the marketing jugglery

I generally refrain from commenting on any marketing hype or horrible media in our country because I believe; in the end they are doing their business and have to earn money to survive. A marketer’s critical work is to hype out self made trends and then make people believe that something like that is really happening. But then that is their job and I think what they are doing is not unethical either. No problems from my side.

Two advertisements off late have attracted whatever little attention span I have for them. One of Nivea promoting the whitening cream for boys and other Parachute advt in which the new chick on the block Deepika Padukone talks about doing “Champi”.

The advt are so contrasting in the message they want to deliver and the concept they are relying on. Nivea brand is associated with men’s product. Now to get into the facial products it’s trying to expand by conveying a message which goes against the general perception of a handsome man “Tall and Dark”. Dark color was ingrained in men’s handsomeness, but now to increase the market and make more money Nivea decided to turn the logic head on. Well we can always argue that this “Tall Dark and Handsome” was arbitrary and has nothing to do with handsomeness of a man and Nivea is an innovator when it challenges the unproven hypothesis.

And if you happen to ask Nivea guys about this advt which is against the accepted notions they would say with a straight face “Oh we found many men using women’s creams. Therefore we thought we have a market to serve”. This is what I was talking about when I said that marketing would make people believe that they are launching the product because a demand exists. This is because marketing led demand inducement is still not taken very well by the people.

I am not saying that demand for men’s cream does not exist. What I am trying to convey is that the demand would be minuscule and hence Nivea has to increase it manifold by advertisements and all sorts of gimmicks. By this it would be successful in inducing foolish consumers in trying a product which they would not really need.

In the parachute advt Deepika is trying to get a forgotten concept “Champi”, a concept which is not considered to be “cool” back to the mainstream. And why is she doing that, because Parachute finds itself to be a brand which is associated with the older generation. Therefore to get back into the grooves it’s trying to get an so called old fashioned concept to core. In another advt she would be promoting a “chip chip” less oil and may be advising not to use oil at all.

I am sure the consumers will buy both the arguments. That reminds me of a few notes I had written in the Kotler’s marketing book when I was doing my post graduation in management. Those notes were “if the people are so gullible and idiots to buy these preposterous marketing arguments, then they deserve to get fooled by these advertisements”.

Therefore whereas Nivea wants to break preconceived notions and is going against the accepted principles, Parachute is trying to bring back a concept which was omnipresent earlier but has been forgotten off late. I am also confident that these products like that of Nivea have a short life span and would go off shelf soon. The consumer finally is not that fool, apart from those who have excessive money to throw away. They may have tremendous growth phase earlier but their longer growth rate is susceptible.

Being a management graduate myself I however must congratulate the marketing campaign of both the products as they would be successful in inducing demand for their product where none may have existed.