"Students Addicted to Social Media"

This article looks at a study done at a large University on how younger people rely very heavily on social media to interact with friends and family. It provides interviews with those students who say that they can't live without some form of social media. When having to live without it most of them stated how they felt less connected with their friends, family and even with what was going on in the rest of the world.

In my own personal experience, I use social media to talk to my friends from home, from school, and my family almost on a daily basis. While at school, my cell phone and facebook are my main means of communication with my friends from home. I especially use text messaging because it allows me to talk to my friends all day long while being able to perform other tasks. When I do not have access to my cell phone I feel like I am missing out on so much. I feel like people are trying to get a hold of me and I can't respond. I know, when at school, my parents get nervous when I do not answer my phone because I always have it on me. They think that something is wrong.

I feel in today's day and age social media is our main communication source. It is the way that I find out about what is going on the world because I am unable to have a television in my room at school. It gives me access to information I wouldn't be able to obtain through the television or the newspaper. This phenomenon is just going to continue to grow and it is something everyone will soon be using.

Do you think you are a victim of conforming to social media? If so, what part of social media do you use the most and why?

In response to Elizabeth's Question

"A lot of people are now seeing that companies are selling more products or have them in stock online rather than in the store. Do you agree with this?"

I do not agree with this. I feel that it is can really attract the customer away from the product or even the store. When one goes shopping, they may be buying on impulse and they may see a pair of jeans they want in the store but that don't have their size or length. When asking the sales clerk if they have them in stock, and they respond with they can purchase the product online, it may give them time to think about it and decide they don't want to make the purchase. In turn, they lose the sale.

Also, I do not think it is beneficial for them to sell some products online only. For instance, I know Victoria's Secret does this often. They have clothes that they sell online that they do not sell in the store. This limits their customer base because people may not always look at their website. In the mall, people may just happen to wander into their store and purchase a product. It is more difficult for a person to come across their website one day and find something they want to buy. It definitely limits who purchases their products.

Have you ever experienced this type of situation and in turn didn't end up purchasing the product at all?

Product Differentiation

It is important for a company to make sure their products are different from their competitors. The use of product differentiation includes the quality, features, and support services of each product. The different products helps to attract a vast variety of customers. It also helps make your product stand out as opposed to one of your competitors.

To start, the quality of the product is one of the most important parts of a product. It it what first will attract a customer to a certain product line, or ever store. For example, there are some products that may look exactly the same but the quality is different. A car for instance, Toyota, could have a life expectancy of 10 years where as a Honda may be known to have a life expectancy of 15 years. This is all due to the quality of the product. They may have the same features and support services but the overall quality is more reliable and longer lasting.

Next, the features of a product is what may be the deciding factor for some people as to which brand to buy. For example, the ipad and the kindle are two very similar products. But they both have different features. The features one of them has may work for one customer while the features the other has may work for another. The ipad is in color, where as the kindle is not. This could be what helps the consumer make the purchasing choice.

Finally, the support services of a product can set them aside from the rest. Many electronics equipment have support services over the phone. Whether or not the service is in an area where the language they speak one can understand, or if it is outsourced could affect the satisfaction of the customer. The less satisfied a customer is, the more they could spread the word which could cause less customers.

In the end it is best to have product differentiation because it helps give a customer a variety of options. What part of product differentiation do you think you pay most attention to when looking to make a purchase?

Marketing Channels

A marketing channel deals with how products gets from the producer to the consumer. There are two main ways this can be done either directly from producer to consumer or from the producer to an intermediary to then the buyer. When going from producer directly to the buyer there are more channels that need to be taken into consideration. Each producer needs to communicate with each buyer. If a producer were to go through an intermediary, they would only have to communicate with that one intermediary and the same for the buyer. They would only have one person to communicate with. Communicating with the intermediary seems like a quicker option.

There are also several channels that are used to distribute products to consumers. Each one is beneficial to different organizations depending on circumstance. Just a few of the options are either producer directly to consumer. This would include no intermediaries. Another option is from producer to retailers to consumers. This would be like Target who buys things from the manufacturer in bulk and then sells to the consumer. A third example is from producer to wholesaler to retailer to consumer. A good example of this are tobacco companies who sell their products to wholesalers who then sell these products to a large number of retailers. This helps the tobacco company get its products out to a large amount of people. There are many more channels that companies can use, these just name 3 of the most used types.

Since there are so many marketing channels, it may seem like it would be difficult to choose which channel an organization should use. Most companies base it on a variety of options. First they start with customer characteristics. The company needs to take into consideration the geographic region of their target market, and what is best for them. They then look at product attributes. The price of the product determines whether one buys it directly from the manufacturer or from a retailer. The sizes or products and characteristics all play a role. The type of organization also influences what type of marketing channel they use. The larger the firm the easier it may be to negotiate deals. They also have more money and may be able to spend more on developing a sales force while smaller firms don't have the financial means to do so. They also look at how their competition is getting their products to the consumers. Which method are they using and how is it working for them? These are only a few of the many factors they look at.

The way a producer gets their products to the consumer is very important. If they aren't able to do it in a timely non costly fashion it could be tragic for their organization. Do you think it is essentially easier to a buyer to go right to the producer, or although it may be at a higher cost, is it less of a hassle to go through retailers and wholesalers?

In response to Elizabeth

"Do you feel as though people are going to buy a toyota car even after hearing about them in the news? Or will people start buying from other car companies such as nissan or ford?"

For a long time, my family would only purchase Toyota's. My father is a loyal customer. He will not buy any car unless it is Toyota, and he currently drives one. Luckily his car was not one of the ones that was recalled, and although I haven't talked to him about how he feels about this situation, I feel that if he needed to purchase a new car, he would still stick with Toyota.

Now, just because that is what my father would do, I don't think everyone would have that same feeling. I feel that each company has their loyal customers and people who have been buying from them for years. I think that those who are loyal customers and still haven't had any problems with their Toyota will continue to purchase their cars from them. I also think that people with Toyota's, who may not be loyal customers, they may even be first time customers, but they haven't experienced any problems, will continue to keep with Toyota.

One the other hand, those ones who have had the bad experiences will probably never go back. They may even get their friends and family members to refrain from purchasing a Toyota, but I don't think that it will last forever. Like celebrity affairs, the event will eventually blow over. 10 years from now, people will have totally forgotten about this whole ordeal. There will be a new group of young people entering the car market who were never affected by the events that arose due to the manufacturing problems with Toyota vehicles. Also, all of the bad publicity this company is currently getting is opening their eyes. They now will be much more cautious as to the safety of their vehicles before they put them on the road.

When it comes to whether or not people will look to other car companies to buy cars, I think right now they will. The questionable reliability of Toyota is still lingering and is causing worry to some, so yes, they will buy cars from other companies, but like I mentioned earlier I don't think it will last for long. Toyota has always been one of the leading car sales companies and they aren't going to stop now. Once the newest up to date car comes out, I believe people will forget about what happened and be looking into buying that car.

Do you think its true that over the mistakes a powerful company makes, usually blow over? Do you know any examples as to where this may have happened?

In response to Deanna

"Do you know anyone who has been unemployed?"

The declining job market of 2009 hit many homes in the United States. Millions lost their jobs, and hundreds of thousands lost their homes. There were very little businesses that were looking for people to hire and when an organization was hiring, the line of applicants stretched around the block. The unemployment problem did not affect myself personally but one of my good friends family has suffered tremendously.

My friends Mom used to work at one of the local factories in my hometown. It employed hundreds of people, but once the recession began to erupt they had to lay off a great deal of employees. This organization was only able to keep the employees that were absolutely essential in running the business. Unfortunately my friends mother was not one of them. She had only been working at the factory for a couple of years, so the people with seniority kept their jobs and she was out. She previously hadn't needed to have a job because her husband was the sole breadwinner in the family, but my friends grandmother got sick and her Mom ended up having to go to work to help pay the medical bills.

Since she has lost her job she has been unable to find another one. Her husbands job has also been slowing down a great deal and he isn't working as many hours as he used to receive. He also works in a local factory, but was luckily one of the employees who didn't get laid off due to his seniority with the company. Her family has had to downsize from their two story home, to a smaller one story home. They have also had to cut back tremendously on their spending, where they only buy what is absolutely necessary. My friends mother was laid off last year and is still struggling to find a job. Hopefully, now that the economy seems to be recovering, jobs will open up and they will be able to get back to where their family used to be.

Do you think that the job market will grow now that it seems the economy is making a recovery? If so, how long do you think it will take to get the unemployment rate back down to where it was before the recession?

Importance of Price

When it comes down to it most companies rely on the sale of their products to keep a float. In order for their products to be sold, the price at which they sell them is most important. There are some companies who charge the absolute minimum price they need to in order to cover their costs. Others charge outrageous prices because they want it to seem as if they products are of better quality than others. In the end after all of a companies costs are covered, the amount of money they continue to charge is just to benefit them

There are companies like Wal-Mart who charge very low prices for their products. They have become such a large organization because they are able to do that. They are able to keep down their variable costs by having their products produced in developing countries. This also helps to keep down their fixed costs because it cost very little to run factories in this country. They have a competitive advantage in their industry because they have such low prices. They do not have to worry as much when an economic recession hits as may Kohls. Wal-Mart is where people turn to get cheaper products. The pricing that this organization uses is what has helped them to be so successful. There is the controversy though, that they are using forms of slave labor to get these low prices, and at times has caused people to stay away from Wal-Mart.

On the opposite side of the spectrum are those companies who charge extremely high prices for their products. At times, their products may be made out of a better material than the cheaper ones, but other times the brand name of a product, or a product that is endorsed by a celebrity, leads to higher prices. For example, the two clothing stores, American Eagle and Abercrombie and Fitch are within the same industry, make the same quality clothes yet Abercrombie tends to have higher prices than American Eagle. Their total costs are probably the same but the profit that Abercromibe makes on each sweatshirt as opposed to American Eagle is more than likely higher. I know both stores and have shopped at both and I have come to notice how they both have good quality products, but one charges more than the other.

The type of event described above can be happening for one of two reasons. Abercrombie and Fitch may be a more well known brand name than American Eagle. If this is the case, they feel as if their brand is worth more so they can charge more, although their products are identical. Another reason this may happen is because they are looking to attract a certain kind of customer, which in my own personal experience I feel Abercrombie is trying to achieve. They want to attract more of the middle to upper class citizens rather the lower class ones. They may feel it is an image their company wants to uphold.

In essence, in order to run a good business, the prices of your products have to come into consideration. A company who sells their product at a higher price may not get as many customers, but at the same time still profits because they are able to charge such a high price for reasons such as branding. In the end each company is able to find some way to make a large enough profit to grow.

Would you rather shop at an organization that charges lower prices because they use forms of slave labor, or would you rather pay a little extra money and buy items from a store who provides Americans with jobs?

Celebrity Endorsments

It seems that most companies are starting to try and get celebrities to endorse their products. For most sporting companies they look to have athletes endorse their products. When it comes to dietary supplements they look to attractive slim celebrities to represent their product. They do this to make it seem like the professional athlete is so good because he is wearing a certain product. They also use them for dietary pills because they want you to think that they got skinny with this pill and so can you. When in reality most of the celebrities that endorse certain products don't use those products at all. They just get paid for saying that they do use the product.

Celebrity endorsements don't always work in a companies favor though. The company never knows when something a celebrity does could impact what people think about them. It could then reflect upon the company. For example, the Tiger Woods case. Tiger Woods was caught having an affair. He was endorsed by a great deal of organizations such as Nike, Gatorade, and EA Games. Although Nike and EA Games did not drop him Gatorade did. I am not entirely sure why they dropped him, but it would seem to me they wouldn't want their customers to think that they support him cheating. By continuing to support his career some may see it as they are over looking his infidelity. Nike didn't drop Tiger Woods because they think that in the long run, people will forget and the profit in the future is more than the loss they may be experiencing right now. So, although celebrity endorsements have the potential of creating great wealth for a company they can also cause loss.

Do you think that you are more attracted to products that are endorsed by your favorite celebrities? Have you ever stopped using a product that was endorsed by a celebrity who acted in a way you didn't agree with?

In response to Elizabeth's Question

"What do you think about brand loyalty? Are you guilty of it as well?"

I think everyone is guilty of brand loyalty. Whether it be for status purposes or because one has come to find that a certain brand works best. I think that brand loyalty can help and hurt a company. When one person is loyal to a brand they are feel strongly about it and at times can convince others to become loyal of that brand. They also probably have been using a certain brand for a longer period of time so they hold a lot of information on the brand.

The downfall to brand loyalty is if your brand isn't considered one that many are loyal too. This would make it hard to attract customers because they may not be able to find a person who uses your brand and will say good things about it. Also the problem with brand loyalty is that it makes it harder to change your brand. Usually people who are loyal to a specific brand like it the way it is. When a company changes their brand they run the risk of losing those customers who have been so loyal to them for so long. This may also make it hard for the company to try and reel in other customers who may be loyal to one of the competitors.

I would have to say that I am guilty of brand loyalty. I don't necessarily think it is a bad thing though. Those brands that I am loyal to have come to have my constant business because of their reliable products. For instance, I am loyal to the store Coach. I have a very hard time purchasing a purse that isn't from that store. Since they are expensive I may not be able to buy an new purse each year but the reliability of their products, and long life of their products is what makes me loyal to them. Also, I am guilty of becoming loyal to brands that are popular. Which is another reason why I am loyal to Coach.

Do you have any brands that you have any brands who you have been loyal to and the company then changed things and lost your loyalty?

"iPad apps, 1,350 and counting"

This article is focusing on the amount of applications the iPad already has compared to the iphone. The iPad just recently was released but is not yet sold to the public. This article talks about how a certain website had gained insider information on what the new applications for this new technological device are. It also provides the prices for these applications. Although most of them are similar to the ones found on the iPhone that fact that they can also now be transferred onto the iPad provides more incentive for those with the iPhone to upgrade to this new device.

The article states that the website they got this information from is one of the websites that always seems to have the most reliable information from the Apple store. It seems to me that Apple is allowing this company to get this information probably because they want it to be released. It may seem like it is insider information but in reality I think that that the Apple store is leaking this information in order to get the iPad to have more appeal. It also gives a consumer more information on this product before it has even come out. By stating the number of apps that on the iPad and that the number is growing, they are trying to relay the information that the iPad will have even more apps than at the current time.

It seems that Apple is trying to make the iPad similar to the iPhone so that people who have the iPhone will upgrade to the iPad and won't have to worry about losing any information that they maybe have paid for to put on their iPhone. Do you think that the iPad will eventually become the iPhone and the iPhone will eventually phase out?

In response to Elizabeth's Question

"What if you were the customer and you were asked if it was okay if they give your name and number to another company, would you be alright with it?

I would have to say I would not be alright with a company giving out my name and number. I would appreciate them asking me rather than just giving the information out but I wouldn't say it was okay. If it was a company like John Smith's then I would more than likely have trust in his company. By him inquiring with me before giving out my personal information, I would be able to keep my trust in his company. My trust may even grow because he would be showing me that he cares enough about his customers to personally confront them about our own information. It also proves to me that he strongly believes in being ethical.

There are many reasons I would not allow them to give my information out. Although I may trust the company who has initially has my personal information, I do not know or trust the company they are providing it to. I have not been a customer of the company and in turn have not had any time to develop a relationship with them. With this being said, they have no obligation to me or my trust in them. I suppose that if they want to recruit me as a customer, they may keep my information private, but I can't be certain of that. If I were to allow my personal information to be given to another company I would want an agreement stating that the new company will not disclose my information to other companies without my consent. Unless standards are written or provided I would not be in accordance to allowing a company with my personal information, to give it out.

What is a situation where someone allowed for their personal information to be passed on to one company, and that the new company ended up passing it on to more and more organizations because they didn't have any personal connection to the initial customer?

John Smith's Dilema

John Smith seems to be caught in a large predicament. He knows that his company is not doing well and will probably have to end up laying people off if business does not improve. He also is aware that his employees consist of people who for the most part bring in the highest amount of income for their households. Being offered this opportunity to sell his customers could help him keep his employees and avoid bankruptcy, but it does not comply with the AMA standards of Ethics.

I do not think John Smith should give these names to the Ohio Department of Economic Development. In the AMA statement of ethics under the section that deals with fairness it does not approve of giving out customer information. The entire body of the Statement of Ethics talks about how an organization needs to keep the trust of their employees. That is the one part of their customer relationship that should be valued the most. By giving away their customers names and phone numbers these people will no longer have trust in John Smiths organization.

The AMA statement of ethics also talks about how they need to protect any private information of their customers. If they release the names of their customers than they aren't trying to protect this information. They are looking to benefit the company entirely and not looking at how the customers will be affected. This could cause the customers to lose all trust in John Smith's company and may look else where for similar services.

In the end it is not worth is for John Smith to give out these names. Although he would be able to make $8000.00 and wouldn't have to lay off his employees, he may lose a large amount of customers. Which would result in losing even more money and it may cause his company to declare bankruptcy even quicker. He should find some other way to work with the Ohio Department of Economic Development to help them with their research while at the same time letting the customers know who will be getting their information and what information these companies will be receiving. It will help John Smith make money and will also allow them to still be known as a trustworthy company.

Do you think that the Ohio Department of Economic Development would be willing to work something out with John Smith or they would just take back their offer and go to another company who would just take the money and give them customer names?

In Response to Meghan Hardy.

If you had the chance to download one of these applications would you and why?

I am unsure as to whether or not I would download on of these applications. I feel it is very useful to be able to go online and purchase clothing or any type of item but at time it can be a little tedious. There is always the time that one must wait in order to receive their item, or the fear that a piece of clothing may not fit they way one wants it to so the access to the actual store is always handy. The time saved though is what puts me on the fence.

One of my largest pet peeves is how long it takes to receive an item that was bought online. If I had the opportunity to download this application to my cell phone and from the outside of a store purchase the item, I don't exactly see the point. What is stopping me from walking in the store and purchasing the item? I understand that there is time saved by being able to stand outside the store point your phone and purchase, but how much more time would it take to just walk in?

I also have a problem with not being able to try on a piece of clothing. Each store has their own style in manufacturing their clothing. Jeans from Forever 21 don't necessarily fit the same as jeans from American Eagle. There are also different styles of clothing such as t-shirts and sweatshirts. This is what turns me away at times from shopping online. It would also turn me away from buying it by pointing my phone at it and clicking a button. I would much rather take the time to enter the store, be sure whatever I want to buy is exactly what I'm looking for then buy it.

In the end I do not think I would download this application. We have the internet if we want to purchase something, and if we see an item in a store window that we want to buy then entering the store seems like the easiest option to me. I understand that sometimes the stores will be closed and that someone walking by may want to purchase that item then, but the store will re-open the next morning and that item will still be available. I feel that it is just another piece of technology that will end up confusing people in the end and won't get very much use.

Do you think that it is really necessary to find another way for consumers to purchase products?

"Alice's $1 Billion Consumer Products Tea Party"

The newest Disney movie that has recently come out is the non-cartoon version of "Alice in Wonderland". This movie has caused great hype. It had a midnight showing that was very popular. Not only did the movie open yesterday, but Disney has put out a new line of consumer products that accompany the movie. They have joined up with some very high end fashion companies such as designer Sue Wong to create the dresses that Alice wears in the movie.

This article states how Disney is joining with these high end fashion designers to design various accessories and clothing that is seen in the movie. They do state though that all of these items are not for sale. They are more interested in marketing their brand of products and they are hoping that by displaying there elegant beautiful materials will reel customers in. They have created a line for their more money conscious customers as well.

It seems as if Disney is hoping to make money off of this movie not only at the box officers but also at the registers of the various stores that will be selling their clothing products and accessories that they plan on relating back to the movie. According to the article the stock prices for all companies involved has already gone up and the customer product chief believes that this line will last decades and they think it will be worth near a billion dollars within the year.

Do you think that some of the customers who would be able to afford the more expensive products will be disappointed when they find out they are not all for sale?

In Response to "From Print to Phone to Web. And a Sale?" and "Firms Hold Fast to Snail Mail Marketing"

Within the next ten years, it is my belief that the internet will be an essential part of every persons life. In order to hear the latest news one will need to access the web. In order to purchase certain, it not all material items, one will use the web. Ordering a pizza on a Friday night will be done strictly through the internet. Cars will drive themselves, and homes will be run through a computer. The internet will become a way of life. In these two articles they discuss how the internet is now beginning to take over the marketing sector.

In the first article "From Print to Phone to Web. And a Sale?" they talk about how a lot of ads in magazines are now providing the readers with bar codes. The reader can scan these bar codes onto their phone, if it has access to the internet, and will be brought directly to the place one can either purchase the item in the ad or learn more. This is great for the producers because they can now advertise in a magazine and provide the reader with an easy way to access their product. Usually one sees an item and isn't exactly sure where they can find that product in the store or even online. Although this may seem beneficial a problem with the bar coding is not everyone has access to a phone that has internet on it. Although now all phones have internet, unless one has a data plan they can not access this for free. Even if they have a data plan it still isn't free they have to pay a monthly fee. If these advertisers start relying heavily on those bar codes in their magazine advertisements they not only lose the market of those who don't have phones with internet access, but they also lose the part of their market that doesn't necessarily read whatever magazine they advertise in.

In the second article "Firms Hold Fast to Snail Mail Marketing" they talk about how since e-marketing has become such a large phenomenon most companies are cutting back on mailing costs and going towards e-mail. All of the companies that the article mentioned had actually lost from switching to e-mail. When switching from the normal paper mail to e-mail it can be difficult to distinguish between what is junk and what isn't when it comes into ones e-mailbox. There are so many people out there who use different names to try and get the receiver to open a piece of mail that ends up containing a virus. It was mentioned in the article that a lot of the companies who switched to e-mail lost some of their customers because they thought they were receiving junk. Another benefit of direct mail, like talked about in the article, if a piece of mail one company sends is fun and entertaining one may keep it. For example the company that sent funny postcards. One of their postcards got them an over $200,000 deal just because of a postcard. This shows that a piece of direct mail can really have a larger effect on a person than an e-mail.

One company that would benefit from direct mailing that wasn't mentioned in the articles is grocery stores. Although they do now offer their flyers online, not everyone has access to the internet on a daily basis, granted most do, but that is just an assumption. It is easy for a grocery store to send out its fliers letting their customers know what types of sales they will be having. This benefits them because usually a household will receive more than one flyer. In that case, they can compare which store has the better deals, or which store has a deal on what one needs to purchase and can go from there. It they relied on e-marketing, the risk arises of people only looking at one stores flyer and not the others because they won't have a physical piece of paper right in front of them.

I think that eventually e-marketing will replace traditional marketing. Although the stories mentioned in the second article show a loss for the companies, at the end it still said the companies were planning on working on e-marketing. In essence it is cheaper and the potential audience is so much larger. In traditional marketing the list of people whom a company calls or mails is only so long. If one were to market on the world wide web, the market in endless. Also, with the new interest in going green, many companies are looking to save paper. A great way to save paper is to e-market. Within the next 5-10 years the main way to market a product will be through the internet.

Do you think there are any companies that would never be able to benefit in any way from e-marketing. If so which ones and why?

In Response to Deanna Sylvester

"How do you think this will affect all of the name brand businesses out there? Do you think they will change their prices in order for this not to happen?"

I think this will have a huge affect on the name brand businesses. For most companies, such as toothpaste and cleaning products, they only sell their products in stores such as wal-mart. Some may be sold online but shopping only hasn't yet evolved to purchasing a tube of toothpaste. These companies rely on their sales to big retail stores. If these companies stop purchasing their products and rely on selling their own some of these major organizations may end up going out of business. This would end up being a problem because once the economy picks back up consumers will need to go back to the products they enjoy. I don't believe they are switching because they don't like the name brand products, they are just switching to save money. Once they are able to afford the better product, they will want to buy it but since these retail stores will no long offer the products they want, they won't be able to purchase them.

In effect, the brand name stores might change their prices in order to compensate for the loss. It would help them keep their products in these large retail stores. Most brand name products also have high prices mainly due to the fact that they can. People are willing to buy their products at a high price because they are of better quality. So I feel that if they lowered their price even a little bit it would keep them in business and wouldn't cause a big loss. It would be in their benefit to lower their prices and hope these retail stores don't stop buying their good.

Do you think that it could be considered a monopoly since Wal-Mart would now only be selling their products in their stores?

"For Sponsors, Tiger's Open Timetable Most Troubling"

The main focus of this article is talking about how Tiger Woods doesn't plan to be golfing for a short period of time. He also isn't sure as to when he plans to return to golf. The author is focusing on how his short absence from golfing will affect his sponsors. He talks about Nike and how they plan to stick behind Tiger Woods 100%. They state how Nike stands behind the athletes they sponsor for pretty much anything and wouldn't just give up Tiger because one day he will return.

I feel this is a smart move on Nike's part. Tiger Woods is known for being one of the best, if not the best, golfer around. Although what he did was ethically and morally wrong it won't stop him from winning golf tournaments. He will still be the best golfer no matter when he decides to start back up again. If Nike were to drop him, another company could swoop him right back up and be the ones now making money. I feel as if his fans will forget about the fact that he cheated on his wife. It may take a few years, but in reality it will blow over. I feel that Nike knows that this is the case also.

When companies sponsor athletes it also isn't always public knowledge. Until reading this article I wasn't aware that Tiger Woods was sponsored by Nike. This may be to my own ignorance and it is publicly known, but I'm sure there are customers of Nike who don't know what athletes they sponsor. So for those people they aren't going to stop shopping at Nike because of Tiger Woods because they don't necessarily know the connection he has with Nike. So I feel that it is more a benefit to Nike to keep Tiger because one day he will rise up to be just as popular as he has always been.

Do you think that by Nike continuing to sponsor Tiger Woods they are making a statement that they approve of what he did?

In response to Deanna

"Do you think things will be looking better for the unemployment rate anytime soon?"

Although I would like to be optimistic and say that I do think the unemployment rate is going to get better soon, I just can't do that. It has been shown that unemployment is the very last thing that will improve after a recession. Although it has been reported that we are out of the recession jobs are not opening up. Employers are still weary that the economy isn't totally recovered yet. They are focusing more on making up for their financial loses than hiring new employees. Also, people still aren't spending as much money, so companies are still not back to where they used to be before the recession.

I feel it is going to take at least a year for the unemployment rate to get better. People are not comfortable with the economy yet. Since this recession was so bad, everyone is paying close attention to their personal finances in case we drop back down again. The unemployment rate can not get better until the people of the United States have confidence in their economy. Also, companies need to feel confident that, once people do start spending, they will continue to spend. They will not hire more employees until they are absolutely necessary. Unfortunately I don't think will be happening any time soon.

What industry do you think will start to hire employees first?

Shiny Sud's Commercial

For most companies they want to find the easiest way to catch the eye of their viewer, in order to get the best results. They hope that through advertisements they will be able to do so. In the shiny sud's commercial the advertiser, method is looking to promote their cleaning product. They create the idea that other cleaning products, although one may scrub them away, do not always leave. They are trying to convey the message that their product does not stay in the shower after it is cleaned, but they do so in the complete wrong way.

The commercial has the suds acting as men trying to get the naked woman to come into the shower while they proceed to watch. This commercial proves to be not only degrading but seems to violate the law of sexual harassment. Although the figures speaking aren't people, that is who they are perceived as. When they are talking about how the woman is cleaning her body and what she looks like doing it, it is relaying the message that it is okay to watch a woman while she is showering and comment on her. The woman is also covering her body conveying to the viewer that she feels uncomfortable doing this. This is what makes the commercial degrading. It is clear that the woman doesn't feel comfortable yet she continues to do what the soap suds say.

I feel that this commercial would catch the attention of many but not in the correct way. I feel this is a bad marketing ploy. It is going to give the company nothing but bad publicity. It makes Method look as if they are trying to use the sexual harassment of a woman to try and sell their product. Next time they look to emphasize how clean their product makes ones shower, they should use a bit of a cleaner commercial.

Do you think that when making this commercial they company thought that it was appropriate to go on public television?

In Response to Elizabeth S post

Why haven't more companies gone green?
I feel that the reason most companies haven't gone green is due to the costs. Most environmentally friendly equiptment and supplies are expensive. This is most likely due to the fact that it is not in high demand and they haven't been able to look into cheaper ways to become environmentally friendly. If there was more of a demand for more companies to go green I feel as if the companies promoting going green would look for cheaper ways to make everyone become a part of the cause.
I also feel like the cost is important when it comes to companies trying to transition into becoming green. They would have to change either their products that were not earth friendly to being earth friendly. They would also have to change thie facilities and officies, vehicles they list could be endless. This is would generate a large cost and with the way the economy is going most companies can't afford to do all of this. Also, by going green they aren't generating a profit. They are just helping the environment. This can have an affect because they are changing their product for the good of the environment, not for a monetary gain.
Do you think that if the government were to provide companies with an incentive to go green, this would cause more companies to take action?

"Is Environmentalism more of a threat or an opportunity for marketers?"

I feel that environmentalism is more of an opportunity for marketers. I idea of "going green" has been on the minds of many people in the United States for the past few years. It is definitely something more and more people are looking into and becoming more interested in. The fact that the current generations are destroying the environment is impossible to ignore when it is being publicized around every corner. Since it is becoming such an issue, there have been so many people looking to buy products that are environmentally friendly.

It is would be to a company's benefit to market products that are environmentally friendly. It would give that company a competitive advantage because they would hit a new forming target market. For example, the companies that make household cleaning products now have to compete with a new upcoming company known as Seventh Generation. They have an advertising campaign on television which publicizes their new products that are environmentally friendly and aren't damaging to the human body when inhaled. Marketing their new environmentalist approach is going to work in their benefit.

Another industry that is benefiting from environmentalism is the automobile industry. Although more and more companies are able to manufacture environmentally when the concern about environmentalism first came about Toyota came out with the first hybrid vehicle. The marketing they did for this vehicle is what caused them to benefit so much from environmentalism. The other car manufacturing companies saw how beneficial their new product and marketing efforts had been for them, they jumped on the bandwagon and began creating their own hybrids.

It seems that pretty soon almost all companies will begin looking into ways to have their organizations work more environmentally friendly. Do you think the costs of becoming environmentally friendly will hold any companies back if all other companies in their industry are getting on board?

In response to Nicole "The Right Job"

I would have to say that the most important P in my eyes is Price. Seeing as I just graduated college I am going to need to find a job in order to pay back my student loans. At the same time I am going to need to be getting on my feet and becoming independent so I will also need money to support that. I also need to keep in the mind the fact that I just spent 4 years a college so the skills I will obtain are also of high importance to me. When presenting myself as the product and requesting the price I would be willing to be "purchased" at I will want the company to know how high I value my my education.

Although it may seem greedy that I think the most important P is price it only makes sense. When looking for a job one must consider all of the benefits they are willing to provide you with. Again, seeing as I will be finish college, I will no longer be able to be on my parents health insurance plan. I need to make sure I find a company who provides their employees with insurance. In the end price is always the most important because in order to survive in this world one needs to have money. What is the best way to get the company you are looking to work for offer the price you hope to obtain?

Marketing Principles Applied to Getting a Job

When looking for a job to the company one is trying to work for they are seen as the product. The company is investing their money in this person and expecting a certain amount of input from this person into their company. The other 3 p's can easily relate to this same example.

One of the P's is price. When relating price to the job it deals with the amount of money the new employee will be paid. There are a lot of factors that the company must look at in order to determine a sufficient price. One of them is the credentials of the applicant. They will look at how much schooling one has, and how the amount of experience they have. They will also have to consider how they will be paying the employee. They will have to determine if they will be paying in the form of salary or on an hourly basis.

Another P is promotion. The promotion aspect of the marketing mix deals with the one looking for the job. This is where the applicant wants to try and sell themselves to the company by pointing out their strengths. This is where the applicant would market themselves to the company by showing them how they best could improve and benefit the place they are looking for a job.

The final P is the place. This incorporates both the company looking to hire the applicant and the applicant. One needs to take into consideration is the company located in a convenient place. They need to look at their own personal life and decide how transportation to and from work will or will not affect them. The company also needs to take into consideration location. Is this employee going to be one who needs to be easily accessible and if so is that conveyed in the job description.

The marketing mix does not only have to be seen as something that focuses on a material product. When looking for a job you are the product and in order to get the job you need to sell yourself to the company. From the companies aspect they need to also make some decisions about you that all deal with marketing. Do you think it would be different if the organization was the product?