I just read the Wired article on Apple marketing and it's trying to say Apple is successful because Mac users are loyal to the brand and not the products. In one quote they state "Without the brand, Apple would be dead," he said. "Absolutely. Completely. The brand is all they've got. The power of their branding is all that keeps them alive. It's got nothing to do with products."
Do you guys agree? After thinking about it I think it's true to a point, but not the whole truth. But I have to think if Gateway had released the flat-panel iMac would it have seemed so cool? probably not.
I think there are a few statements that are right on in the article, such as:
According to Gobe, emotional brands have three things in common:
* The company projects a humanistic corporate culture and a strong corporate ethic, characterized by volunteerism, support of good causes or involvement in the community. Nike blundered here. Apple, on the other hand, comes across as profoundly humanist. Its founding ethos was power to the people through technology, and it remains committed to computers in education. "It's always about people," Gobe said.
* The company has a unique visual and verbal vocabulary, expressed in product design and advertising: This is true of Apple. Its products and advertising are clearly recognizable. (So is Target's, or even Wal-Mart's, Gobe said).
* The company has established a "heartfelt connection" with its customers. This can take several forms, from building trust to establishing a community around a product. In Apple's case, its products are designed around people: "Take the iPod, it brings an emotional, sensory experience to computing," Gobe said. "Apple's design is people-driven."
In the end it might be the image and not just the product that pushes Apple Computers, but maybe they are just thinking different as a computer company.....
Do you guys agree? After thinking about it I think it's true to a point, but not the whole truth. But I have to think if Gateway had released the flat-panel iMac would it have seemed so cool? probably not.
I think there are a few statements that are right on in the article, such as:
According to Gobe, emotional brands have three things in common:
* The company projects a humanistic corporate culture and a strong corporate ethic, characterized by volunteerism, support of good causes or involvement in the community. Nike blundered here. Apple, on the other hand, comes across as profoundly humanist. Its founding ethos was power to the people through technology, and it remains committed to computers in education. "It's always about people," Gobe said.
* The company has a unique visual and verbal vocabulary, expressed in product design and advertising: This is true of Apple. Its products and advertising are clearly recognizable. (So is Target's, or even Wal-Mart's, Gobe said).
* The company has established a "heartfelt connection" with its customers. This can take several forms, from building trust to establishing a community around a product. In Apple's case, its products are designed around people: "Take the iPod, it brings an emotional, sensory experience to computing," Gobe said. "Apple's design is people-driven."
In the end it might be the image and not just the product that pushes Apple Computers, but maybe they are just thinking different as a computer company.....