Launching a Product vs. Launching a Brand- Summary & Analysis

• Launching a Product vs. Launching a Brand- Summary & Analysis
• Part I: Summary of the Article
• Part II: Comparisons between the Article and Fundamentals of Marketing
• Part III: Key Terms for Future Marketers
• Part IV: Article Review- Strengths
• Part V: Article Review- Weaknesses
• Part VI: Remaining Questions for the Writer of the Article
• Part VII: Impact on Society
• Part VIII: Concluding Statement
• Works Cited

Part I: Summary of the Article

In the article “Why You Should Launch a Product, Not a Brand”, Peter Getman- founder of Microarts, states that there is a complete difference between launching a product and launching a brand. The article starts out by keeping it plain and simple- product innovations will not survive if they have no reputability. Launching a brand that captures the image of the company will have more successful products than those companies that launch products without a brand that holds value.

Getman digs into the topic of Consumer choice. Consumer choice matters because customers fall on simple principles when deciding on a product like quality, consistency, and trust. He goes on to say

“When consumers trust a brand, they go on to be loyal. When they are loyal, they buy more”.

Essentially, the goal at the end of the day is to have the customer buy more often and more quality (with respect to any general product or service). Companies that launch original products tend to lose to brands that can make a better-cheaper-faster version of the product (discussed later in this research). This is because startups don’t have the brand equity that companies have already established.

Getman then goes on to state the five reasons why brands are preferred in consumer choice. First, they provide the customer with peace of mind. When the author states this, he is making a general assumption that consumers are most likely going to avoid risk and seek safety. In this, a product that has been around for a while is going to be trusted over a brand that is new to the sector. Normally, a brand is yielded as a positive because it assures the principles it has already established, unlike another brand or startup product that has little to no relevance in people’s minds. Second, brands create difference and save decision-making time. They do this by creating an identity that no other company can replicate. Although other companies can replicate products and features, they cannot steal a company’s individuality. Third, brands add value. The value is based upon the company’s longevity. The price says a lot about how the company is valuing a product. Long story short, you get what you pay. Fourth, brands express who we are. People in this day and age are very impressionable when it comes to a first meet. Brand names add a sense of certainty because people brands define our buying style. Cheap buyers go for cheap products, and no one wants to be involved in making a purchase that affects their social status. Fifth and lastly, brands give consumers a reason to share. Word of mouth is a big factor in how a company can perform. When there is just one product to brag about with little identity, people will just simply not even bring it up, resulting in less awareness for brand loyalty.

Part II: Comparisons between the Article and Fundamentals of Marketing

Comparing the article to Principles of Marketing, consider the two in-sync with each other. In other words, to understand what the article is asking for to the fullest extent, this class is providing the necessary vocabulary to help obtain the information (key terms listed below).

The importance of this article is to stress upon opening with a brand identity rather than to wander the market aimlessly by launching a product. We stress about learning the key elements to succeeding a product from one customer to another. Identifying the identity and concept of your company is essential before developing products. When companies make products to sell to consumers, they already know the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that they face. This is important in making the product, but what about future endeavors? With a brand to keep the company rolling smoothly and productively, the quality, consistency, and trust will grow over time to be there.

Integrating all of chapter 10, it is well known that brands that have multiple products tend to even out the product curve, oftentimes maximizing as much money possible. Take, for instance, the FAD product life cycle: a trend relatable to a startup company just grasping for energy in the market. This FAD company without an established brand will not survive due to its quick product life. Companies that sell products may have something figured out, but it would be much easier to rebound profits with a brand to differentiate in the sector.

Chapter 10 goes on to talk about the importance of branding, similar to how branding is important in selling products. They both mention that branding is absolutely necessary due to our competitive markets today. If a start product/products are put on the market without a brand backing it up, chances are consumers won’t buy it because of consumer sovereignty.

Part III: Key Terms for Future Marketers

• Product- A good, idea, method, information, object, or service created as a result of a process and serves a need or satisfies a want. It has a combination of tangible and intangible attributes (benefits, features, functions, uses) that a seller offers a buyer for purchase.
• Brand- Unique design, sign, symbol, words, or a combination of these, employed in creating an image that identifies a product and differentiates it from its competitors.
• Launch Products- The debut of a product into the market. The product launch signifies the point at which consumers first have access to a new product.
• Consumer Choices- The power of consumers to determine what goods and services are produced.
• Better-Cheaper-Faster Version- A three-point verification of producer domination.
• Patents- Limited legal monopoly granted to an individual or firm to make, use, and sell its invention, and to exclude others from doing so.

Part IV: Article Review- Strengths

Though everything stated in this article might not be obvious, the article did have some good points of emphasis that I agree upon. This was an article that was straight forward and got right to the point. A lot of writers write content that is strictly for length, often disregarding the correspondence of the point of view. It is obvious to some, but not to all those customer choices are related to how brands stagger up next to one another.

I agree with how brands matter because like I stated above, brands add an identity. Identity can be broken down limitlessly. One might be about how the customer service is on new innovation. If the company is renowned in how it handles customer support, that could be one way that the company would thrive in dependability (one aspect of positive identity).

Moving on, the article states that loyal customers buy more. This could be more often, more quantity, or more quality. I agree completely because the more loyal customers a company has, the more power it possesses. Look at Amazon versus any other competition. Amazon has been around for a while. They built relationships, they maintained their relationships, and because of it, they are becoming more and more powerful. On the contrary, the competition is losing power to Amazon, thus resulting in a loss of profits (all due to customer loyalty).

To point out another obvious characteristic that I agree with is that brands provide peace of mind. For example, first-time buyers often are leery about trying (human nature 101). It may take several tries to find the right product with the assurance that a consumer is looking to obtain. When buying a brand product with a positively recognized name, it is an assurance that it doesn’t allow the consumer to double guess the product choice.

Part V: Article Review- Weaknesses

Although this article gets right to the point with little time wasted,  I would like to say it could be more informative. The general information was there and it was written to perfection; however, there could've been more information provided on each topic. In regards to any disagreements to the article, this is where I find myself confused, leading to my contradictions. First, launching a Brand isn't for every company. It depends on the company’s goals, short term, and long term, in the direction of the company. Branding is something a company would use to be on the market for a while. What if the company has goals for a finish? A lot of companies would like to be around forever, but knowing long-term goals can really show if a company needs branding.

Another thing I disagree with is within the article is the messaging and story of a product/brand isn’t the basic two factors to look out for in reaching an audience in a unique way. There are more ways to reach out to people, and a brand’s story and their portrayed messages are only a part of the big picture. Quality, positioning, repositioning, communications, first-mover advantage, long term perspective, and internal marketing is considered to be the big picture of brand factors.

Third, I would beg to differ that people avoid risk by nature because if we lived in a world where people strayed from risk, we would all be happy. People want to get ahead in life, and a lot of the time that requires taking risks. Customers would be happier trying a new product, and in the end, knowing that it paid off just fine. They tend to seek safety, but the correlation is considered more of a fallback option. For instance, consumers will try anything on a shelf at a convenience store that pops out to them. A fallback option would be something they likely trust, oftentimes “settling” for a product with a renowned name. In essence, customers do not pick the safest option all the time.

The author also states that “Brands save decision-making time”; however, that is only true to a certain extent. Brands do not always save decision-making time, in fact, they make them even more difficult. Choosing between two or more well-known brands can be a headache- one that a consumer will ultimately choose a product based solely on price. Price isn’t the only mechanism for choosing one brand over another, but it sure plays as a factor of decision making. When choosing a product, they will search for the most relevant, low priced product (one might say). It just depends on the consumer’s point of view in regards to choosing a product or brand.

Lastly, the author stresses that brand building is essential to getting the company’s name out in the open. This would be especially true if the consumer was part of the 16% of the early life cycle. With that being stated, it is from my understanding that there are customers outside of the early 16% (innovators and early adopters) that still makeup product sales. It’s understandable that the consumer will get the word out, but in the end, the late 50% to use a product tend to be behind in a product’s life cycle. This is important because those demographics suggest that the rate of shared information upon those two classes is not shared as often, resulting in less conversation and moreover reducing the amount of “traffic” a product might receive (suggesting that brands aren’t always noticed). To sum it up, not everyone has something to say about every brand they encounter.

Part VI: Remaining Questions for the Writer of the Article

1. How can one define a brand with little to no time on the market?
2. If a brand is launched with a single to a few products, wouldn’t the brand be known only for its popular products?
3. Why do consumer choices only dictate that brands are better than products?
4. Why would this article be relevant to the consumer who buys generic brands?
5. What is the percentage of people that care less about brand equity?

Part VII: Impact on Society

The further impact on society that brand launching will have can be compelling but eventually will lead to spot trends. It would have to be said that patents will expire quicker than they already do. On average, utility patents expire every 20 years. With a system that launches brands instead of products, this will lead to patents being bought out even quicker than the 20-year span. My idea is simple- corporations will own more of our GDP in the next five years, and I believe that it will grow exponentially. Corporate America will change the competition globally, and for that, patents will be harder to obtain due to these large corporations stealing basic names.

The future for marketing would include more brands and fewer products per brand. It is to say that more startups will take Getman’s advice and launch brands rather than products. This will steal the line-light for other products but will result in fewer products per brand out on the market. There might even be a shot that brands will be required in order to launch a product.

In reference to my point at the beginning of Part VI, better-faster-cheaper versions of products will allow corporations to grow rampantly. For all the people that say “America is the land for entrepreneurship”, they are not keeping up with common time news. Once again, corporations are profit machines, and anything can be replicated with better innovation and some money behind it. In essence, consumer choices will be simple- go for big corporations.

Part VIII: Concluding Statement

At the end of the day, they are growing to become unstoppable (as if they already are already untouchable).

Works Cited

1. Getman, Peter. “Why You Should Launch a Brand, Not a Product.” Entrepreneur, 19 June 2017, www.entrepreneur.com/article/295306.
2. Kerin, Roger A., and Steven William. Hartley. Marketing: the Core. McGraw-Hill Education, 2016.
3. “Online Business Dictionary - BusinessDictionary.com.”
4. Online Business Dictionary - BusinessDictionary.com/businessdictionary.com/.