next president better help small business and entrepreneurs thrive?

Catching Up

It's been a while since I last blogged, I'll try to reproduce some of my thoughts from this missing period.

Ravi