Dove is trying a new marketing strategy called "Real Beauty" where they take girls that are not supermodel status but use them as the faces for their products saying that real beauty are the everyday girls that buy the product of Dove, not the supermodels that try and sell that. There is a controversy though that Dove is encouraging girls that they don't need to try to be healthy to be beautiful. This could promote a more unhealthy eating style of younger girls, instead of girls trying to be skinny to look like the models we see in everyday lives. The only problem is that younger girls need to focus on a happy medium between the extreme of Victoria Secret skinny and being able to be unhealthy or overweight. There isn't much focus on being healthy, but not to an extreme like a Victoria Secret model. Would it be effective to have a variety of different women (age, ethnicity, weight, etc) to market the same product or company all together?

In response to Allison Ray's post "Do you buy Fiji water or Smart water over a brand like "Cumberland Farms Natural Spring Water?" Even though it is more expensive, why would you buy it?"

All of the water to me is the same. It is all too similar to actually have a preference over which water is the best water. I usually still get a more famous brand like Poland Spring though since they have the most water bottles in a case. I don't shy away from other water bottles if Poland Spring isn't there. It is just the most convenient one for me to get usually. Are there any other products that you think isn't any different from their competitor's product?

In response to Cote Lagerberg "The advertisements themselves are supposed to be based off of what we look up and suggestion of what are friends like. My question is do you think this is an effective form of marketing?"

I think it is a good marketing strategy since they take the pages you like and realize what you are most interested in. For someone that really likes sports, they might like a lot of pages on Facebook about sports. On the side will pop up advertisements of maybe a jersey store and that sports fan could buy one just because they got that idea from Facebook. Anytime you can get an interest of your consumers in a product, I think it is a good marketing strategy. With everyone using Facebook now, Is it more effective to put an advertisement on Facebook, or cable?

Profits & Markups in the Fashion Industry (or, Did Banana Republic Make Money Off My $20 Dress?

Banana Republic is a store with usually higher quality brands. If they sell a dress for only 20 dollars, according to the math done in this article, the dress would only cost the company about 5 dollars to make. Now, I doubt that Gap Inc was making these dresses and selling them for the correct price. This still isn't bad for the company even if they made little profit off of each dress, say 5 dollars instead of 15. They were getting rid of excess inventory quick with cheaper dresses, and this will draw in customers to show that Banana Republic isn't just a store with high quality, high priced items. They actually have an item or two that is a "good deal". Even with the deal the customers are now in the store and are more willing to buy the products since they are already buying one of the products. Do you think it is a good marketing strategy to sell a product for almost no profit value to draw in customers to your store?

In response to Kevin Provost's post, "Do you think if Dodge threw some big gulp cup holders and an automatic transmission in the Dart that it would sell more units?"

I completely believe that they would have. In America the majority of cars that people drive are automatic transmissions. The car isn't targeted to be bought buy americans. It is targeted to be bought by Europeans. Americans, for the most part, aren't going to buy a European style car. They would have to make it more for americans, which would be throwing in an automatic transmission and the big gulp cup holders. Sports cars don;t sell well in america, and the Dodge Dart is just an example of one car that should sell more but won't because of how our society is. When looking for a new car, what is most important to you?

The technology we have today makes it a lot easier for anyone to put their name out there and get famous. A couple of  famous singers already have posted a video of them on youtube and have gotten a record deal because of it. Singers such as Justin Bieber and Carley Rae Jepsen started their careers through advertising themselves on a free public website for anyone to see. The type of marketing and advertisement changes constantly the more evolved we get as a society. Ten years ago no one got famous by putting a video of themselves on the internet. Now people can make millions of dollars by putting their name out there and getting the right person to contact them. Does the ability to get famous lose its credibility because of the internet?

In response to Allison Ray's post. "Do commercials with catchy songs tend to have a greater, longer lasting effect on you? Does it make you picture the product in the commercial every time you hear the song? For me, it leaves a long lasting impression in my head of the product when it is correlated to a song I like, does it do this for you?"

Catchy songs are always a plot to try and get you to remember the product. This happens to me alot. You see a commerical on TV with a catchy song and that song gets stuck in your head. Now, if you hum a tune it could be the catchy song earlier in the day which then reminds of the product that you saw on TV. In my opinion, having a catchy song along with your TV commerical is the best way to get consumers to remember your product throughout their daily activites in their lives. Do you think there is a better advertising strategy than a catchy song to remember the product later in the day?