GE to replace incandescent bulbs....

In just a few years, incandescent light bulbs have become a thing of the past — replaced by more energy efficient and affordable compact fluorescent bulbs. But now General Electric says it has a technology that could kill the standard light bulb altogether: A new light-emitting diode bulb that performs just like a 40-watt incandescent, but lasts more than 17 years.

Marketed as the Energy Smart LED Bulb, the product should hit shelves by the end of 2010, GE says. Not only does it last 25 times longer than the bulbs consumers are used to, it also substantially cuts energy use (requiring only 9 watts to emit the same 450 lumens) — presumably saving homeowners cash off their energy bills for more than a decade.

The one catch? Its price tag exceeds $40. Who will be willing to pay that much when people are used to buying a four-pack of bulbs at the grocery store for under $10? GE says it has faith that consumers will weigh potential savings against upfront cost, but this has never been a strength of the mass market.

The GE bulb is revolutionary for several other reasons. One of the reasons LEDs haven’t been widely adopted for general home and workplace lighting is because their beams tend to be focused, rather than diffuse. One of the companies working on this problem is Bridgelux, which just came out with its own screw-in LED bulb, called the Heleion. The Energy Smart LED bulb uses plastic structures wrapped around the glass to more evenly distribute the light.

Flanking and Guerrilla warfare strategies...

Well both of these strategies are performed by players with small market share...

Flankers are generally attackers whose market shares are around 15%... The difference between the flankers and guerrilla's are that flankers operate close to their rivals but guerrillas attack by staying away...

For example US when GM and Ford enjoyed 80% market together, American motors came up with special convertible cars at a price close to rivals, attacking their territory...

Example of Guerrilla is Rolls Royce...Do you think any company like GM,Ford,Honda,Toyota would look into that segment as an category extension of their cars??? Definitely no..

Their segment is too narrow to risk...

Points to remember:

Flanking attack should be a surprise for others to defend..So companies need to avoid big test marketing..Other examples of flanking is Volkswagen small car concept by launching Bettle("Think small campaign") etc...

Guerrillas should never come too exposed and should never try to act like leaders...

Since their markets are small size they should never make big tycoons to feel that the segment being served is large or impressive...Brand extension should not be done(for example mercedes Benz deluxe @ 3 crores...)etc.

Guerrillas are more often found locally...They compete with national brands..like a chitalle bandhu(pune sweet shop) with big chains(if existed) etc.. Ramkumar

Countries started emulating Indian processes(Amul)

t may have been content so far with milk powder as a substitute, Nigeria now intends to replicate the Amul model in the near future. The Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC) is planning to send a team to study the co-operative model."We had visited GCMMF on Tuesday and were impressed by their co-operative model and the way they produce milk. We intend to replicate this model in Nigeria," Reuben Kifasi, director - investment promotion, NIPC, on the sidelines of '3rd Nigeria - India Business & Investment Forum (NIBIF - 2010)' in Ahmedabad. Currently, the African country uses milk powder as a substitute to milk.

However, according to Mustafa Bello, executive secretary, NIPC, Nigeria may not be able to replicate it fully. "It is not easy to replicate the Amul way of producing milk. We are importing milk powder as of now. It would be difficult to suddenly stop those imports and that may also encourage smuggling. We will have to take it up in phases," said Bello.

The Nigerian team is expected to visit Anand, GCMMF's headquarters, in the following months soon.

"We are looking at possibilities of opening up our own dairy farms and initially supply milk to schools. Later when we have convinced the government to increase the cattle, Nigeria can look at replacing milk powder with milk. Plus, we may not be able to go the co-operative way completely but would want to study Amul's milk production and technology aspects to replicate something," Bello added.

The 4 strategies!!!!!

Namely are defensive, offensive, flanking and guerrilla...
Defensive strategies are used by the leader to protect its market share to its close rivals...
It can be done through many ways..
Example: Microsoft enjoys undisputed leadership in operating system(Windows) but it doesnt enjoy its laurels rather keep reinventing new things leaving no scope for their customers to try Machintosh. Keyword here is reinventing..
Another classic example is Gillette. It had rivalry from Wilksword etc but followed Wilksword to produce disposable razor so as to not leave any stone unturned..Now that the market is shared by both Gillette and wilksword, Gillette's new step was to introduce adjustable disposable razors making the earlier one obsolete through which it captured its lost marketing share...Leader should be bold enough to attack its own products...

About the offensive strategies, it should be used by close number 2 and number 3 players..
Offensive strategies should aim at not leaders weakness but weakness in its strengths..
Examples: One exquisite example in this regard is that of Avis(car rental company which is number 2 in US, Hertz was number 1).. We have read about its positioning in Kotler(reverse positioning) which says that "We are number 2 so we work hard than others." this is offensive... Another one by Avis was, Our waiting line lengths are shorter, so we serve fast. This is an example where they looked into weakness in Hertz's market share which is their strength..

This principle is also used in attacking a monopolistic market..
Example: Wall street journal had a monopoly in business news magazines.. Company like Business Times tried entering into the market with an offensive plan which came out to be very successful.. Wall street journal had a hair breadth difference between its content..One was financial (shares, debentures etc) and the other had business news(strategies etc.).. Now since Wall street positioned itself as financial newspaper BusinessTimes came up with Business newspaper..

I would be discussing the other 2 strategies in the next blog.. Ramkumar

Are Indian products racists?????

Well there has always been a group discussion on a topic like racism and its relevance in India..
Knowingly or unknowingly we are all into that distant trap.... In India racism, poverty(Bottom of the Pyramid in mgmt. terms), women empowerment and all these are concatenated terms. Two of the best management guru's, Indian Institutes have ever produced where i mean to say Prahalad and Aneel Karnani (both of them are Professors in Michigan University) had an interminable discussion over this..Prahalad in one of his book named Fortune at the BOP mentioned widely the example of fair n lovely cream where it was able to reach the mass market and create enough loyalty towards the brand..He says that F&L empowered them by bringing more confidence into them by making them look better as he quotes, some women working with a mason once said that F&L made her skin less darker as compared to her parents crediting F&L.. Counter acting this Aneel Karnani said that F&L is actually exploiting them and making people more vulnerable to the racism bug.. Fair n Lovely ad's claims that far skinned women become more successful with better job and better husband, to which people responded very seriously which was deceptive according to Aneel..He says that these create a sense of difference between fair looking and dark skinned women in the society leading to racism which is very dangerous..
Even if you look at statistics, India is the only country where this concept of fairness cream has evolved and has turned as a favourable destination for marketeers to market..HUL after cladding mammoth success in India ,thought that the African market would also respond in the same way..But alas!!!! They dont have special feeling or to put more clearly a sense of superiority in white...They are not racists,atleast from this point of view...Ramkumar

Understanding asset bubble burst!!!!

This story would give a great insight to what it is!!!!

Once there was a little island country. The land of this country was the
tiny island itself. The total money in circulation was 2 dollar as there
were only two pieces of 1 dollar coins circulating around.

1) There were 3 citizens living on this island country. A owned the land. B
and C each owned 1 dollar.

2) B decided to purchase the land from A for 1 dollar. So, A and C now each
own 1 dollar while B owned a piece of land that is worth 1 dollar.
The net asset of the country = 3 dollar.

3) C thought that since there is only one piece of land in the country and
land is non produceable asset, its value must definitely go up. So, he
borrowed 1 dollar from A and together with his own 1 dollar, he bought the
land from B for 2 dollar.
A has a loan to C of 1 dollar, so his net asset is 1 dollar.

B sold his land and got 2 dollar, so his net asset is 2 dollar.

C owned the piece of land worth 2 dollar but with his 1 dollar debt to A,
his net asset is 1 dollar.

The net asset of the country = 4 dollar.

4) A saw that the land he once owned has risen in value. He regretted
selling it. Luckily, he has a 1 dollar loan to C. He then borrowed 2 dollar
from B and and acquired the land back from C for 3 dollar. The payment is by
2 dollar cash (which he borrowed) and cancellation of the 1 dollar loan to
C.
As a result, A now owned a piece of land that is worth 3 dollar. But since
he owed B 2 dollar, his net asset is 1 dollar.

B loaned 2 dollar to A. So his net asset is 2 dollar.

C now has the 2 coins. His net asset is also 2 dollar.

The net asset of the country = 5 dollar. A bubble is building up.

(5) B saw that the value of land kept rising. He also wanted to own the
land. So he bought the land from A for 4 dollar. The payment is by borrowing
2 dollar from C and cancellation of his 2 dollar loan to A.

As a result, A has got his debt cleared and he got the 2 coins. His net
asset is 2 dollar.

B owned a piece of land that is worth 4 dollar but since he has a debt of 2
dollar with C, his net Asset is 2 dollar.

C loaned 2 dollar to B, so his net asset is 2 dollar.

The net asset of the country = 6 dollar. Even though, the country has only
one piece of land and 2 Dollar in circulation.


(6) Everybody has made money and everybody felt happy and prosperous.

(7) One day an evil wind blowed. An evil thought came to C's mind. "Hey,
what if the land price stop going up, how could B repay my loan. There is
only 2 dollar in circulation, I think after all the land that B owns is
worth at most 1 dollar only."

A also thought the same.

(8) Nobody wanted to buy land anymore. In the end, A owns the 2 dollar
coins, his net asset is 2 dollar. B owed C 2 dollar and the land he owned
which he thought worth 4 dollar is now 1 dollar. His net asset become -1
dollar.

C has a loan of 2 dollar to B. But it is a bad debt. Although his net asset
is still 2 dollar, his Heart is palpitating.

The net asset of the country = 3 dollar again.

Who has stolen the 3 dollar from the country ?
Of course, before the bubble burst B thought his land worth 4 dollar.
Actually, right before the collapse, the net asset of the country was 6
dollar in paper. his net asset is still 2 dollar, his heart is palpitating.

The net asset of the country = 3 dollar again.

(9) B had no choice but to declare bankruptcy. C as to relinquish his 2
dollar bad debt to B but in return he acquired the land which is worth 1
dollar now.

A owns the 2 coins, his net asset is 2 dollar. B is bankrupt, his net asset
is 0 dollar. ( B lost everything ) C got no choice but end up with a land
worth only 1 dollar (C lost one dollar) The net asset of the country = 3
dollar.

What is Ambush marketing????

Ambush marketing is a marketing technique which involves riding on the coattails of a major event without paying sponsorship fees, essentially using the event as a free promotion. One classic example of ambush marketing occurred at the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta, when the Nike company covered the city in ads, benefiting from the focus on the city for the Olympics without having to pay the often hefty sponsorship fees. Ambush marketing is a source of frustration for promoters of sports events, as well as companies which do pay sponsorship fees.This type of marketing most commonly occurs in association with major sports events, although potentially other events could be used as a venue for ambush marketing as well. At a typical sports event, several companies pay very large fees for exclusive marketing rights, and these fees can sometimes number in the billions for events like the Olympics. In return for the fees, the company gets exclusive advertising space, and it is supposed to get protection from competitors. Rival soda companies, for example, cannot both pay sponsorship fees for the same event.

A variety of techniques are used in ambush marketing. The most basic is simply buying up billboard space around an event, assuring that people who attend the event will see the marketing. This practice is entirely legal, although event organizers and sponsors may find it annoying. Ambush marketers may also be more subtle, doing things like passing out t-shirts, hats, and other promotional gear to people attending the event so that their branding is seen in the stadium.