Brand equity is the sum of all the hearts and minds of every single person that comes into contact with your company
- Christopher Betzter

Groot-Constantia-330yr-Banner.jpg

Pepsi-Banner.jpg
Vaalpark-Recycling-Banner.jpg
3D-Printed-House.jpg

Recycle-Heading.jpg
Well done if you do.
But have you ever wondered how and why the recycling symbol was created.
It was designed in 1970 by Gary Anderson as an entry into a design competition.

[READ MORE]

Recycle.jpg
new-coke_3.jpg

Marketing-Blunder_Heading.jpg
In April 1985 New Coke was introduced in the US
after blind taste tests showed
that American consumers overwhelmingly preferred its taste.
The launch was a disaster
as consumers rejected the new product's taste
once it was presented in Coca-Cola's packaging

[Read More]

Golf.jpg
Spoilt-for-choice-Banner.jpg
77_of_South_Africans.jpg
Cards.jpg
McDonalds-Packaging-Change-Banner.jpg
Africa-Online-Shopping-Webbanner.jpg
Zoe-Sugg-Vlogger-Banner.jpg
Tropicana-Banner.jpg
Lindt-Bunny-Banner.jpg
Can-Collect-Recycling-Banner.jpg
Rule-of-Thumb.jpg
Twinings.jpg
63-of-South-Africans.jpg
Horsing-Around.jpg
SA_Bigger.jpg
Lovemarks_Banner.jpg
Lovemarks_Heading.jpg
We first learned to satisfy consumers’ needs. Then we realised more was
needed so we strived to delight consumers. Now that too is not enough ...
... consumers need to love the brand.
Saatchi & Saatchi researched “What makes some brands inspirational,
while others struggle?”
They came up with the answer:
Lovemarks: the future beyond brands
[READ MORE]

Plastic-Heading.jpg


If you have ever looked at the bottom of a plastic bottle
you may have noticed the triangle symbol with a number in it.
This symbol is important to plastic recyclers to identify
the type of plastic of the packaging.
[READ MORE]

Plastic.jpg

Home | Spoilt for Choice
Spoilt for Choice

Spoilt-for-choice-Banner-crop.jpg
From a posting on http://www.consumerreports.org/ ....

Between 1975 and 2008, the number of products in the average supermarket swelled from an average of 8,948 to almost 47,000, according to the Food Marketing Institute, a trade group. (In the past few years, that number has fallen slightly, in part because of a growth spurt among smaller stores.)

“Consumers have always had choices, but today options have exploded beyond all reason,” says Barry Schwartz, author of “The Paradox of Choice” (HarperCollins, 2003) and a psychology professor at Swarthmore College. “It’s the ethos of American society; the idea that freedom is good, more is better, and you enhance those ideas by offering choice. Logically, you can’t hurt anyone by adding options. It makes no one worse off, and some better. That’s the theory, but in practicality it’s not true.”

Schwartz contends that an abundance of choice can complicate decision-making, causing shoppers to freeze or postpone a purchase out of uncertainty and frustration. When they do make a choice, they’re more likely to be dissatisfied because they think an unchosen item might have been better. A survey by Consumer Reports National Research Center suggests that Schwartz has a point. Five percent of respondents who found too many options said they had walked away empty-handed because the scope of choices made selection too hard.

More troubling is that when faced with an array of complex options, consumers tend to throw reason out the window and pick a product based on what’s easiest to evaluate, not what’s most important, says Sheena Iyengar, director of the Global Leadership Matrix Program at the Columbia (University) Business School. “We stick to the familiar or go by price because we don’t want to deal with so many choices and scrutinize label claims or nutrition information,” she says.

You can read comment on this issue here