Marketing Guru David Aaker, "Brand Relevance"

let's get started please let's get started my name is rich Lyons I'm the Dean of the business school here the Haas School at UC Berkeley I want to welcome you to our event today which is part of our Dean's speaker series it is also part of an annual event that we call the David Walker distinguished lecture series in marketing before I introduce our speaker today introduce Dave let me just take a minute to remind you of this dean speaker series so there are an awful lot of great speakers that come through this series next week for example we have a distinguished guest that is Susan Peters Susan is the chief learning officer at GE runs all of the leadership development and all the training at Croton Ville at GE and is really a deep and very well-respected expert in leadership and in corporate education as well that talk is the 23rd at 12:30 Wells Fargo same place today I'm thrilled to introduce our guest friend colleague David ocker David is a professor emeritus here at UC Berkeley who was on our faculty for a long long time stays very much engaged with us he retired in a formal sense in 2001 but as you can tell from his book and from many of the other things he'll talk about today he is very very far from retired we set up this series in part to make sure that we got him back at least once a year to fill us in on his thinking and every year he's got a lot of new content as is the case this year with with a new book that is noted that is noted up there this is also co-sponsored event the hospital Club the MBA Haas Marketing Club and also our undergraduate Marketing Association I see many of the students here thanks to you for coming it's also this wonderful opportunity to hear from Dave and in the area of marketing many of you may not know this at the end at the MBA level we turn out more people into marketing jobs than any other top 10 Business School roughly 25 26 percent per year very consistently it is a very important area for us and has been for a long time David's prolific career over a hundred articles 15 books many many different languages this work has been translated into he's recognized as one of the top top top if not the top person in in branding and has been for a long time he's been called a guru I think of Dave as Dave dave is one of these people that's just a wonderful wonderful accessible and and wonderfully wonderfully high perspective person he has he was the originator of the ocker brand identity model a model that many of you have worked with it's a bottle that we've worked with here at Haas to think about what our brand what our brand essence is this book today that will talk about brand relevance making competitors irrelevant that you can see on the screen here we will learn an awful lot from him there's no question about it he's been on the faculty I should have mentioned since 1968 he was the eg Grethe ER professor of marketing and public policy he also serves as the vice chair of profit brand strategies San Francisco based consulting firm that was set up by two of our hassel um Scott Galloway and Ian Chaplin both of them named MBA grads in 1992 David received his Bachelor of Science degree from MIT his MS and PhD are from Stanford and I want to thank David on behalf of all of us and also me personally because David is one of my favorite people David thank you very much thanks well it's nice to be here again and and thanks to rich I think we have the best dean in the country or in the world by a big margin and I can say that authoritative Lee from a lot of angles the since last year I am it's a whole new world I'm now on Twitter you know I know rich lines when it comes to twittering but I Twitter and I started a blog three months ago so once or twice a week I write something on brands and I'm on LinkedIn and Facebook and it's it's a it's really a fast-moving bewildering world and in that context I've been studying brand relevance now since for about six or seven years I introduced it my last book brand portfolio strategy my last brand book and since then I've been working with it I'm just really amazed at its power you know could two observations from from my research into brand relevance first of all you know we all are engaged in very dynamic markets new products new applications new emerging sub categories new trends it's it's very dynamic and every every time I look at that dynamic in any context I think brand relevance explains it it really explains what's happening why some are emerging some are declining and it explains it because it drives it what really is driving market dynamics is the emerging of new categories and sub-categories making some people less relevant and some people more relevant another observation is that it is really astounding how how much of marketing expenditures have no impact no impact none in and most of those are probably wasted and really it's an extraordinary thing and I look at category after category ad to support that assertion I studied the the beer market in Japan pretty extent too late and if you look at it over 40 actually over 50 years there's been no change in market chair trajectory in 50 years except when three times when new subcategories were established and a fourth time when a subcategory was repositioned extraordinary I mean from 1960 to 1986 Karen had 60 percent market share plus or minus one percent despite enormous monies and new products every year six new products a lot of money spent nothing nothing nothing and then Asahi came out with super dry in 1986 a beer that had more alcohol no aftertaste it was was pitched to the young it was a Western beer and and and then it changed Karen lost ten share points in a year and a half and there were they weren't free fall and they tried everything and nothing worked until they came out with a subcategory called Ichiban and they they stabilized the decline until until in 1995 acai repositioned dry beer is a leading beer the freshest beer the global beer and tragically Karen for care they repositioned it as a draught beer because they hated it that Asahi was the number one draft beer so they walked away from all their equity they went again into free fall and that happened until they became the dominant brand in a new sub category called hapa Shu which was a lo Mart low tax beer extraordinary you look at at the computer industry I mean Dec didn't become a major player in the 70s multibillion-dollar player because it it beat IBM it became it created a new sub category and dominated it Sun didn't become a major player in six years the fastest growing company in American history because it beat dacor it beat IBM it created sub-category network works 8 stations you can go after category after category the same story the major changes occurred when somebody created a new category or sun category let's step back and define brand relevance if you look at a decision process a customer first selects a category or subcategory maybe it's SUVs and then it determines what brands to consider maybe it's Lexus BMW and Cadillac and then selects which brands the first two steps are brand relevance and the really unique thing is that it brings selection of the category and subcategory into the process the last stage is brand preference and we spend way way way too much money and time on brand preference competition and way too little on brand relevance competition and the that routes to winning are completely different in in brand preference competition you win because your brand is preferred over other brands that's how you win and the strategy is to engage in incremental competition a little better a little cheaper and and to engage in in marketing programs you know supported hopefully by a huge marketing budget to tell the world that your brand is better than the other brand the problem with this model is it's really hard to own an incremental innovation because somebody will copy you or at least leave the impression they've copied you and you have nothing and all this marketing expenditures it just doesn't lead anywhere doesn't lead to more sales leads to less profits it's a brutal world now in brand preference competition is completely different you win because competitors brands are not considered not because your preferred and so the strategy is to engage in substantial and transformational innovation to create new categories and sub-categories and then to manage those categories and sub-categories just like others are managing brands you have to manage categories and subcategories its econ 101 you know I used to learn law in my econ by listening to rich talk to students seasoned that used to be in the office next to mine and he was always talking to students I accused him of you know you know trying to get good teaching ratings by spending time with students but it's econ 101 right you make money when there's no competition or weak competition and that's what brand relevance competition is all about so it's very important to understand innovation there's incremental innovation that helps you in brand preference competition there's transformational competition the circus Olay is the that that everybody kind of understands you really change something very radically but there's substantial competition substantial innovation is the tricky thing so in substantial competence a substantial innovation what you're doing is improving it something that that people are already that's already familiar with in their category you're improving it so much that your improvement becomes a must-have people will not buy from somebody that doesn't have a must-have so you know body armor you know you can get body armor but some will have Kel var in it and that's a substantial innovation didn't change what people make or what people buy just made it'll so much better that it became a must-have and defined its own subcategory it's really important to understand when you have a substantial innovation in hand and when you really have an incremental innovation there's enormous payoff from this and I can give you in the book has a hundred different case studies Enterprise read apart car went 35 years with no competition they went 20 years before even anybody noticed them they're now twice as big as Hertz and they got much more profits and and I there's a whole bunch of examples like that but there's also a dozen or more quantitative studies you know one of them for example looked at a hundred eight business launches and those that were defined to involve new categories or subcategories was 14% of the sample 38% of the revenue and 61% of the profits it's amazing it's just amazing how little impact you know strategy directed toward preference competition results in McKinsey study a thousand firms forty years they looked at the new entrants into a marketplace and they found that the the profit premium the ROI over the average in that in that marketplace 13 percent the first year even the the even a tenth year there was still a small premium and if you assume that new entrants are more likely to involve new categories or subcategories that's pretty dramatic and a marking we've had dozens and dozens of studies that show that new product success is correlated with differentiation me-too products just don't make it and if you believe that differentiation is correlated with the existence of new categories or subcategories that's further evidence so how do you do it and on one hand it it must be doable because there's so many people that have done it but on the other it's uh it's it's it's not so easy either anyway I've studied this now again looked at hundreds of case studies and so forth and and a lot of academic research one of the small advantages I have over others that right for the business communities I can actually read academic articles I think I'll stop there but anyway a couple observations let me just make five quick observations about all this research one ideas come from all over the place and in the book I talk about 15 or 17 different ways you can generate ideas in an organization you can ask customers but usually that doesn't result in the kind of breakthrough you want and Henry Ford famously said if I asked people what they wanted they would set a faster horse but you can observe customers and you know Proctor and Gamble ethnographic research has is developed countless new subcategories in the last 15 years when Marriott sent a team of six people for six weeks into into hotel lobbies and looked the way businessman interact in as a result of that completely redesigned their lobbies with discussion centers with the tables and so on really changed the experience you can be a customer I mean quick hand started when a the founder observed his wife was having trouble with internet bill pain and record-keeping Zappos was started when the founder realized that it was pretty hard to find a selection of shoes in in his size you can partner with a customer I mean Proctor and Gamble is now worked with Walmart is a team for 15 or 20 years and they study logistics and accounting and warehousing and promotions and and they have a team that makes all those things work better and they have really created a whole new subcategory in the packaged goods industry and that is involves a kind of relationship with your customer that Procter & Gamble has and a lot of their didn't for a long time can be technology dryers figured out how to make creamy low-fat ice cream with their new process that was a technology it can be designed designed for some people become a must-have they're not going to buy a brand that doesn't have the magic they're looking for there's a system solution SIBO in 1995 invented C R M were they packaged a dozen different software programs all involving the customer relationship and customer touch points and they call that customer relationship management and all those companies that were making those component software parts then matter how good they are they weren't relevant because that wasn't what people were buying anymore in Siebel was in one of that growth stories of the last 15 years you can augment the product Best Buy bought a little company called the Geek Squad and made it go from 200 to 13,000 people and and created a must-have for customers of consumer electronics sometimes its CEO vision and reward had a vision Ted Turner had a vision Mike Harper got a heart attack and then he got a vision we needed some frozen dinners that are healthy and or at least not unhealthy second timing is everything you got to have the market and the technology and the firm already they all need to be ready every one of them you know one of the incredible misconceptions about jobs is that it that is that the reason he's so successful incidentally he's created six subcategories in ten years one of the more phenomenal achievements in all business history but people think it's his vision well he does have vision but more important than vision is timing I mean the iPad came out was introduced by Microsoft ten years before iPad and the iPod was introduced by Sony two years before Apple did so Sony had the vision but Sony didn't have the timing right they came out with a product that was too expensive at it could only hold 16 songs and they and they had music they had this complicated download system so that SUNY Sony Music was convinced that nobody would steal their songs so they had the timing wrong and timing has to be right the Chrysler minivan the Coco introduced at 99 82 they went 16 years with no viable competitor 16 years they sold 12 and a half million vehicles it's saved Chrysler and Lee Iacocca proposed that well before he was fired at Ford four years earlier but Ford had no front-wheel drive Ford had a CEO that was didn't want Lee Iacocca to have another success and Ford had a huge station wagon business they could didn't want to you know undercut that they're making a ton of money on station wagons the timing was not right Ford was not ready so it didn't happen it 4/3 you know the brand relevance competition is different in that it's no longer about my brand is better than your brand so it's it's not about brand management brand building brand strategy as we know it you have to manage the category and subcategory it's a very different mindset and sometimes it's difficult to make that transition and the key to doing that is to become the category or subcategory MZ exemplar and we study the exemplar in psychology a lot and what it is it's like it's a brand that represents the category or subcategory and because it represents it it can define it and that's so powerful because you want to define this category not only initially but you want to define it over time and you wanted to find it in such a way that your must-haves is really an important part of that definition and as you innovate over time you want to make sure that you manage the the changing definition of it but it also connects the brand to the subcategory because if you're not the exemplar you have the job of becoming relevant by connecting yourself to that category of subcategory and that can be really tough and expensive and it can be risky because you risk somebody else becoming having a stronger connection but if you're the exemplar if your Prius with hybrids if your iPod then you know you have a huge because you automatically connected I mean you're defining it you're it and you're sort of the Kleenex of the category you know I want to buy a Kleenex or I want to Xerox something you're you're part of the category so all these brands have become exemplar x' so CNN ESPN they they define what the category is all about and tide cold water and so on so how do you become an exemplar well there's three things first you have to with discipline market the category or subcategory and not the brand in salesforce.com became the exemplar of cloud computing by doing that they never talked about by Salesforce instead of some other brand they talked about why you need cloud computing because it's so much easier to install to repair to service to upgrade and because it's actually safe and it's reliable and it's going to be always there for you so they only talked about the category and subcategory never the brand a second you need to be the early market leader it doesn't work if you're one of the small also-ran companies or brands so if you look at that prius they weren't the first hybrid in america Honda was but Prius took over and dominated the market iPod wasn't the first you know music player of that type mp3 player it was it was Sony and there were others but iPod took over and dominated Iran so you don't have to be the pioneer but you have to be the early market leader and finally you need to be the authentic brand authenticity is really important now when when Asahi dry beer came out with their new category in 1986 one of the things Karen did was come out with Karen dry it was the identical beer it was just as good but it wasn't authentic and people knew that because first of all they knew the story oh this this incredible upstart firm was able to do such a such a dramatic thing in the marketplace they knew who did that it was Asahi and they knew that Karen was just trying to rip him off besides Karen didn't have all the other associations that made it authentic that Asahi had didn't work for for Karen so you've got to think about authenticity that means things like trust and reliability and and you know peer being period of the promise fourth you need to create barriers to competition again econ 101 if you get a monopoly you need a barriers otherwise you lose it right I always like to give economists a little bit of a you know a CLE when I can when you know they have something that is relevant to the rest of us then I like to point that out we need barriers to protect our monopolies so how do you do that well there's three kinds of barriers one you can just execute over the top and Zappos created this new sub category which was a shoe store and the internet and they have over-the-top service they don't spend money on marketing they devote it all to their 24/7 call center they and in the service is supported by a set of ten values the most famous of which is be have fun and be a little weird and so the whole nature of the relationship the whole personality of the brand is affected by those values really hard to copy really hard to copy second you can continuously innovate so if you look at iPod then we had the Nano we had the shuffle we had the I touch and and ultimately iPad and iPhone really hard to compete against a moving target it just doesn't stand still so innovation is a key thing and the third is to get beyond functional benefits to surround your your brand in this new sub category with you know things like a personality like organizational associations things that are going to be hard to copy but become must-haves so like panasonic I monitor brands in Japan we've done this for 10 years and we measure a thousand brands and Panasonic is always in the top 10 usually in the top five and a reason is that they have this incredible program they get credit for for being the most sustainable company they have a whole line of products out of an ecosystem that manages the energy in your home and your building in the end of the building they they themselves are very sustainable in terms of their plants and and product packages and so on and finally they even courage the sustainability message in the larger population you know crate quite incredible and in doing so they in effect created a sub category that includes companies that have a social security social concern in that segment the United States I should add is is growing rapidly finally look at underserved segments so one of the great brand stories in the last 10 years is Nintendo in our study Nintendo went from 165 to sixty five to seven to one to one and now it's three most amazing a change in brand position that we've seen in ten years of running that survey and the way they did it is to to say to themselves we're going to let Microsoft and Sony you know go after the heavy user the young male that likes violence at like graphics that likes high speed and we're going to go after moms and girls and families and give them involvement and give them educational stuff and so on we're going to do something completely different and so they looked at the underserved segments Aluna broke into the energy bar system by creating an energy bar for women called the Luna so anyway that's just some ideas the book of course has much more about how do you go about categories and sub-categories and a lot of these things are not obvious you know the fact that there's this you just don't turn out concept exploration to the market research to turn important you've got to be on top of things so you get the timing right you've got to worry about managing the category or subcategory you got to create barriers and look at underserved segments great quote you do not merely want to be considered the best of the best you want to be considered the only one who does what you do so a challenge what percent of a marketing budget in your firm goes to you know establishing and defending offerings that dominate a category or subcategory that's brand relevance competition and what percent support brands that are fighting established competitors and established categories or subcategories that's brand preference competition you want to change that percentage just one last thought brand relevance is also a threat as well as an opportunity it's a threat because if you no longer made what customers are buying you're going to fade let me elaborate on that so if you like if you look at McDonald's they were being challenged they becoming not relevant for a lot of people because they were going to Starbucks for their mid-morning coffee for even for breakfast so McDonald's came out with me coffee not to be better than Starbucks their goal was not to win the brand preference competition their goal was to be relevant to be good enough so people would no longer avoid McDonald's you know Walmart incredible story 8% of America six years ago were boycotting Walmart because you know the litany of bad things they were perceived to be doing and in 1995 in a camping trip the CEO of Walmart decided that you know he would do something about the environment so he embarked on a sustainability program that was remarkable in its scope and impact and to his surprise he found that not only was this doing good for the world but it was saving a lot of money I mean a lot of money his trucks his packaging is warehouse and everything was a lot cheaper and it was helping him attract sales because there was a lot of customers that wanted to buy stuff like this so it turned out to be a win-win-win for Walmart and I just saw an article a few months ago that said it's hard to hate Walmart's anymore it's remarkable but also you can use relevance because you lose energy and visibility and therefore you're not considered that's the other part of the relevance model remember so what we know that you know there's a great book called the Brad bubble that explains the data behind this but we know that brands just need energy and brands are losing equity over the world because they're losing energy so one way to get energy is to energize the business and you know a dove was a 200 million dollar bar so back 20 years ago and now it's a 4 billion dollar company and they've introduced the Dove moisturizer concept into you know six or eight different categories and they develop these incredible what I call branded differentiators like the weightless moisturizer a lot of energy into dove because of the business but you can also find something with energy and attach it to your business or find or create that is like the Avon breast cancer crusade and the Avon run for breast cancer enormous energy for Avon which is really kind of a bit of a boring category in many respects for most but but here they have a program that has substance behind it there is 640 million for breast cancer it's got an enormous involvement in participation and it's a it's not a short term one-shot promotion I mean this is 20 years almost they've been at this so so back to the where we started you know there's all these market dynamics it's hard to understand how to respond to them and it's really important to be in a position where you can dry them and I think the key to all this is brand relevance so that's it thanks for having me again and we'll have some questions when we continue to capture as much of our content as we can to make it available to you later and to those who couldn't be here so I'm going to ask you to use those microphones but please anybody who's got a question we would love to take one please sir so recently Groupon has gotten a lot of attention for being with the fastest-growing companies ever booked with Groupon oh and there's a look there's been a lot of articles looking at clones that are out there that are you know emulating the same business models and are kind of trying to take over the market share by having more local fields than screw ponds kind of the more mainstream international company I mean how do you feel a company that's moving that fast in such an energetic space can kind of have some you know subcategory relevance well I think Groupon is a good example of a company that's become the early market leader and is dominating that category that they are now participating in but when you have something that it's is that dynamic then everything is is telescope down so you know maybe you'll have a monopoly for you know eight months or a year and a half instead of 18 years but the the principle is the same what you try to do is to you know create those barriers you try to innovate to make it a moving target and so you know that's what eBay did an eBay was able to to maintain their position for a long time by continually innovating and and changing and I might add again the eBay context the the use of a brand portfolio and sub brands help you in that because what you want to do is to create new must-have new must-haves new must-haves and that all require communication and so forth so that's one thing Groupon needs to do I think is to innovate and the other thing is that if coupon can you know create a huge following base I mean that's the ultimate barrier because then you could have a much better product in gloop on but you're not going to be able to break in because it requires a huge follower base in order to work and in Groupon has that you know not only a follower base of people that buy into it but people that are selling but it's going to be interesting so it was interesting to watch something that can happen so fast we're not talking about enterprise rent-a-car or the Chrysler minivan where we had decades with virtually no competition and an interesting role model for Groupon would be Apple and the iPad and you look at what's happening in that market and how Apple is holding off some really vigorous big competitors with good technology but it's tough for them to break in if I may if I may ask one and please to step to the microphone as you see firms go after this more further upstream at the brand relevant stage what sorts of things are they doing organizationally to make themselves better at taking advantage of these ideas well that's a good question yeah it's an organizational challenge and what I say is that organizations have to have three characteristics in order to do that and these three characteristics are in conflict first of all they have to be entrepreneurial they have to be quick on their feet they have to be externally have an external information system they have to be flexible they have to be be in multiple product markets but at the same time they have to be able to commit they have to be able to do incremental innovation because if you if you get onto one of these things you've got to commit to it you've got to solve the problems you can't give up too early and that's one of the things that that we see a lot people give up too early and they they are risk averse and there's a third thing you have to incidentally Charles O'Reilly used to be professor here wrote about the fact that companies need to do these two things simultaneously and so I'm not the first one with that idea but it's still it's a huge challenge but there's the third thing they have to be able to allocate resources across the organization because what happens is the the law organizational units suck the resources out of the air and they suck innovation out and you look at Microsoft of course it's famous for the fact that windows in office you know so huge so profitable that anything else is is sort of it's not worthwhile so it's really hard for Microsoft to be the innovator in that space and that's true it you know make me Donald's coca-cola and everything so the challenge is to be able to allocate resources so that these promising innovations that have the potential established a category or subcategory are really funded not only when you're getting the the technical tweaks out but when you're introducing it into the marketplace you're building barriers and you're protecting it other questions please yeah could could be could you use the microphone flexible you just tell me I'll repeat the question okay how would you apply this concept to nonprofits and research centers well I think it applies every bit the same it's it's a mindset are you selling a category or category or are you going to build a brand and it's very different if you think in terms of a category or subcategory your prospective changes in the way you spend marketing activities change and at the end you result in a stronger brand you look at is the Teva the one that has a microfinance that pioneered that and that was done actually with a Stanford student at AHA student but there's probably Haws examples as well but anyway they built the sub category and they taught people what microfinance in their world was and and now you have some other microfinance companies emerging and I think if they create new sub categories instead of trying to say we're better than Teva that they're they're better off and you know I was talking to rich about business schools and their branding which we've talked about many times but I think if you look at it as you know if you created some things that are so different that have so many must-haves that it becomes a subcategory so we're not trying to say that our brand is better than Stanford we're trying to say we've created a place where where we have confidence without arrogance if I got that phrase right confidence yeah without attitude without it without attitude without that get yeah arrogance a little strong isn't it but that that you know that can become a must-have and that can become a whole new subcategory so let's talk about this is a type of business school you might want not that you want Berkeley versus somebody else you want to build that whole category good question yeah so you gave up some example about products that were developed to build new categories do you think for services it's is it more challenging to create to come up with new ideas to create new categories then then then it's for products so far for services in general your question so you you mentioned some very interesting examples about new products okay that are related to cup new categories but how does how does it is it more it's it's harder to to do the same for services yeah well whether you talk about brands or categories or subcategories the difference between services and products are that services are delivered through an organization and an organization is an integral part of the experience and of the offering so that has a lot of implications the that means that when you talk about an organization you're talking about you know programs like the Avon breast cancer could say you're talking about a type of people like they have at Zappos you're talking about a culture you know like they have at the Virgin Airlines so your and and it's very hard to duplicate programs people in culture where it's easier to duplicate this type of toothpaste or this type of car so so then what you're what you usually have to focus on are those kinds of things because those are the kinds of things that are going to differentially you know differentiate your brand or define a new category or sub Gouri so the ones that do that in the service sector usually have really strong culture based on a set of values it really has the discipline in hiring people and course apples famously gives people $4,000 to quit and if so if they're the least bit unhappy they want them gone and and they'll have a set of programs that drive though that are driven by those values in that culture other questions hi you mentioned Microsoft I was wondering if you had any advice for somebody that would bring a product to market like Windows Mobile where they would appear to be the follow candidate boy I don't know anything about Windows Mobile most anybody except the Windows Mobile are they the ones that are forming an alliance with Nokia yeah I was just talking to a brand one of the leading brand strategists of Sweden about a Nokia and they're in a tough place because they there there's this whole new sub category that have created under really cheap phones defined by the old low price simple and then there's the the smart phones and they just were left behind there they're out and so they're they don't have a lot of options so one of their what they're trying to do is trying to become relevant by fast by getting getting it with Microsoft and Microsoft has got its own similar problems and so they want to try to get relevant fast by merging with Nokia and it's it's it's probably a strategy with low to moderate probability of success but it's probably the best strategy for both of them Thanks say this will be the last question please can you comment on Sony Corporation because back in a day like Steve Jobs was big fan of akio morita was it the deaths of the founder of Sony or what would happened after walkman well yeah Sony if you look at Sony and 80s it was the apple of the of its day it had all these innovations Walkman and I think Morita is is is the reason I mean he was the Steve Jobs of his time and to have a spectacular CEO like that is extraordinary I don't think the CEOs of Sony that followed him were were bad and we've had some bad CEOs that I like Smith of GM and so on but they they weren't bad they were good but they this Morita was a genius he was a jobs and so I do think that had a thing but as a lot of you know I talk about my spanning silos book all the problems that companies face in terms of silos in Sony is is really got silo problems they haven't been able to overcome it so that's held him back and they've also were were so analog so all these brilliant products of the 80s were analog and when you go digital then you lose all that analog equity and all the analog advantage and so they they they wanted to go digital but they were tied to the analog stuff and it was really hard for them and all these other people had no equity in analog so they were off and running but Sony you know it's still it's still one of the top five brands in Japan it's it still got a lot it still got really great technology but they have a hard time turning that technology in the marketplace winners and they have a hard time overcoming this silo stuff too so then gets energy from that company but I wouldn't give up on Sony Dibakar you are your own category sir thank you very very much thank you Thanks you

Channel: Berkeley Haas

Views: 90,523

Rating: 4.8955007 out of 5

Keywords: UC Berkeley, Haas School of Business, David Aaker, Brand Relevance, Competitive Strategy, Marketing

Id: FtW1x5oul6g

Length: 50min 14sec (3014 seconds)

Published: Fri Feb 18 2011