In app purchases

   Last week my blog post hosted concerns on the changing society of America and how these changes reflect a company's marketing strategies.  This week we'll look at the a trend I've noticed in apps stores in recent years.  Everybody knows some apps are free and some you have to pay for.  The latter has actually come as a more preferred option now a days because an app you pay for up front is less likely to include in app purchases.  In app purchases are extremely inconvenient for users.  Imagine downloading an app that in some cases literally boasts the word FREE on its front, and finding out that about 60% of the content is Locked away and needs paying for.  This border line leans on false advertising in my opinion, as ALL "free", apps literally say the word free where the price is normally listed.  Imagine getting a jacket for free and wearing it for a while only to have a sales rep magically appear out of thin air when you try and use one of the pockets, and saying " that'll be 99 cents".  Even worse are addictive App Store games that are literally rigged and unplayable unless the player spends money at some point.  It's a very cheap and low marketing technique to ambush your customer base with charges and fees they are lead to believe they won't experience.  Finally we have the paid apps that still have in app purchases.  These can be the worst of all, as the customer is essentially paying a fee so that they can be charged again at a later date.  I don't know of anyone who wouldn't want to pay everything up front, even if it meant the app would be more expensive.  The worst example of this sales technique however is in the console gaming industry, where relatively the same practice has been dubbed "micro transactions".  Console games are not like iPhone or android games.  They are much more expensive and have a much more serious customer base.  The customers however are still treated the same way as the customers of the simple phone games.  Now, games that cost 60$ up front are littered with 99 cent charges to complete the game faster and gain progress over in gain opponents.  Doesn't sound very fun does it? Play a game you paid 60$ for only to have someone your playing against in the game spend REAL money in order to get ahead.  Everything mentioned earlier can theoretically be written off as lousy marketing but a 60$ game that you have to spend MORE money on? Nope, not for me, I'll take my 20 year old Super Nintendo over that any day

Week 14 Blog Post

Week 14 blog post 

 

This week my post will go into the influences of demographics on a business's marketing campaign and how our quickly changing society has and will effect marketing in the future.  This past week has been a rough one for the rational human being.  Attacks in Paris and abroad have rocked most of the world and protest and division loom on some of our university campuses.  What does this all mean for marketing? The college protests stem from fear of racial injustice and inequality.  As a result of this fear some people are calling for more control over the free speech of individuals and this call for censorship is rightly returned with outrage by most others.  This country is more divided and confused than it has been in years.  Who a person is and what they say is under much more scrutiny than ever before.  This means the messages of a business, just like the messages of a person, must be carefully decided and evaluated.  We have presidential candidates who won't even utter much less entertain the term "radical Islam", for fear of backlash.  The type of society we're living in can take something that isn't even meant offensive and claim it is offensive (if the  person in question is part of the right interest group).  This amount of distrust and division can really affect how a company markets it's products.  Maybe a company ceases to market diet drinks to women simply because it fears accusations of sexism.  Maybe a company wastes money marketing muscle building protein shakes to women for the same fears.  Maybe a company ceases to provide its products for a church because it doesn't want to been seen or accused biased to any religion.  In other words, companies are entering a time where the demographic of their product matters less, and the "equality" of their marketing matters more.  They will eventually be forced to market products to virtually any type of person, in order to keep people from feeling "left out".  The real question stands, is it real "equality" when you go out of your way to achieve it? Or is the fabrication of forced equality making things even worse.  

My last blog post focused on nostalgic type marketing with the actual brand of the product in question.  Such as a clothing company that makes modern clothes having a vintage style logo to capitalize on the trends that make the "vintage style" popular.  This week, I'll write on two types of marketing strategies and branding techniques that dominate most industries. Simple products meant to sell quickly, and complicated products meant to be high in revenue return.  Remember the cellphone for elderly people, the "Jitterbug".  It was marketed as a simple product targeted to people who might be intimidated by the complicated features of a modern phone.  The jitterbug done well in sales due to this simple approach.  Sometimes a product can be marketed with simplicity and functionality in mind and sold for a lot less money.  The product is still profitable despite its low sales price due to the increased volume of sales.  This is a valuable marketing strategy as because the customer expects less of the product than they would of a more expensive one.  "I dropped and broke my flip phone yesterday", sounds better than " I think dropped and broke my iPhone yesterday".  Sometimes, people don't want to over buy.  They feel they only need a product that has a limited amount of features and gimmicks. The flip phone can also be easily replaced by the company without damaging the company's image because the customer didn't expect perfect quality when they bought such a cheap phone.  The company can make up for loss revenue on returned items by selling more items as a whole.  The other marketing strategy revolves around opposite goals.  This strategy focuses on selling less products for more of a markup and strictly avoiding product failure and dealing with returns.  This strategy relies on statements like "oh these pictures I took with my iPhone camera look so great!!!" And " this flip phone camera sucks!!!!!!"  Lots of customers DO want the features and gimmicks, and will pay much more for them.  Companies following this strategy will have to be more careful about what they sell to their customer, as the customer will be more picky. And if the products being sold are not working as described, then customers will quickly stop paying the high price. Non the less it's a valuable marketing strategy used by lots of companies every day.  Both of these strategies are valuable routes for businesses in today's market as there are many different types of customers and target markets.  However in my opinion, a good strategy will implement a combination of both.