|
|  |
| |
|
| | The Marketing, Channels/Partnership & Sales Execs Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts | | re: re: Unique selling propositions are not strategic | Views: 918 | | Dec 13, 2004 3:21 pm | | re: re: Unique selling propositions are not strategic | # | 
Jim Masen | | Nancy,
I agree with most of what you said. However, what I find interesting is the assumption that everything is emotionally driven. Personally, there are products sets for me that have absolutely no emotional content. It is a performance based decision. I have no emotional commitment over what apples, razor blades, medicine, toilet paper, light bulbs, hammers, or pens I use. They either work or they don't. Thus, build an emotional personality where the user is suppose to believe something that may or may not be delivered by the product (could be delivered by the person's psyche) and be charged a premium for this, is close to being fraudulent if not farsical. But, I will admit that I learned early to shop around the perimeter of a grocery store and rarely in the aisles. Some mass merchants feel the same way about the merchandise they carry. Wal Mart is a prime example, they almost don't care what you call the product, because nothing is more important than the Wal Mart Brand.
It's an anti-gestalt approach for Wal Mart. The sum of it's parts will never be greater than the whole. In fact, Wal Mart is know for approaching Chinese manufacturers and asking them to fill in a product gap at a specific price point, because a branded product refused to conform to the Wal Mart cost and branding policies. They even tell manufacturers there will be no Co-Op advertising for the manufacturer to brand their products.
The only other point you make that is sort of a chicken and the egg statement is that you have to get the money before you can make cost savings. Your production costs can't be too high or no-one will buy the product, regardless of the emotional component.
I don't believe Chen's point that USP are "basically a cost-saving measure to create branding. It is too expensive to make sure that a consumer remembers the multiple selling propositions, so one is selected and promoted." For me, a USP tells me why I should buy product X. For example, I use an Apple computer, because they work without failing, easy to use, works across all computing platforms, and has almost flawless customer support. Another example would be Volvo's safety advertisement where they show a Volvo can be rolled over and then being driven away. If there are "multiple" selling propositions, then either the marketing strategy needs attention to ensure the proper USP hits the proper recipient or the product strategy needs to be address to ensure that the product is not a "horse designed by committe" or to see what benefit or value the product is bringing to the targeted end user.
Jim Masen
> Nancy Fraser wrote:
> Chen,
>You are right when you say that USP is usually not very strategic, but that is not do with USP, it's due to the person behind the decision of what the USP is and how that message will be conveyed.
>
>That's an interesting perspective, to consider USP a cost saving measure to create branding.
>
>Brand is the personality of a business. If you consider, for example, your own personality, and look at it from the perspective of your friends. They will be able to list features of your personal brand that they like and don't like but generally there is one positive characteristic of your personality that each and every one of your friends mentions near the top of their list. People who don't know you well, may not even be aware of this unique facet of the brand of "you". If you want to grow your group of friends doesn't it make sense to highlight that overriding positive about yourself to attract other people who are going to like you?
>Then it comes down to, how do you convey that facet of "you" so that people see it and it's memorable.
>
>USP is about standing out from the crowd; cost saving on what...on the fact that your investment in your business will be lost if people can't figure out why they should deal with you? You have to get the money before you can think about cost saving measures.
>
>The development of a strong USP requires the identification of the core target. Many businesses, when asked, will say that everyone is their target market. These are the businesses that will never develop a strong USP because they are so afraid of losing a customer by excluding them, they are bland through their generalization.
>
>No one forms a strong emotional connection with bland...better to be controversial than bland, and boring.
>
>Nancy
>Nota Bene Consulting
>www.notable-marketing.com
>
>> Chen Sun wrote:
>> Unique selling proposition is not very strategic. Almost any product and its associated services has an unique selling proposition, or one can be effectively created for it. That’s not to say some selling propositions aren’t more valuable than others.
>>
>>Unique selling proposition is basically a cost-saving measure to create branding. It is too expensive to make sure that a consumer remembers the multiple selling propositions, so one is selected and promoted. If one had the advertising budget, why not promote more than one? It causes some confusion, but I believe that promoting more than one—it’ll work. So, the prior postings regarding unique selling proposition having strategic value—I think it’s primarily a cost saving value.
>>
>>Chen Sun
>>www.WebAndNet.com,
>>a Web Inventions eNterprise, WINning Solutions TM
>> Private Reply to Jim Masen | | Dec 13, 2004 4:23 pm | | re: re: re: Unique selling propositions are not strategic | # | 
Nancy Fraser | | Jim,
Everything is not emotionally drive.....brands are emotionally driven. You can't form a long term relationship with a customer who is motivated on price alone, unless you always sell at the lowest price. Wal-Mart's, so called loyalty, is based on their pricing strategy, you talk about that in your response. This holiday season Wal-Mart decided it would not cut the price on some key, hot items. It's been all over the business news that their sales after US Thanksgiving were lack lustre. They have restated their earning expectations. Others cut the price on those items and got the sales.
If you build a brand on a certain premise and are not true to the brand, consumers won't trust you. Brand loyalty is based on the trust that you are going to be consistent day in and day out; that the consumer knows what their experience will be when they do business with you.
See today's Monday Morning Memo from www.wizardofads.com for an explanation of transactional and relational shoppers and the value of each.
Your statement that production costs can't be too high or no one will buy the product assumes that there is a set relationship between production cost and sales price..there isn't. An examination of brand name production cost in relation to sale price and off brand production cost and sale price puts an end to that argument.
Hot brands are sold at whatever the market will bear and one person's reasonable price has no relation to what another considers reasonable.
Please do not read into this that I think prodcution cost is unimportant, because I am definitely not saying that.
Nancy
Nota Bene Consulting
www.notable-marketing.com
Private Reply to Nancy Fraser | | Dec 13, 2004 4:42 pm | | re: re: re: Unique selling propositions are not strategic | # | 
Jonathan Weaver | | I really tried to stay out of this one... but I find it all to compelling not to say something..
USP mean less today than ever before...
Unique doesn't mean I want to buy it...
CSP is what people buy.... the Compelling selling Proposition...
you may have unique features or benefits.... but each individual is looking for something compelling in your proposition to make the decision to move forward...
if you sold a minivan that had a satellite receiver so that the lcd screens in the passenger galley could watch movies or tv, it would not mean much if the buyer doesn't value the "Unique Selling Point"
Until you do something compelling you don't have action...
Contrary to what many may think...Walmart's primary driver is not actually price...
I suggest Walmart's primary driver is the fact that if they advertise it, it's in stock...
Way too many other retailers advertise items but when you go to buy them, they are not there...
Walmart advertises price, but what make them profitable, is the fact that when customers come to shop, product is there!
Will be interested to see how others
> Jim Masen wrote:
> Nancy,
>
>I agree with most of what you said. However, what I find interesting is the assumption that everything is emotionally driven. Personally, there are products sets for me that have absolutely no emotional content. It is a performance based decision. I have no emotional commitment over what apples, razor blades, medicine, toilet paper, light bulbs, hammers, or pens I use. They either work or they don't. Thus, build an emotional personality where the user is suppose to believe something that may or may not be delivered by the product (could be delivered by the person's psyche) and be charged a premium for this, is close to being fraudulent if not farsical. But, I will admit that I learned early to shop around the perimeter of a grocery store and rarely in the aisles. Some mass merchants feel the same way about the merchandise they carry. Wal Mart is a prime example, they almost don't care what you call the product, because nothing is more important than the Wal Mart Brand.
>
>It's an anti-gestalt approach for Wal Mart. The sum of it's parts will never be greater than the whole. In fact, Wal Mart is know for approaching Chinese manufacturers and asking them to fill in a product gap at a specific price point, because a branded product refused to conform to the Wal Mart cost and branding policies. They even tell manufacturers there will be no Co-Op advertising for the manufacturer to brand their products.
>
>The only other point you make that is sort of a chicken and the egg statement is that you have to get the money before you can make cost savings. Your production costs can't be too high or no-one will buy the product, regardless of the emotional component.
>
>I don't believe Chen's point that USP are "basically a cost-saving measure to create branding. It is too expensive to make sure that a consumer remembers the multiple selling propositions, so one is selected and promoted." For me, a USP tells me why I should buy product X. For example, I use an Apple computer, because they work without failing, easy to use, works across all computing platforms, and has almost flawless customer support. Another example would be Volvo's safety advertisement where they show a Volvo can be rolled over and then being driven away. If there are "multiple" selling propositions, then either the marketing strategy needs attention to ensure the proper USP hits the proper recipient or the product strategy needs to be address to ensure that the product is not a "horse designed by committe" or to see what benefit or value the product is bringing to the targeted end user.
>
>Jim Masen
>
>
>
>> Nancy Fraser wrote:
>> Chen,
>>You are right when you say that USP is usually not very strategic, but that is not do with USP, it's due to the person behind the decision of what the USP is and how that message will be conveyed.
>>
>>That's an interesting perspective, to consider USP a cost saving measure to create branding.
>>
>>Brand is the personality of a business. If you consider, for example, your own personality, and look at it from the perspective of your friends. They will be able to list features of your personal brand that they like and don't like but generally there is one positive characteristic of your personality that each and every one of your friends mentions near the top of their list. People who don't know you well, may not even be aware of this unique facet of the brand of "you". If you want to grow your group of friends doesn't it make sense to highlight that overriding positive about yourself to attract other people who are going to like you?
>>Then it comes down to, how do you convey that facet of "you" so that people see it and it's memorable.
>>
>>USP is about standing out from the crowd; cost saving on what...on the fact that your investment in your business will be lost if people can't figure out why they should deal with you? You have to get the money before you can think about cost saving measures.
>>
>>The development of a strong USP requires the identification of the core target. Many businesses, when asked, will say that everyone is their target market. These are the businesses that will never develop a strong USP because they are so afraid of losing a customer by excluding them, they are bland through their generalization.
>>
>>No one forms a strong emotional connection with bland...better to be controversial than bland, and boring.
>>
>>Nancy
>>Nota Bene Consulting
>>www.notable-marketing.com
>>
>>> Chen Sun wrote:
>>> Unique selling proposition is not very strategic. Almost any product and its associated services has an unique selling proposition, or one can be effectively created for it. That’s not to say some selling propositions aren’t more valuable than others.
>>>
>>>Unique selling proposition is basically a cost-saving measure to create branding. It is too expensive to make sure that a consumer remembers the multiple selling propositions, so one is selected and promoted. If one had the advertising budget, why not promote more than one? It causes some confusion, but I believe that promoting more than one—it’ll work. So, the prior postings regarding unique selling proposition having strategic value—I think it’s primarily a cost saving value.
>>>
>>>Chen Sun
>>>www.WebAndNet.com,
>>>a Web Inventions eNterprise, WINning Solutions TM
>>> Private Reply to Jonathan Weaver | | Dec 13, 2004 6:34 pm | | re: re: re: re: Unique selling propositions are not strategic | # |
Jim Masen | | Mary,
Wal Mart advertises price, but it really is focused on having a product available in sufficient quantities and it almost doesn't care what the product is. If they can't get Dr. Pepper at the price point they want, they'll substitute Dr. Bob and use their merchandising skill to get that off the shelves. I am not underestimating the importance of price, but understand how Wal Mart works. Wal Mart is rarely the lowest cost provider when consumer costs are appropriately calculated.
Oh, I do not need or want an emotional relationship with Gillette. I'll take any razor that preforms adequately, priced fairly, and distributed seamlessly and easily.
I think you misunderstood my statement about costs and price. If the market will only bare a 5 cent item and it costs 10 dollars to produce, then I believe we both will agree the product will yield a net loss. I mentioned it was a chicken and egg scenario, because it's difficult to say which should come first. Oh, hot brands can be sold rarely at below cost for any length of time (e.g. market penetration strategy).
Your Fadsofwizards site was interesting. The only part of the transactional versus relationship dichotomy that I didn't see much about was utilitarian expectation of the product or service. I understand there is only so much they can discuss in a limited amount of space. I think it's fair to repeat the article's final words that a product/brand manager needs to understand whether their customers view their services as transactional, commodity, or worthy of forming a relationship. This is even truer in an increased Buyer Beware legal, ethical, and political environment.
Jim
> Nancy Fraser wrote:
> Jim,
>Everything is not emotionally drive.....brands are emotionally driven. You can't form a long term relationship with a customer who is motivated on price alone, unless you always sell at the lowest price. Wal-Mart's, so called loyalty, is based on their pricing strategy, you talk about that in your response. This holiday season Wal-Mart decided it would not cut the price on some key, hot items. It's been all over the business news that their sales after US Thanksgiving were lack lustre. They have restated their earning expectations. Others cut the price on those items and got the sales.
>
>If you build a brand on a certain premise and are not true to the brand, consumers won't trust you. Brand loyalty is based on the trust that you are going to be consistent day in and day out; that the consumer knows what their experience will be when they do business with you.
>
>See today's Monday Morning Memo from www.wizardofads.com for an explanation of transactional and relational shoppers and the value of each.
>
>Your statement that production costs can't be too high or no one will buy the product assumes that there is a set relationship between production cost and sales price..there isn't. An examination of brand name production cost in relation to sale price and off brand production cost and sale price puts an end to that argument.
>
>Hot brands are sold at whatever the market will bear and one person's reasonable price has no relation to what another considers reasonable.
>
>Please do not read into this that I think prodcution cost is unimportant, because I am definitely not saying that.
>
>Nancy
>Nota Bene Consulting
>www.notable-marketing.com
> Private Reply to Jim Masen | | |
| |
| |
