From: Grlygrl201@aol.com
Date: Sun Sep 10 2000 - 04:37:50 PDT
In a message dated 9/10/00 12:34:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
joelinda1@home.com writes:
<< <>
I would agree with this. From an article in September's Red Herring
on second mover's advantage:
>>
WAY broad statement. Of course marketing drives sales (duh), but does it
compel people to buy things they don't want? Or does advertising? This
whole argument has been all over the page, starting with somebody blaming
marketing for making people buy gas-guzzling suv's. People I know in
marketing participate in focus groups (consumer/competitor driven), market
analyses (consumer/competitor driven), and a good bit of hit-and-miss. It's
brand against brand, not product against consumer.
One of my fav arguments is that magazine advertising makes women "do things"
- like starve themselves, wear makeup, etc. Long before there was a Madison
Avenue there was henna, kohl, clay, talc, piercing, scarring and all manner
of facia altering substances utilized by women - and men. I'd say the urge
to change our appearance has always been there. An industry was born of that
urge, Elle capitalizes on it by cashing in on brand competitiveness.
Borghese vs Bobbi Brown.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 10 2000 - 04:44:26 PDT