What is Marketing ... tongue in cheek
Please don't think that the following is intended to shock or to be sexist or offensive ... I came across this years ago and then forgot about it. Whilst I was in Singapore I met a delightful young representative of the
Marketing Institure of Singapore: she gave me a copy of their magazine
The Singapore Marketer and what you are about to read comes from page 32 of that very attractive publication.
What is Marketing?
Direct Marketing: You see a gorgeous girl at a party. You go up to her and say, "I'm fantastic in bed."
Advertising: You're at a party with a bunch of friends and see a gorgeous girl. One of your friends goes up to her and pointing at you says, "He's fantastic in bed."
Telemarketing: You see a gorgeous girl at a party. You go up to her and get her telephone number. The next day you call and say, "Hi, I'm fantastic in bed."
Public Relations: You're at a party and see a gorgeous girl. You get up and straighten your tie...Walk up to her and pour her a drink...Open the door for her...Pick up her bag after she drops it...Offer her a ride, and then say, "By the way, I'm fantastic in bed."
Brand Recognition: You're at a party and see a gorgeous girl. She walks up to you and says, "I hear you're fantastic in bed."
Customer Feedback: You see a gorgeous girl at a party. You go up to her and say, "I'm rich. Marry me" She gives you a nice hard slap on your face.Since I wanted to check my facts and sources, I took a look around the internet and found this piece all over the place. interestingly, not everyone includes the Customer Feedback aspect.
Here are links to some of the places where you can find this "definition of marketing"!
The Singapore Marketer Dec 2006 – February 2007 page 32
The University of
Texas at DallasAskMen.Com (
UK Version)
Duncan Williamson
Footballing question ... what would you do? II
Here's the answer to my footballing question. Celtic was the club in question. They told their fans that their match against FC Copenhagen would take place on Tuesday instead of Wednesday. Lots of their fans made their arrangements based on the Tuesday announcement.
Celtic then corrected their mistake and told anyone who'd made a booking on the basis of the mistake that they could claim compensation. Honestly, that's what they promised and that's what they did.
How do I know this? I met two Celtic fans on their way to Copenhagen and they told me. They were happy to be going (even though Celtic lost badly I'm afraid) and they got an extra day's holiday courtesy of the error. So they weren't angry at all!!
Duncan Williamson
Things From the Economist
Some things in the weeks Economist either caught my eye or got on my nerves.
The GherkinEvery television programme and film made in and around London these days will include an image of the Gherkin building: that's that
sloping and rounded topped building designed by Norman Foster. It's as if this building stands alone for the most modern and excellent of the world's buildings. In the article in the Economist, however, they remind us that its tenants don't all like it and even three years after it opened, there are floors that are still empty.
Now, as you know I travel a bit and strongly recommend that we take a much wider view of modern architecture. Forget those monstrosities such as the Guggenheim that are the equivalent of the Turner Prize winners. Look at the Dubai skyline and you will see doznes and dozens of innovative looking buildings: all of which are miles ahead of Forster's folly. Singapore doesn't have so much to go at because it's relatively small; but it's worth a look there too: no Singapore Stupidity either!
Language use and abuseThere's more moaning about how badly off we are at English and Maths: the rest of the world is better at their own language and maths than we are and it's largely true. We are not at the top of any league table for excellence in these things. Then people worry over why it might be that we are so bad at these things.
It doesn't help that
1 at least one exam board is now prepared to allow its examination candiadtes to answer quewtions in txt spk. Can you inmage the stupidity of this? If all you need to do is to learn how to txt then fine: forget spelling, forget punctuation, forget grammar, forget syntax, forget nuance, forget just about everything. These people will not be able to communicate effectively. What are they destined to achieve, then, if they cannot express themselves in writing properly?
2 journalists, television presenters and newspaper journalists are all developing the language in ways that I for one cannot tolerae. The other day on radio 4's today programme, a presenter who must be well educated and well informed said, following an article on reading to children, concluded by saying that 'We are guilting our parents'. This was from and educated and informed woman. So, her problem you might say. However, we all know the power of the media because, hold your hands up now, how many of you now say these
a movies instead of films
b box office instead of ticket office
c parking lot instead of car park
d sidewalk instead of pavement
e trialled instead of tested
and the rest. We even have people talking about stepping up to the plate (baseball, I think) even when a footballer (soccer not the other sort) gets ready to take a penalty!
Then there is the 'it's about' syndrome. What does it mean when someone says, 'It's about cricket'? or 'It's all about football'? The other day someone on the telly said something like this:
'It's about sport, it's about cricket, it's about the Ashes, it's about passion, it's about England'. See, it's absolutely senseless yet it seems that everyone except me talks like that!!!
I can't stand the way that these inadequates feel the desire to import some appalling changes into our language simply because they can. Then many of us are so weak that we feel the need to copy them. More than that, though, I have been to meetings with teachers who speak the language of the street: they speak like their children and these journalists so they are failing to provide the leadership that they should. I don't see this as anything to do with language evolution either.
FoodThere is a long article on ethical shopping and in my opinion they have completely missed the point of parts of the debate. One strange thing they did was to ask that nouveau economist Tim Harford for his opinion on something, as an 'economist'. He gave the expectd fatuous answer. Read the article and see. They talk about how fair trade ruins everything for everybody. Over production has resulted from fair trade. Nestle has become strong: is that because of trickery or because they have doen their work well?
They couldn't resist a dig at 4x4 vehicles either, as if we all own and use them.
They do point out that many of the food miles that are generated come when we drive to the shops and back. They fail to take it at least one step further and say that in the old days, we all lived near the shops as we didn't have super and hypermarkets. So, we would go and do much of our shopping just in time and on foot. Now we do weekly or monthly shopping and have to drive to do it.
They also drone on about the energy content of tomatoes grown in Spain rather then in the UK ... for winter consumption. Excuse me, again in the old days and in some places still, they accept that there aren't any tomatoes to be had out of season so they do without. Seasonality is not necessarily a bad thing.
End of rants for now.
Duncan Williamson
A few things
What are our Tax Responsibilities ... they are either active or passive: the large table here shows us how and why!
Everyone's familiar with the
Boston Matrix aren't they?
what is the name of the person who created it?
are you aware that there are no longer any dogs ... what are they called now?
Scroll down for the answers.
How about this for a
justification for avoiding tax?
Over and over again, courts have said that there is mothing sinister in (sic) arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands; taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions.Judge Hand: Commissioner of Internal Revenue v Newman 159 F.2d 848, Circuit 12947 (USA)
How to earn a patent?
A patent must be
non obvious to anyone of ordinary skill in the art.Financial Engineering News November/December 2006 Issue52 page 21
Want to know another Enron story: this is linked to Merrill Lynch
The so-called barge deal was an arrangement for "parking" an Enron asset, an equity interest in three power-generating barges moored off the coast of Nigeria, with Merrill Lynch for six months for the purpose of enhancing Enron's 1999 end-of-year earnings report with what would be reflected in the financial statements as a sale. Merrill invested S7 million to purchase equity in the barges and Enron recorded S12 million in earnings, thereby meeting its forecasts. Enron executives orally promised Merrill a flat fee of S250.000 and a guaranteed 15 percent annual rate of return over the six-month period that Merrill would be invested in the barges. According to testimony, Enron executives (including Andrew Fastow) promised that Enron or one of its affiliates would buy back Merrill's interest in the barges if no third party could be found by the end of the six-month period.
The barge deal went through, Enron reported SI2,563,000 in earnings from the transaction, and Merrill and LJM2 (an Enron subsidiary) closed the deal for the resale of the barges to Enron on June 29, 2000. LJM2 paid Merrill S7,525,000 for its interest in the barges, which was six months' return at a rate of 15 percent annually. Including the $250,000 "advisory fee" received at the end of 1999, Merrill made 5775,000 on the barge deal. Not bad work, and all with no heavy lifting.
The federal government filed charges of fraud and conspiracy against the Merrill four because Merrill's interest in the barges was risk-free. With no risk on Merrill's part, Enron should not have booked the transactions as a sale, but rather as a lease. The booking as a sale resulted in an overstatement of earnings for the year, an overstatement that had Enron meet analyst's expectations. The government's position was that the Enron executives and Merrill bankers had thereby conspired to defraud Enron and its shareholders. The Merrill four were tried and convicted of conspiracy and wire fraud. One Enron executive, tried with the Merrill four, was also convicted while another Enron executive with minimal involvement was acquitted.
The appellate court reversed (2-1) the verdicts because, the court held, Merrill bankers could not commit fraud against Enron when Enron was so fundamentally corrupt and its own officers were aligned with that corruption. Merrill bankers were just doing what the executives of Enron asked. In other words, when the corporation and officers are aligned as one in fraud, no one on the outside who participates in transactions with the corrupt souls who lead the corporation can be accused of depriving the corporation of anything. Hence, no fraud. Hence, no criminal liability. Enron was too crooked to defraud.
The lawyer in me agrees with the appellate court. Fraud requires proof of intent to defraud someone, and where a company is so fraught with fraud that fraud becomes its business those on the outside doing transactions cannot be expected to ferret through the smoke screens. Such a requirement would set a dangerous legal precedent with its imposition of duties on bankers.
However, the part of me that studies ethics looks at this case in disbelief because of the great moral clarity Merrill employees demonstrated in their initial review of the transaction. When Katherine Zrike, chief counsel for Merrill's Global Investment Banking, first had the deal presented to her, she expressed concern because of the year-end nature of the deal, its unique quality and a lack of due diligence. In fax communications Mr. Brown noted his concerns as follows, "Enron credit/ performance risk," a lack of "repurchase oblig. Enron," and the "reputational risk" of "aid[ing]/abet[ting] Enron income stmt, manipulation." Brown also communicated his concerns to about the risks, including the risk of aiding Enron with "income manipulation," to Tina Trinkle, an analyst. Unfortunately, the moral clarity was not translated into action, i.e., a refusal to do the deal. The trial record does reveal that the refusal may not have come because, in their hearts, they hoped that the sloppy and last-minute barge deal would not go through.
Ken Blanchard and the late Dr. Norman Vincent Peale, in their book. The Power of Ethical Management, offer a three-step method of analysis for ethical issues. The first step is the question, "Is it legal?" As I explain to my students, in business issues, if the answer is "No," I would stop there. Conscientious objection has not enjoyed much success with the IRS, the SEC or the Justice Department. If the answer is "Maybe," you are at the tree tops, and Merrill should have stopped there. Even if the answer to the legality question is "Yes," your analysis is not complete. Question 2 forces deeper thought, "Is it balanced?" The barge deal was one that benefited Merrill with little risk and did nothing for Enron or its shareholders. This type of one-sided see-saw deal was what Blanchard and Peale had in mind in forcing us to look at the notion of fairness. Finally, the third question and herein lies the rub. This question invokes conscience with, "How does it make me feel?" The Merrill employees had zeroed in on the issue: Their participation helped Enron engage in earnings manipulation. They felt it keenly and wrote of it in their internal communications.http://www.fenews-digital.com/fenews/20061112/?pg=45&pm=1
The answers you were gagging to read!
Bruce Henderson created the Boston Matrix
Dogs are now known as Pets ... can you believe it?
Duncan Williamson
Footballing question ... what would you do?
Imagine the situation: you are a supporter of a high profile football club that is currently playing in the Champions League. On the club's web site it announces during November that it will be playing its next match away on Tuesday 5th December. After a week of having made that announcement the club realises that its match is actually going to be played on Wednesday 6th December.
Many supporters are keen to go to the match and a lot of them have booked flights and hotels centring around the match being played on 5th December.
The club ... well, what would you do if you were a director of it? Would you apologise to the fans and wish them all the best; reimburse them in some way; give them a free ticket to the next home league game?
You might know the case, you might not: it's a real case and I'd like your opinion, what would you do?
I'll tell you what they really did after a week or so from now!
Duncan Williamson
Farepak Quiz
Here you are, a new quiz at last. It's been ages since we prepared one. This one's a bit tough and it's on the subject of the Farepak Collapse.
Go to our
home page and click on the Quizzes link then go to the bottom of the Business Studies list ... 4th December 2006 if you are reading this a long time after this message originally appeared.
Duncan Williamson
The Straits Times
This is a copy of the blog that originally appeared in my personal blog, found via my home page at www.duncanwil.co.uk; and is aimed at raising marketing and advertising awareness.
266 pages in nine parts: a mighty newspaper for a Saturday morning. The adverts caught my eye, I have to say: the news is fine but rather parochial for the most part and of only passing interest for an erstwile nomad like me.
45,000 people have signed up for the free wifi broadband service now opening up across Singapore. 600 hot spots started up yesterday and there will be 4,400 more by September next year. Read about it
here.
Those adverts, then: digital products are definitely the order of the day. Of the 40 pages in the first section of today's edition
there are mobile phone adverts on pages 2, 3, 4, 13, 17 (this advert for Sony Ericsson is ruined by including a large mug shot of that odious Robbie Williams), 18, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, 36, 38
there are adverts for other digital products on pages 5, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 29, 30, 32, 34
I must say that there are some really good looking bargains here too.
DW
