http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=133099
"Walmart Is Set to Sell a $99 iPhone"
From Advertising Age Online
This article discusses the agreement between Apple and Walmart to begin carrying a 4GB iPhone in Walmart locations. The main point the article made was questioning whether or not this move would help or hurt Apple's brand image. For a company seen as selling top-of-the-line premium products, is mass marketing the best way to go in order to maintain that strong image? This doesn't seem to be a concern for Apple, however. They've recognized the opportunity to reach a rapidly increasing market and want to do what they can to allow those figures to continue growing. According to a recent ComScore study, iPhone adoption since June 2008 grew 48% among those earning between $25,000 and $50,000 per year and 46% among those earning between $25,000 and $75,000.
It seems that this will give Apple the perfect opportunity to penetrate the above-mentioned market, benefiting Walmart as well by drawing customers into the store for prices they won't find anywhere else. While originally I found myself questioning what this would do for Apple's image (selling such an "elite" product at such a low cost), I realized that it's not much different from what they're already doing. Apple products have been sold at Walmart locations for awhile now and it hasn't seemed to do much other than help boost sales. The iPhone is more or less just the addition of another product to the already existing line. When it's all about the sales and making the money, a company will put their brand wherever they'll see great results.
Forrester analyst, Neil Strother, made a good point in the article that you can't really argue with: "If you're trying to sell products, a lot of them move through Walmart. Especially in a down economy, do you want to be choosy where you get your customers?" It sounds like a perfectly valid point. Apple thinks so too.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Nice job. A couple minor suggestions for you. One, embed the source article url in a link. Two, consider using titles descriptive of the content. Or at least something more creative than "week 2". ;-)
Post a Comment