Reading Response 4
Submitted by jtirrell on Thu, 09/13/2007 - 09:57.
After reading Twitchell's "What We Are to Advertisers," respond in a comment to the following two prompts:
- According to Twitchell, why do marketers believe that the "product must be overlooked and the audience isolated and sold" (par. 9)?
- Look at the VALS2 chart on page 207. Where would you slot yourself and why? How useful is this chart for advertising purposes? What data does it reveal? What data does it hide?
1 - Marketers believe that a product must be overlooked because it doesn’t matter how different your product is from the rest of the products, there’s no difference to the consumer. Therefore, in order to ‘sell’ something you must target a specific audience and use various forms of persuasive advertisement to sell it to them. The author Twitchell uses the example of cigarettes, consumers could not tell the difference between different types of cigarettes, so in order to sell a particular brand you must advertise to a specific audience. Advertisement of product is what sells not the product itself. The soap Dove, for instance, was advertised for woman in the bath when it could have been advertised for dirty men. The soap is not specifically meant for either but is advertised towards woman. So the product was sold by advertisement to a specific audience which is why marketers believe that the product itself should be overlooked.
2 – I would say that I am an achiever only because I like the concept of prestige. It’s fun to show off a nice car or have a cool hood ornament. I think driving a Land Rover is meant for Manhattan! I don’t feel that the chart is very useful though. If an advertiser was looking for an audience to sell the product to, he would want to choose the largest possible audience. This chart shows no statistical values as to how many people are in each category. Why would I target my product to an extremely small audience? I would want to see what the largest audience is to make the most sales. However, the chart does reveal what types of people have the most resources. So if I was to sell my product for a relatively large amount of money I would know what type of people would be buying it. It hides however other members of society. You cannot categorize everyone into eight types of people. What about those who stay away from society for religious purposes? Or people who make average salaries but are not tempted at all by worldly advertisements? What about foreigners, first-generation consumers, children with no income? It’s tempting to consider these eight categories as the only possible ones but in fact there are many more; this is what the chart fails to reveal.
Submitted by rsaba on Sun, 09/16/2007 - 23:42.1.)The product itself is relatively unimportant to the overall goal of advertisers. The goal of good advertising is to convince the consumer that the product they are buying is superior in some way to the other choices, even though they might be the exact same. The advertisement talks to a specific audience with the goal of getting them to buy a certain product. To do this, the audience needs to be defined and told specifically why they need this certain product over another one. A perfect example of this are brand name products versus generic products. Most of the generic products available at grocery stores are made by the same company that makes the brand name, but the brand name is more expensive and more people buy it because they are told that it is better than generic.
2.) I think that I would be an achiever or striver. I see nothing wrong with driving a prestigious car to show it off or buying things to show status. I think that these labels are useful for advertising, but they are not set in stone. There are people in the world that buy products without paying any attention to the advertising of those products. They research the various available products and choose the one that suits their purpose best. This chart reveals who specific advertising campaigns are marketed towards and can help you identify such advertising when you see it. It also shows what strategies marketers use when trying to reach a certain audience and what elements they need to emphasize to get those people to buy their product.
Submitted by Mrmann on Mon, 09/17/2007 - 15:59.1. What Twitchell is saying here is that too many products have common properties that make it hard to separate each other from the rest. Thus, advertisers must focus on who would want the product rather than how good their product is. This makes sense even from my own experience. For example, often times I can be found changing the oil in our vehicles at home and regular hand soap does not get that dirt and grime off as I would like it. My dad has this hand cleanser that he would use and when he used to offer it to me, I would pass because it was a “man’s” product. One time, I finally did use it and it cleaned much better than regular hand soap. The hand cleanser would not have been a product I would buy for myself for the distinct reason that I thought it to be a “man’s” product.
2. I would place myself within the “Believer” category. My family does go to church regularly and my mom is a regular customer at Walmart as I am too. Our parents own two Chevy Mailbus which are your typical midsize sedans and my brother has just purchased another Malibu himself. I am also going to consider a Malibu for my future purchase.
Submitted by sarlwils86 on Mon, 09/17/2007 - 20:14.This chart is very useful for advertisers because it helps them focus on a specific group they want to market their product too. It also gives them strategies on how to market to these groups, such as using the “living on the edge” idea. This data does not reveal income ranges of the groups, however. It is assumed that the lower groups have lower incomes, but this may not necessarily be the case.
1.) Taste tests, etc., prove that it is not the actual product that consumers prefer –– instead they prefer the images of certain products. The success of these images is determined by the number of people that are sold on the image and decide to use the product.
Isolation is the key. As the author reports, humans are like sheep. (After all, why did entire villages participate in stoning people, except that everyone else was doing it?) Isolating individuals would only serve to repel them however, so the author suggests isolating certain audiences. Individuals relate to their particular demographic, so if everyone in their “group” supports a product, they feel even more compelled to follow suit.
2.) I found the chart to be quite useless as a means of conveying the information about the different types of people. It does essentially nothing to describe each group's characteristics. I can appreciate the ideas behind the chart for ethnographic and marketing purposes. I cannot, however, find a place for myself within its framework.
Submitted by jajansen on Mon, 09/17/2007 - 20:25.I am part striver, part maker, and part believer, though I contradict elements described in each. While I strive for success, I am not so driven by consumerism that I am blind to its motives. I also do not strive to “damn the man” and go against the establishment.
I’m quite a hypocrite, to be frank. I recognize advertisements and packaging for what they are – but still I prefer to drink Starbucks than my own, homemade version of a nonfat, no-whip mocha. It isn’t that Starbucks coffee is so much better than my own... maybe I'm just lazy?
Cigarettes are cigarettes, soap is soap, beer is beer, and cola is cola. Consumers rarely distinguish the difference between products based solely on the product. Twitchell points out this idea by showing consumers cannot distinguish the difference between two brands of cigarettes. The bottom line is Twitchell feels as though the product itself must be overlooked, and sold to a specific audience in order to be successful. The fact that consumers do not distinguish between products with similar characteristics is the fuel for his reasoning. He gives a couple of examples, pointing out how the marketing for Dove soap chose to appeal to women as a skin moisturizer instead of advertising for men with dirty hands. Although the soap could be used in both situations, Dove felt as though they would sell more soap with the advertising directed at the women. Also, Twitchell comments “if Anheuser- Bush wants to maximize its sales, the soccer mom driving the shiny Chevy Suburban must feel she drinks a different Budweiser than the roustabout in the rusted-out Chevy pickup.” His point is clear in that the same product with different marketing and a different targeted audience can be completely different.
I would have to say that I would fall under the category of “Believer.” I do typically support the status quo as it seems I don’t have time to do otherwise. I follow the beliefs of going to church and family being very important. I would consider myself conservative, although I have some liberal ideals as well. I do attend Wal-Mart regularly, most likely because it is so conveniently located next to my apartments. I, like most consumers, do not distinguish much between brands and for most things I get whichever is on sale. Although I do not drive my “father’s Oldsmobile,” I do drive a mid-range car (Honda Civic). Lastly, I would consider myself a “Believer” because I have very predictable consumer habits, as I buy only what I need and practically nothing else. I buy what is on sale or what is cheapest and research big purchasing for weeks before making them, reducing the risk involved with purchasing to nearly zero.
Submitted by jdortiz on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 09:03.1. The reason marketers believe the product can be overlooked is that in the end it is not the product that matters. What matters in the marketing world is sales by isolating who you are marketing to like people who believe they are like the woman in the ad will have a better tendency to the product. People would rather see who is using it and why they are using the product then the real truth about the product. When it comes down to buying products people usually will buy the one that the packaging looks pleasing to them then another brand.
Submitted by julie4646 on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 09:56.2. I don’t know if I could pinpoint which one I exactly am being that part of me lies in a few of them. If I had to choose I would go with actualizer. The reason I would say this one is that I wouldn’t buy a car and car about the looks or hood ornament. I would care more about the gas mileage and how safe it was. When buying a product I am more concerned on how long it will last and does it work right then the color of the boxing that it is in.
I think that Twitchell says this because most of the consumers can't tell the difference between products. The article mentions cigarettes, and in a blind test, most people couldn't tell the difference between the brands they used and others. People that believed they liked a particular brand because it was the smoothest or had the best flavor were only repeating that because it was how the company marketed the product to them. When it came down to it, they couldn't actually make the distinction for themselves. For these reasons, Twitchell says that its important to target an audience and make them believe that their product is better because the product alone will not say enough on its own.
I think that I am somewhere between an experiencer and a Maker. I would partially fall into the "enthusiastic, impulsive, and even reckless" part of the experiencer and most certainly I'm politically uncommitted, but the caring about how fast the car goes from 0 to 60 isn't me at all. The maker section about building things and experiencing the world by working on it also describes me. The chart seems to reveal a generic picture of world by suppling some categories that most people belong to. This gives advertisers a ball park figure of the large groups of people they can appeal to, but it certainly leaves out others. There isn't much mention of children in this model, and there is plenty of advertising that appeals to children. The chart doesn't say anything about how often they buy products, how much money they spend, or if they are brand loyal.
Submitted by Bdawg8569 on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 10:02.(1) As James Twitchell continually restates throughout this article, the product itself does not have much importance in marketing. He says that when consumers compare different products, they really don't look at the physical differences between the product itself, but rather the packaging, and the image associated with the product. Because of this, he states that the product must be overlooked and the audience must be identified in order to be "sold". When marketers know which groups of consumers have a certain value, they tend to play to those peoples' thoughts and beliefs about a certain aspect of life. For instance, Coors Light uses a theme of mountains on their products, and they show commercials of people in the outdoors, doing extreme sports. This is a marketing scheme clearly designed to reach people in the "Experiencer" group of the VALS2.
(2) In the VALS2 chart, I would place myself in the 'striver' catebory. As a college student, I fit into many of the characteristics of 'striver'. I have a low amount of resources, and I am trying to figure out where I fit in society, while working to fulfill the goal of eventually getting a job, and being able to support myself. This is a transitionary state, but the striver category fits me best. I will either shift more towards 'achiever' or 'believer' as I get older and develop different ideals. The VALS2 chart is useful for advertising because it sections people into definite categories, which attempt to span the whole human experience. Because the reach of the categories is so broad, advertisers can choose a category to aim an advertisement towards, and it will most likely contain a very large number of people. The problem with this chart is that it is too broad. There is a small number of people who actually fit into a definite category, so this means that if an advertiser used this chart, and stuck with a certain category, the advertisement would work for a small number of people, and for the rest, it would only be slightly effective.
Submitted by strigidae_rider on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 12:18.Question 1
Marketers believe that the “product must be overlooked, and the audience isolated and sold,” because it’s not the actual product that the advertiser is selling. It’s the experience, the rush, the prestige, the name, or the general satisfaction felt when making a purchase. The advertisers are playing on the consumer’s emotions, knowledge, and gullibility to in order to sell their product. It’s not what the product does, but it’s the appeal of owning it. If you can isolate the mindset of a particular person you can twist and contort your message in order to tailor it to their perceptions that would make it more appealing for that audience. If that audience has a greater appeal to that product the more likely they are to choose that product or brand over another. And this can be generalized and stereotyped to the masses, by only targeting the particular audience; the other stereotypes will dismiss it, that is, until you send them a message designed for their point of view.
Question 2
I would slot myself as a striver attempting to become an actualizer with a touch of achieverism. I’m only interested in the things that I need, but I like them to have a little bit of flair to them, but as a college student with little income, I find myself as a believer, relying on the products that I know will get the job done at a minimal cost. This chart is useful for advertisers because it stereotypes people into select groups. This stereotyping gives the advertisers a sense of control over their anticipated audience because the advertisers can make predictions about their audience’s future buying habits based on their personality profiles. It data reveals that people have a certain mindset when approached with concept of purchasing something and certain mindsets are easier for advertisers to exploit to their advantage. It hides the mobility of the consumer. That at any given time about any particular purchase a person can switch from one group to another or possibly be a blend between them. The lines are drawn much clearer than they really are. Submitted by merlin769 on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 12:44.
1.
When consumers can't tell the difference between various products, marketers are forced to sell an image in order to differentiate from other products. In a sense, they sell the audience itself, as the image given to a certain product reflects the wants, needs, and experiences of the target audience. If you sell a truck, you show it hauling giant machinery around a construction site, appealing to the audience of giant-machine-hauling-construction-workers, or those who think themselves as such, by selling and image of how they view themselves.
2.I drive an Oldsmobile ninety-eight, so according to the chart I must be a Believer. Of course, that was driven by necessity and circumstance, so I guess that puts myself more on the side of the struggler...or maybe the actualizer. Lack of disposible income coupled with pragmatism, reading consumer reports in order to find a fuel-efficient, cheap, and reliable car.
The chart offers broad generalizations and stereotypes as a means for planning advertisements. Luckily, America loves to fall into stereotypes and generalizations. The chart can be useful for finding a starting point for ads, fitting the image of your product into its niche. The data is focused on wealth, with the most stable having both wealth and principles. It seems to leave little room for bleeding between the groups, which merely corresponds to the over-generalization of the chart. But I'll concede that a broad view of audience may help the sold image appeal to more people, or at the very least hit upon the stereotype rather well.
Submitted by Adam on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 13:59.1. The author is saying that within a product type, consumers are indifferent to the brands and other minor differents. No product is different. In order for one brand to succeed over others, it must specifically target some sort of audience, and come up with a very good, worthwhile, and effective advertising scheme.
2. I believe I am a maker. I like to see things get done, and I like doing projects on my own. Despite not always finishing what I set out to do, I am always getting into something new when I have the time. It can be useful to businesses that are already spending a lot of money on advertising, but not to companies who are not spending a mass amount of money on advertising. It shows what different types of people like to do and what they are attracted to. It hides that everyone goes through at least 3 of these different categories in a lifetime.
Submitted by rsethi on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 14:54.1) According to Twitchell, Marketers believe the “product must be overlooked and the audience isolated and sold” because research shows that the actual distinction between products, when it comes down to it goes relatively unnoticed by consumers.
2) I would not slot myself in any of the categories. In my opinion, none of them sum up my identity conclusively. The chart is somewhat useful as a starting point for advertising because it gives the marketer a general idea of the audience his/her product would most appeal to. I don’t believe it reveals much that is not sort of known already.
It basically splits people up as the haves and the have-nots; then claims that everyone in between goes about trying to obtain what they want or become one of the haves by either working towards it, wishing for it, or pretending to have it or to not care. The chart hides a lot, it completely neglects the people who just want the cheapest most efficient product available, as well as those who just purchase whatever satisfies their need the first time and sticks with it.
Submitted by dayodel on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 15:48.He believes that the product must be overlooked because there are so many products out which are so similar that it just makes no difference to the consumer that’s buying it. The advertising is what wins the customer not the product. Knowing what the audience does and doesn’t like enables those advertisers to calibrate their product into something that the consumer would want over another product. The label alone can win over a customer, not how the product functions. For example, there are very few differences between different brands of milk but consumers will buy one brand over another.
I would slot myself as an experiencer. Reason is because I prefer my life not to be plain. Granted I don’t go on impulses, but I try to be original in what I do. Even though I feel I match that one the most, I feel like I could fit into other categories as well. So sometimes I have an issue categorizing myself or others into just one category alone. The chart categorizes people by the amount of resources each one has, for example, the more resources one has, the more likely they are to become an experiencer. One thing I notice is it does not show the success rate of each category.
Submitted by InvisiblebiRON on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 16:08.Twitchell said this very crucial point, because he realizes the qualities of human nature. We are not going to just purchase anything that is on the shelf. We need a reason. Therefore, it is very important to target your item to an audience to distinguish it from the rest of the junk on the rack at Wal-mart.
Submitted by polkastripe on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 16:12.I think I would consider myself mostly an "actualizer," because when I see something that I want, I won't take no for an answer. Sometimes, unfortnately, i have to wait a little bit, for the item to go on sale, but most of the time, it's there for me when I want it.
According to Twitchell, products don’t vary much. He says that people can’t tell the difference between cigarette brands, let alone their own. His philosophy is to try and read the person, and sell toward their wants. When products are compatible with each other, charisma takes over. Twitchell states the similarities and differences in the eight different personality types. Some people will never buy a product, no matter how you market it. Therefore, you must find the right audience to sell to, because the products are all the same.
I don’t fit well into the chart. I probably fit best into the Makers category. I fit the suspicious quality and like to fix things myself, because I know that I can do a good job. I imagine the chart is good for advertisers. Most people are fairly normal and fit into a category. Strategies with that category will definitely help marketers to sell things. It might reveal an aptitude to selling things, but will not fully catch the reason as to why the chart works. The chart is way too vague to truly capture the variety of personalities that people possess.
Submitted by mhorstme on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 16:14.1) Marketers believe that the "product must be overlooked and the audience isolated and sold" because of the breakdown of the audience segments. Well, at least thats his argument. It doesn't really matter what your selling it only matters whether you can appeal to particular parts of the market segment that would be likely to have interest in your product, and if they wouldn't be likely to have interest in your product somehow make them think that your product is closer to what they envision.
2) I would more than likely put myself in the "strivers" category. YUPPIE. There, I said it. Despite not necessarily having a good connotation I do not think there is any problem with trying to enjoy the world as it is. Too bad I'm going into teaching. I'll end up settling with what I have and being as happy as everyone else. If I do end up getting a bit more I will appreciate it all the same.
Submitted by dan_bortnick on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 16:25.1 - No matter what product is being sold, you must sell an idea rather than a product. In a marketing sense, everything is the same, and you must individualize selling to a person, not a product. It goes along the same lines of the fact that if you can sell a used shoestring to a person, you can sell anything to that person. You sold *it* to them, no matter what it was. It is a matter of need and want, and what you are convincing someone a product does for them.
2 - I would probably consider myself a Maker. I enjoy working with things, and seeing end results from start to finish. I don't like having things done for me, I'd rather do them myself, even if it means taking on a lot of extra work. I'm a do-it-yourself person to a point, however I don't like to waste time in doing pointless things either. This is useful to pinpoint where a customer stands, and how they will need to be sold an item. Each person needs to be sold in a different way, according to his/her category. It reveals what they enjoy to do, what they like about specific things. It does not reveal themselves as far as brand loyalty or grudges go, and sometimes what they do in their free time.
Submitted by dpaulat on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 16:29.1. Most people see products as generic. In most cases people are buying the brand and not the actual product itself. So many products have similar taste, uses, etc. that in most cases it doesn't really matter which you use. By isolating the audience and instead of selling the product, the advertisers are appealling to a certain niche in the market which is much easier than advertising the mass appeal of a certain generic product. People can have a tendency to overlook the contents of the object if the ad is speaking directly to them and appealing to their interests.
2. I guess if I had to choose one it would be a "striver." I see myself as being fairly ambitious, although in some cases, my ambitions can get the best of me. This chart can be useful if you want to have a concrete idea of how to advertise to a certain corner of the market. It sort of shows what certain people are attracted to or are interested in, and would give advertisers a general idea of how to go about doing an advertisment. It does also (as a side effect) seem to over generalize these markets.
Submitted by aaurella on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 16:30.http://www.sric-bi.com/VALS/presurvey.shtml
Submitted by strigidae_rider on Tue, 09/18/2007 - 16:50.