Blog #1 - 4 favorite Brands

Merrell
Question 1 (the Golden Question): Is the key message expressed Superlative, Important, and Believable?
Merrell advertises their product as performance footwear with style. They always express that their shoes are for the modern outdoors man. As it truly is important to take good care of your feet there is good reason to gravitate to their product. I believe this message is affective and dominant.
http://www.merrell.com/US/en-us/Home/FlexPage.mvc.aspx#performance_and_style/opti-wick/

Question 2 (the Substitution Question): Can I take out the company's name, plug in anybody else's, and have the exact same ad or claim? Or is it a claim that only this company can make?
There are many brands to choose from when shopping for shoes, but by combining preformance and style Merrell has a unique position that few brands could claim. The look is not like any other shoe or boot so buy purchasing their footwear you are also making a statement that you spend a little extra money to have the “good stuff”.

Question 3 (the Star Question): In communications like advertising, is the product the star of the ad or incidental? In other words, if the communication is Memorable, is it for the right reasons?
Again, because they have a high quality specialty product and that is in fact what they are advertising, the reasons one would remember them are exactly the right ones.


Google
Question 1
Google is trying to express one clear message: “With us you can find information easily”. The simple playful logo and the minimalistic home page support this message. It obviously worked for them in the beginning and now they have expanded into a vast complex of functionality with Google software but the home design has remained the same.
http://www.google.com/

Question 2
Let's consider how Google is approaching the OS market; "We designed Google Chrome for people who live on the web"... Duh. It's a Lenux based operating system, so it can do all the same stuff as Windows or Mac. The only thing that's new is that there is not already an OS that makes that claim. With so much hype about programming for mobile, central processing (e.g. PHP, Python), and open source programing they're going to lock down the "modern" OS market by positioning themselves as the only web-based OS. For more on Google's official position take a look at their blog:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html

Question 3
Good marketing wasn't the only thing that made Google a successful company. They had a unique way to find information on the web and it worked better than any other search engine. The technology gap is no longer the difference maker it once was, but when people talk about finding something on the web they typically say that they'll “Google it”.


Skype
Question 1
This brand is not as strong as the others I've mentioned, but I think that they still have a message that people can relate to; “More countries and more choices with our subscriptions”. They state the reason you should go with Skype and it is completely believable. Although it seems that there is a grammatical error in their tag line on their home page. To me that takes away from the message that they are the best at anything. See it here:
http://www.skype.com

Question 2
Their position isn't so unique that you have to think Skype when it comes to worldwide VoIP services. Vonage is a company that provides nearly the same thing but they advertise that you use your home phone. To be a top brand I think that Skype would need to strengthen their position as the “computer phone”.

Question 3
The statement that Skype makes, “More countries more choices”, is just a gimmick. There are VoIP options that are just as good. Additionally, the look of their brand says that it will be easy like a toy, but the program is not as intuitive as the advertising would suggest.


NFL
Question 1
At first it seems that football would the only message in this brand, but after some thought I realize that they are really trying to sell a TV program, sports apparel, advertizing segments, and... oh yeah, tickets to a NFL football game. You believe from their advertizing that with NFL you're going to get the most entertaining sports TV and if you buy the $50 hat you can become part of the NFL cult too. The TV ads almost always show off the fact that the NFL has awesome computer graphics. This is a good one that supports my argument:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJhObHh6f8g

Question 2
There is no replacement for the NFL because the brand loyalty is unrivaled in sports. Soccer is the most popular sport in the world but people may like to watch the FIFA's World Cup, the UEFA's Euro Cup or the MLS's U.S. Open cup, but their loyalties lie in the game. With football the sport would be unrecognizable outside of the NFL. I wonder if the sport would compete with others without such a dominant brand.

Question 3
With the NFL the brand is synonymous with the sport. For most people, if they were ask themselves if they remember the NFL for the right reasons it would be nearly indistinguishable from the question “do you remember football for the right reasons?”. They've done a great job positioning themselves as the one single football brand.