Business: Marketing a business
- Hits: 4190
The following essay is a sample paper for an essay on Business: Marketing a business. It should not be used as a ready paper for your assignment as it is already in our website. In case you want an original paper on the same topic please order for the essay at our site and our able writers will work on it from the scratch
Business: Marketing a business
- Explain why Sears or Wal-mart cannot effectively create a trendy counterculture image.
Counter culture means going against the popular culture, and in most cases, such kind of trends do not work well or augur well with the existing customers. For instance, the customers could be very much used to some particular form of cultures and if you go contrary to what they know, the receptive nature may not be pleasing. In most cases, businesses cannot afford to create some cultures that tend to go contrary to the popular opinion, and this is because this can only spell some doom for such a business. When it is possible to create a bigger model or a business mind, it is hard to influence instantly on the market of the particular line of ware because the customers can easily switch to other competitors. The stores like those ones of Wal-Mart or the Sears have a business structure or model dedicated to appealing, and therefore when they try to alienate some groups or the customer, the result is low business.
Even though, one can note that the market for the companies was ripe for a counterculture as the market customers were looking for a company that would go against conformity. However, the rules of business game are the same all over, and that is to keep and maintain what has been the norm. However, conformity can work against the company when virtually all of the competitors are changing the rule of the game. Lynn (2009) concurs with this idea when he gives an example of starting a coffeehouse. He notes that the way to go forward especially when the competition is at its pick is to start something new to what is generally known. This is counterculture, but when it is placed in the discussion of Sears or Wal-mart, this may be not be the case and can give a different result altogether.
- 1. Could the big box stores sell merchandise to Urban Outfitters?
Notably, all the stores are big including those of Urban Outfitters, and therefore, it is difficult to sell merchandise to a competitor. Competition prevails when there are competing stimuli, but when one of the stimuli is incapable of handling some of the things the other can, then, there is no competition. This is just like noting that one has a bigger share of the market than the other does, and when one gets the merchandise from the other, then, the selling one is superior to the buying one. This may not exist in competition, and what would happen is that one can undermine the other and create some forms of monopoly. Again, it is difficult to sell the same as the other because commonality exists, and what is best for such a thing is for the companies to seek their own merchandise from other sources and in a manner that would not create unnecessary or unproductive competition. Urban Outfitters sells the labels that are edgy and selective on where they sell their ware and they may be wit involved in such.
As Motta (2004) argues along this line and more so on competition, productive business is one, which creates value to everything that is on offer, or the companies are selling in the market. However, he is critical of the kind of competition that only aims at creating some monopolies, and notes that when one company gives up in competition, there would be dominance and the result is low value. In this, the big stores such as Sears cannot sell to another big store or company, and what this would just mean is that there is no competition. Each company should instead try as much as possible to topple the other, and as this continues, the result is for the customer or anyone benefiting from this getting value of his money. Motta (2004) adds that productivity and growth in a sector is realized when a strong will and competition are coupled.
- 2. Identify at least three reasons why exclusivity is valuable.
Exclusivity refers to sole rights in the use of something, and this can apply even in business of selling goods and ware. Exclusivity in such a case can mean that your business has some unique ways of doing something and another business does not have full rights to using the exact idea as yours. Exclusivity is good for a number of reasons and can make the business as per our case profitable. First, there is no interference of the original idea because, when there are counterfeits in something you had done, then, the customer would not know the original and the imitated product. Exclusivity acts as a form of recognizance where everybody would know that a particular technique in business belongs to somebody specific rather than having a multiple of counterfeits. Thirdly, one is able to revolve around what he or she did earlier, or what the business developed and come up with a more improved one, but when there is no exclusivity, then, anyone can interfere and discourage invention.
While arguing about this, DeMatteis (2004) gives an example of somebody who starts a business and puts many strategies in it, and as an inventor, he has the rights to possess those skills and deliver services using the skills at liberty. However, the opposite is when now these strategies are taken away, and then are interfered with. What then happens is that the original idea is distorted, and it no longer becomes unique, or cannot be used again for development of business. In this case, therefore, there is need to protect one’s idea and should only be in the public domain when he or she feels that he or she has exhausted it. Everybody especially in business should be an inventor rather than becoming a person only known to hack other peoples’ ideas and transforming them to appear as though yours.
- 3. Senk says that shopping is largely entertainment. Do you agree or disagree with him?
Yes, it is true that shopping is a form of entertainment, and this is because the era of buying for the sake of it is gone. People have become wiser and only go shopping because there is a high need for that. For instance, it is next to impossibility for somebody to live beyond his or her means, and whenever one is on the stores of a shop or a supermarket, then, it is because he or she fancies the item on display. This gives the sense that the person has used it before and valued it as good, or has seen it being used by another person and liked the style and its value. In an entertainment field, the sport or the game that one chooses is the one, which interests him or her or gives him or her pleasure whenever he or she is a participant or a spectator. In buying something or generally shopping, it is so because one likes it very much and gives a sense of satisfaction.
Actually, Moss (2007) qualifies it and notes that the shop is a shopping place that can give one a pleasure, and in his argument, he uses the word magic to mean that there is magic that a person just goes to his of her favorite place for shopping. He disregards all other places and opts for one place no matter how distant the place could be. This is because the person got some experience of the place to an extent that it became irresistible to the buyer. In this case, it means that buying itself gives pleasure and is magical to make a person always do it severally. This concurs with the earlier argument that it is like a sport where, once one is introduced to it, it becomes hard to resist it, and he or she may just find him or herself in the game again. Moss (2007) adds that once one finds himself or herself in something, then, it gets into the nerves.
DeMatteis, B. (2004). From patent to profit: Secrets and Strategies for the successful inventor. New York: Square One Publishers.
Lynn, J. (2009). Start your own restaurant business and more: Pizzeria, Coffeehouse, Deli, Bakery Catering Business. Madison: Entrepreneur Media Inc.
Moss, M. (2007). Shopping as an entertainment experience. Plymouth: Lexington Books.
Motta, M. (2004). Competition policy: Theory and practice. Oxford: Cambridge University Press.