Reply to each of the 6 postings individually.
I believe some brands die down and many keep longevity. A brand is nothing without a product or service but bands definitely do evolve over time. Some brands get killed by bigger brands or just simply lose its customers. I believe some brands can live forever as well. There are brands such as Coca Cola, Kraft and that have been around over 125 years. Marketing does play a huge factor in product exposure and demand. However, long term success doesn’t necessarily depend on a marketers skill or insight. Brands unlike a product can live for ever, if managed properly. Many brands undergo a physical change too. Some brands keep changing their color, the identity or image. This ensures freshness and long life. To take a position on this subject matter, I would have to say a brand can simply go both ways, it can be long term or become obsolete.
According to our Marketing textbook, a brand is “a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or a combination of them, intended to identify the goods or services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors” (Kotler & Philip 2015). When I think of brands, I think of Nike, Kraft, Procter & Gamble, Whirpool, Apple, Ford; the list goes on and on. With the exception of Nike and Apple, the other 4 companies were founded or established over 100 years ago. Kraft was founded in 1903, Procter & Gamble was established in 1837, Whirpool was founded in 1911 and Ford was established in 1903. These are only a few of the companies out there whose brands have lasted the test of time, and will continue to live strong and remain profitable, as long as their marketing departments remain adaptive. Without changing up ad campaigns to ‘keep up with the times’, adapting advertising to meet certain social cultures, and altering products to win over global demographics, brands would become obsolete. I believe that the big named companies such as Ford and Whirpool (and many, many others) will continue to be smart advertisers and continue to change up their marketing campaigns to keep up with the times. They have proven that they are capable of brand recognition in over a century’s worth of time, therefore suggesting that they have finite lives, and that their long-term success depends on marketers’ skill and insight. In conclusion, I believe that ‘SOME brands have their day,’ but some brands can live forever.
If the brand has the right driver behind the wheel there is no reason for it to ever become obsolete. Take Levi Strauss as an example. The company received their patent in 1873 to put rivets in men’s pants for ruggedness. (This is really the reason for this little metal pieces that burn you when they are hot from the dryer.) Forbes.com notes that as other competitors began producing their own line of casual pants Levi Strauss & Company suffered a huge decline in sales. However, the company brought Chip Bergh onboard as their CEO and he made changes that began to increase sales, and they are now one of the best-performing companies in any industry. According to Forbes.com, Bergh developed a new strategy, found new markets, employed a new management team, and paid attention to the internet. Even though the Levi product has changed from the initial design from 1873 the brand is far from obsolete. I believe that if a company produces quality products at reasonable prices all while listening to consumers wants and needs the brand will be around for a very long time.
I believe that brands do not have finite lives and depending on what strategies companies utilize, they are able to sustain their brand for as long as consumers are spending. This discussion makes me think back to our previous discussion about marketers creating wants in the form of needs. What will consumers “always need” or think they need? If a brand uses the right insight and research to know what customers “need” and what they are buying at certain times, I think a brand can certainly evolve overtime to withstand falling out. Consumer preferences and values are constantly changing and if a brand wants to keep profits increasing they will find out what those changes are. For example, by using a slow-growth period as a way “to learn even more what consumers are thinking, felling, and doing, especially the loyal base that yields so much profitability” companies can keep existing consumers satisfied while attracting new ones. (Kotler & Keller, 2016). Loyal customers to certain brands are likely to stay loyal if the company is showing forward progress while having their (the customers) main interests in mind. If a company uses all resources and skills available to keep up with the ever changing economy and social needs, they can achieve brand longevity.
Marketing can throw something in your face at vital moments in your life. Products are the things people buy, but marketing gets them to buy it. A brand can in fact last forever and it has been proven. It takes a quality product and an intelligent marketing team. With that being said the best stay forever. All industries have the power forces that have been there for quite some time. Food industries have McDonald’s or Wendy’s. Clothing industries have Nike and Under Armour. There are many brands that will last a long time. The key thing that they accomplish is changing with the times. Marketers have to listen to their audiences. Companies that attempt to push their message no matter what the audience fail. It takes time and effort to speak to the right crowd. All of the elite companies have had to change throughout their long lives to stay open. Marketers need to research on how to make their brands last forever.
Brands cannot be expected to last forever, especially with the new technology we have today. Most companies that are still relevant have adapted to the new technology and upgraded technology equipment to keep their company up to date. A perfect example for this scenario is “Myspace”. Ever wondered what happened to “Myspace?” I know I did, but I also had a pretty good general idea as to why the top social network in 2006 absolutely became obsolete. “Myspace was created by people in the entertainment industry, not by technology gurus, therefore they could not innovate at the pace that they needed to compete” (Lee). And then there was Facebook. This company created by college undergraduates became very innovative and adapted its technology to please the users. Technology has been the main reason why the average lifespan of a company is now just under 20 years. Not being able to adapt, adjust, and reevaluate the company’s plan and main objectives will result in failure.