Kobie Lofton
Principles of Marketing
Dr. Amanda Helm
11/11/17
Round 4: Co-Branding
Fitness Fruit Co-branding is reckoned a general approach for corporations to partner in hopes of broadening the existing market or a new one. Before the co-branding process begins, there is one question that needs to be answered: What are the determining factors in a company selecting another brand to team up with? Both companies must see potential to expand each individual market and even enter a new market. This along with both sides gaining profitable revenue makes for successful co-branding. Another factor that plays a distinct role in successful cobranding is that both partners must be mature and successful in their own fields. There are a few different …show more content…
Nike, a brand known to supply athletic gear focuses on people who enjoy sports especially running. What’s an activity people like to do while they run: listen to music. Along with this, people would also like to track their progress and physical condition when engaging in fitness activities. Apple, a brand known for supplying users with a great smartphone (that seems to crack every 30 seconds), handy apps, and of course a supreme music program in Apple Music, focuses on people who want to stay up to date with technology and enjoy listening to a good song every now and then. With Apple and Nike being second to none in their collective fields, it makes all the sense that they would collaborate in such a way that is both creative and genius. The marketing strategies for the co-brand include online marketing on each website, commercials, and applications in the Iphone app store, just to name a few. As far as gains, other than revenue, each brand is able to expand their target audiences. If done correctly, these team-ups achieve brand milestones that can not only reinforce an image, but also increase awareness. In Apple’s case, this partnership made them seem more health conscious, rather than only focusing on the things pertaining to the ‘i’ devices. For Nike, it seemed to just add more variety in the services it provided; it showed users that they weren’t just a sports clothing oriented brand. In the article called “The Case …show more content…
Robert B. DiPietro claims that the “dilution of the value of brand names is a potential issue.” In Nike and Apple’s case, this very well could have diluted the value of their brands equally. Certain people think that brands tend to go too far when they decide to “dip” into other markets. People could have started affiliating themselves with other brands that provide the same type of services. For Nike, such a market competitor would be Adidas; for Apple, such a market competitor would be Android. This could have decreased revenue for both companies and although extremely unlikely, could have even caused both companies to go bankrupt. “Another factor that may dilute the brand is the fact that these cobranded units typically have a condensed menu, rather than the full menu that a freestanding restaurant affords” (DiPietro). Although Nike and Apple fail to fall under the restaurant category, this quote is relevant to say the least. Rather than a condensed menu, Apple and Nike could very well have a condensed selection of products. This could be a dilemma and could very well also be responsible for the dilution of each individual brand. Other possible risks of co-branding could be failure to fulfill promises made in advertisements, faulty co-brand products, and even brands becoming uncooperative. This would hurt production, resulting in less earned
Principles of Marketing
Dr. Amanda Helm
11/11/17
Round 4: Co-Branding
Fitness Fruit Co-branding is reckoned a general approach for corporations to partner in hopes of broadening the existing market or a new one. Before the co-branding process begins, there is one question that needs to be answered: What are the determining factors in a company selecting another brand to team up with? Both companies must see potential to expand each individual market and even enter a new market. This along with both sides gaining profitable revenue makes for successful co-branding. Another factor that plays a distinct role in successful cobranding is that both partners must be mature and successful in their own fields. There are a few different …show more content…
Nike, a brand known to supply athletic gear focuses on people who enjoy sports especially running. What’s an activity people like to do while they run: listen to music. Along with this, people would also like to track their progress and physical condition when engaging in fitness activities. Apple, a brand known for supplying users with a great smartphone (that seems to crack every 30 seconds), handy apps, and of course a supreme music program in Apple Music, focuses on people who want to stay up to date with technology and enjoy listening to a good song every now and then. With Apple and Nike being second to none in their collective fields, it makes all the sense that they would collaborate in such a way that is both creative and genius. The marketing strategies for the co-brand include online marketing on each website, commercials, and applications in the Iphone app store, just to name a few. As far as gains, other than revenue, each brand is able to expand their target audiences. If done correctly, these team-ups achieve brand milestones that can not only reinforce an image, but also increase awareness. In Apple’s case, this partnership made them seem more health conscious, rather than only focusing on the things pertaining to the ‘i’ devices. For Nike, it seemed to just add more variety in the services it provided; it showed users that they weren’t just a sports clothing oriented brand. In the article called “The Case …show more content…
Robert B. DiPietro claims that the “dilution of the value of brand names is a potential issue.” In Nike and Apple’s case, this very well could have diluted the value of their brands equally. Certain people think that brands tend to go too far when they decide to “dip” into other markets. People could have started affiliating themselves with other brands that provide the same type of services. For Nike, such a market competitor would be Adidas; for Apple, such a market competitor would be Android. This could have decreased revenue for both companies and although extremely unlikely, could have even caused both companies to go bankrupt. “Another factor that may dilute the brand is the fact that these cobranded units typically have a condensed menu, rather than the full menu that a freestanding restaurant affords” (DiPietro). Although Nike and Apple fail to fall under the restaurant category, this quote is relevant to say the least. Rather than a condensed menu, Apple and Nike could very well have a condensed selection of products. This could be a dilemma and could very well also be responsible for the dilution of each individual brand. Other possible risks of co-branding could be failure to fulfill promises made in advertisements, faulty co-brand products, and even brands becoming uncooperative. This would hurt production, resulting in less earned