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?