Marketing (was Re: Columbus analogy (Was: Corrections to trivia

From: Doug Yowza <yowza_at_yowza.com>
Date: Sun Oct 11 21:28:24 1998

On Sun, 11 Oct 1998, Sam Ismail wrote:

> Your problem is that you're equating "marketing" to "advertising".

I have many problems, but that's not one of them. The kind of marketing
you're talking about matters a whole lot in certain markets, such as
commodities. Marketing is what makes you buy one brand of fruit rather
than another (the whole idea of branding a fruit is pure marketing).

Microsoft spends a lot of money on marketing, but that's not why you buy
their products. You buy their OS because all of the applications you want
run on their OS. They did very little in terms of marketing to make that
happen (they have co-op marketing plans for ISV's, but they're mostly
symbolic).

In fact, I'd bet that you actually find the idea of buying Microsoft
produts rather distasteful, but that you do it anyways. The fact that you
have a bad impression of them shows just how bad their marketing is. As
far as minor things like product placement, etc., Microsoft goes through
the same dull distribution channels as everybody else and does the same
inane promotions as everbody else, but they still have a huge advantage.

Marketing is not a science, and it helps when all else is equal, but it
certainly isn't the magic medicine you seem to think it is that can erase
the effects of second-rate technology, absurd pricing, or illconceived
products!

-- Doug
Received on Sun Oct 11 1998 - 21:28:24 BST