Question 1
The Coca Cola Company utilized different strategies in
Europe and Australia compared to North America. In Europe Coke Zero was
positioned as a “diet drink” and in North America it was positioned as a “low calorie drink”. Do you
believe it was an appropriate strategy? Could Coke have used the same
positioning strategy in both geographic areas? If so, which should they have
used? If no, why?
I believe that labeling a product as a "low calorie drink" leaves the more health-minded Americans to believe that there is less "bad stuff" in the product. Now, I'm not sure what folks in Europe think about "zero calorie" products, but I know that most Americans would think to themselves, "Man, there must be some serious crap in there". That being said, I still think that both brands of the product would work in either market.
Question 2
This case discusses some aspects of the study of consumer
behavior that have drawn criticism from observers. Coke Zero created a “fake
blog” to generate interest in The Zero Movement. Was this unethical?I don't know that having a fake account is necessarily unethical, but it definitely not what I expect from Coca-Cola. As I've learned Coke invented freakin' Santa Claus, more or less, and branded him as their own for the rest of eternity. So, on a side note, I guess there is Coca-Cola in heaven. I think that this looks more desperate than anything else, but I don't discredit them at all most likely because it doesn't really bother me.
Question 3
Find a similar product that has launched or promoted itself
in a way, which has drawn criticism. Explain its success or failure from a
consumer’s point of view.
The obvious candidate here is Pepsi! They have been doing all that they can to provide a zero calorie complement to "Coke Zero" besides their own "Diet Pepsi". Since the release of Coke Zero, Pepsi has introduced two new drinks that claim the "low- calorie beverage" title starting with "Pepsi Max" and more recently, "Pepsi Next". We'll see how these two take off in the near future, but I find that they are sort of competing with themselves. Maybe that is a good strategy though, after all. If you think about it, the more options, the better, right? Because someone can choose their beverage based on several factors:
Zero calories, no caffeine- Caffeine Free Diet Pepsi
Zero calories, caffeine- Diet Pepsi
Zero calories, about twice the caffeine- Pepsi Max
Calories, sugar, caffeine- Pepsi
Calories, sugar, no caffeine- Caffeine Free Pepsi
60% of the calories, 60% of the sugar, caffeine- Pepsi Next
So, whereas this might look like Pepsi is taking away from their own product, they're ultimately just putting more money into their own pockets by providing more options. After all, whether Diet or regular, or whatever, it all goes to the same place for Pepsi.
This case discusses some aspects of the study of consumer behavior that have drawn criticism from some observers. Coke Zero created a 'fake blog' to generate interest in The Zero Movement. Was this unethical?
ReplyDeleteWhy not? Is creating a "fake blog" any different than paying bloggers or sponsoring content online?
Delete