Comments on: Intel’s Brand Strategy – Make Remarkable Ads

By: worldwide banks

worldwide banks — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 18:01:28 +0000

worldwide banks…

[...]Intel’s Brand Strategy – Make Remarkable Ads | Truly Deeply/Madly[...]…

By: aol errors

aol errors — Fri, 21 May 2010 15:26:53 +0000

reminds me a bit of a Hudson River School piece..the colors and reflection so soft and warm. Lovely.

By: david

david — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 04:33:30 +0000

t, that’s the unreasonable truth about brand, it has the ability to lift lesser-standard products into the premium position of a category, complete with premium margins (perhaps if only to spend on expensive ad campaigns).

By: t

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:59:52 +0000

Ads will never change the fact that AMD makes a much better chip for the price.

By: david

david — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 21:34:36 +0000

Nick, Thanks for the comment – Knowledge is King and you’ve shone some light beautifully on this discussion. From a brand perspective, great brands almost always come on the back of great products. AMD’s falling behind in the technology race sounds like it was the start of the end. But likewise, Intel’s continuing investment in technology development during the recession reflects the behavior of most of the leading brands world-wide over the last two years.
There’s no doubt Intel’s business approach has been a large part of their success. But don’t underestimate the role of the brand in their success also.
We always need to be careful in discussing the way brands and advertising work that we don’t base our judgments on personal views and reactions. The ‘Why did you buy your last computer’ question is over-simplistic and too personal. Your response of ‘operating system and software’ represents just your motivation. For me it is the design of the product and the Apple brand (but that’s just me). For my mum recently it was the price she could get at OfficeWorks (and that’s definitely my mum). Content and functionality as ypou point out do sell the machine to some people, but for others it’s recommendation, price, look and trust. There are a whole bunch of decision drivers, of which brand is an influencer of trust – an undeniably important aspect.
As creators of brand we need to understand the bigger picture and larger trends driving behaviors.
It would seem Intel’s new ad campaign has been part of their strategy to maintain and grow their leadership position at a time when the competition is faltering. The fact they’re memorable is about return on investment. Wheter that investment has been worthwhile would take a far clearer understanding of Intel’s balance sheet and business plan than I possess.
As for Apple and its A4 chip? That will be an interesting space to watch – partly because Apple have a history of doing the unexpected. But from a purely brand perspective, Apple has built their market share and undeniable customer loyalty around design, intuitive user functionality and just ‘brand coolness’ rather than hardware speed. My guess is they may talk about ‘faster’, but we wont be seeing a change in Apple’s brand strategy to make the A4 chip the hero.

By: Nick

Nick — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 03:37:53 +0000

“The incumbent AMD lost their throne and a big chunk of market share by taking a traditional B2B approach.”

Actually, this is incorrect. AMD actually fell behind in the technology race because of insufficient investment in chip design and fabs. Intel will continue its leadership because during the current recession, mainly because they have substantially boosted technology investment, especially in its fabs.

Also, one reason that Intel is in so many PCs (with Intel inside stickers) is because of the very substantial spiffs given to manufacturers. The spiffs could not be matched by AMD without it potentially going out of business. This is why Intel is facing investigation by the EU for antitrust activity.

And Marcus is correct when he says that its advertising is essentially irrelevant. Quick! Why did you buy your last computer? Because of some hardware it had inside, or because of the operating system and software you wanted? Remember, it’s content and functionality that sells, not the machine.

Are Intel’s ads good? Definitely. Has Intel done the right thing and followed a consistent strategy (first outlined by Andy Grove) for more than a decade? Absolutely. Is its advertising the reason for its market dominance? Perhaps a small factor, but it’s debatable whether the return has been worth the substantial investment.

A much more interesting question, however, is what that paragon of branding, Apple, will do with the A4, which is the most amazing chip to come down the pike for several years. But if I had to bet I’d say that you’ll never see an ad saying “A4 Inside.”

By: Domma

Domma — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 04:00:06 +0000

I hadn’t seen these ads until now Dave, thanks for brining them to my attention and I agree that it’s such a great way to get people to feel good about your brand.

By: david

david — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 02:05:55 +0000

Victor, I agree these ads bring greater meaning and personality to the ‘Intel Inside’ proposition.

By: david

david — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 02:05:15 +0000

Marcus
Very much enjoying the discussion around brand/advertising.
Looks like we’re going to have to agree to disagree on the one hand, but on the other hand I agree 100%.
I couldn’t agree more that too many brands for too long have spent huge budgets on TV advertising that could have been more effectively invested in other brand building activities.
On the other hand, I remain convinced of the role that TV advertising can play as part of an integrated brand communication campaign.
Always happy to agree to disagree, with great respect and good humor.

By: Marcus Osborne

Marcus Osborne — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:33:03 +0000

David, thanks for taking the time to reply to my comment.

Today, advertising is tactical, branding is strategic. I’m not saying I am right, but I don’t understand how an ad can be a brand ad. And I don’t believe that today, one can build a brand on awareness.

I don’t think Intel built its brand around ‘end consumer driven awareness’. I believe that Intel built its brand via the brilliant strategic relationships it built with computer makers. Or, as you put it, the traditional B2B approach that didn’t work for AMD.

And even if you are right, the world is a very different place today than it was even in the 1990s.

Nowadays, in a media saturated world, awareness is just background noise that means very little. For most companies, and there are very few exceptions, in an age when information on every product and service is widely available, and consumers have more choice, are better informed, and more powerful, creating awareness is not going to build a brand. For instance here in Malaysia, we’re all aware of Mazda, Alfa Romeo, Eon Bank, American Airlines and many other multi national global brands, yet most of us will go through life without ever buying something from these companies.

Indeed, many companies have realized, sadly after spending millions on advertising, that advertising can raise awareness (and even that outcome is not a given), but still fail to transform an offering into a brand (I’ve written about these on my blog – sorry for the shameless self promotion!). Settling for awareness, when so much more is possible and required is a total waste of valuable funds.

Of course Intel is technology driven, what else could it be?