Struck and Dunking’ Donuts Case study
I think the consumers will consider the price f the products and they will consider the product is fit for them or not when they buy the products. Mostly, the consumers will choose the brand which they used before because they used this brand before, they know this brand and they will have more trust for this brand.
Sometime, the consumers could choose the brand which they knew or heard before when they buy some new products because the famous brand product can bring more trust for the consumers. I agree with these three Ingredients.
In fact, I believe most customers, include me, follow these three key gradients when we choose the brand. I think better brand equity management can improve the brand value and image. It can also better promote the brand and let more customers know your brand.
This can help your brand stay in the top area of the congener products. . Take the coffee product category basically dominated by the two main brands Struck and Dunking’ Donuts. Evaluate the positioning of each brand in terms of the four components of brand positioning. Who are their target markets?
What are their main points-of-parity and points-of-difference? Have they defined their positioning erectly and effectively? How might their positioning be improved? Think the major target markets of Struck are the collage students, the white collar employees.
For Dunking’ Donuts, the target markets consumers are the customers who Just want to drink coffee and these customers want to take away their coffee immediately and do not want to cost much money on coffee. Ere main points of parity for Struck and Dunking’ Donuts are that the product of them is coffee and both of them also sell some fast food.
The main points of difference for them are the price and store layout. Hint they define their positioning correctly and effectively. For Struck, they define their brand as a high-end coffee brand. Now, this brand is famous around the Nor.
For Dunking’ Donuts, they define their brand as a quickly service coffee. Now, they are also success. I think the positioning of Struck and Dunking’ Donuts are correctly. Both of them choose to focus and develop on one area. This can help they nave enough compete it t evenness and help them improve their brand value. 3.
Upon reading the chapter discussion of points-of-parity vs.. ND points-of- preference an you think of any negatively correlated attributes and benefits other than those listed in Figure 2-6 at the bottom of p. 56.? Can you think of any other strategies to deal with negatively correlated attributes and benefits? For example, in the product of shampoo field, anti-dandruff shampoo vs..
Hair care shampoo. Think we can create some sub-brand to avoid these negatively. For example, the shampoo product, we can produce two kinds of shampoo, anti-dandruff shampoo and hair care shampoo to reduce the negatively correlated attributes and benefits. Is strategy will give the option to the customers. They will choose any product of our brand and we will avoid the negatively correlated attributes and benefits. 4.
After finishing the chapter take a few minutes and review the following puttee. Com video titled “No Logo: Brands, Globalization & Resistance. ” http:// What do you think of Naomi Kelvin’s positions as espoused in (her book) No Logos? How would you respond to her propositions? Do you agree or disagree about her beliefs on the growth of corporate power and why? Think no logo is amazing. Brand help the customer choose the products quickly.
Especially now, most people do not too much time to choose the products one by one.
They like choose products from the brand which they know. If no logo and no brand, I think most customer will be in confusion when they buy something. In addition, I think globalization is the trend. I don’t think no logo can prevent the existence of the exploitation. However, I agree with her beliefs on the growth of corporate power. Because most global corporate are worthy.
Sometime they can impact the policies of the government, especially in those underdeveloped nations.