Brand Loyalty (was Re: [MUD-Dev] Requirements for MM (wasComplexities of MMOG Servers))
dubiousadvocate at hotmail.com
Fri Jan 3 06:39:36 New Zealand Daylight Time 2003
From: "Amanda Walker" <amanda at alfar.com>
> Nothing. Brand loyalty is not under brand-owner's control.
> Branding is a strange beast. A strong brand has a lot of value.
> However, a strong brand is an effect of a strong business, not a
> cause of it. This, of course, was the big fallacy of the dotcom
> boom: "First, we create strong brand, then we go make some
> products." It doesn't work that way. The brands that generate
> the most customer loyalty are the brands associated with
> organizations that deliver the most customer value to their
> particular customer base the most consistently.
Yes. And no.... :-) actually the fallacy of the dotcom boom was
that one didn't need to monetize branding and that one didn't need a
multiplier of cash reserve. They disregarded that the same reduced
barriers to entry that made it possible for each participant to
enter the fray also meant the immediate challenge to monetize was
just that much more imperative and that they needed enough "grain"
to survive the following "seven years" of lean.
Many dotcoms actually did establish strong products, strong reps,
and strong product loyalty. What they did not do was structure
their business so they could survive the inevitable shakeout phase
of an industry. Since so many dotcoms where so unsophisticated, the
shakeout was incredibly severe and in business terms immediate. (I
was a very loyal Pets.com and eToys customer - so were a lot of
people I knew. Didn't help since they lacked cash reserves to
survive two back-to-back down years)
In short they thought they were different, and different meant they
were safe. Sound familiar? ;-)
"Questions are a burden to others, answers a prison for oneself"
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
More information about the MUD-Dev