Sounds strange, right? That was the definition given by the presenter in the show ‘logo’ telecast on UTVi on 16th of August. I knew the 4Ps of marketing as Product, Price, Place and Promotion, but there is this channel which added a new tool to the marketing mix. Jerome McCarthy! Are you listening? I learnt packaging to be a part of Product, one of the Ps of marketing mix. But this 24 hour English Business (Take a note of this) News Channel claims packaging to be one of the Ps. I have learnt from the channel’s website that the presenter was Tina Tandon who had conceptualized the show and also anchors it. I am remembered of my advertising professor’s words here. He often says that if you are in the top rung in the industry, you may even talk crap and people would take it as words of wisdom. They may even talk things which are even common sensical but they would be applauded for their insights. Everybody can talk sense, but it is the position, the status of the person that determines the value of his talk rather than the intrinsic value of the talk itself. But when these high profile individuals or corporates make statements which are false or do not have any sense, people try and find out some kind of newer meanings in them, because it is often perceived that successful people are always right in what they say and do. Anyway, returning back to the topic, I tuned into this show some 15 or 20 minutes after its start and was astonished to hear what was being said and I was like, “What!, Packaging, the final P of marketing! Are you crazy or what?” I don’t know what the previous Ps were referred to as and for that matter, I do not even know their stand on the number of Ps in the marketing mix. So, no comments on it. The show later went on to show how the sachet revolutionized the Indian FMCG market. All was fine, but referring to Packaging as one of the P was hard to hear and accept for a student of marketing. The concept on which the show was based is all good but the makers need to take care to get their basics right before embarking on making such shows.
I beg to differ. You wouldn't have felt infuriated had the person been some X,Y,Z. That he's on a TV show decidedly means that he's worth something in the industry.(which I'm sorry to put so straightly...you're not presently). Obviously you would be least bothered to hear from an unknown person. Whats so strange about that?
ReplyDeleteMarketing is not a science and in view of the context, it appears validated that he should account for Packaging.
Its not an unreasonable supposition that in future another definition could be more popular. And "as a student of marketing" you should be more open to diverse opinions.
PS : I feel, on the contrary that its you who should have thought before seeking to publish this entry with sweeping generalizations
I don't necessarily imply that you are wrong and its probable that I agree with every word of yours personally, yet it stands to reason why this incident should be accounted as strange or amusing.
@ Madhav
ReplyDelete@ You wouldn't have felt infuriated had the person been some X,Y,Z.
Yes, I wouldn't have felt the same if it was X,Y or Z simply beacause he is X,Y or Z.But the person here is not X, Y or Z. If he is something worth in the industry then he carries certain responsibility. I already qouted in one of my posts and am again quoting it now, "With great power comes great responsibility"
Marketing is not a science. Accepted. But for art too there are some basic rules. He should account for packaging, true, but there are other important things that need to be accounted more than that of packaging. The four P's that were proposed encompass all the activities of marketing and give a holistic view.
@ Its not an unreasonable supposition that in future another definition could be more popular.
Take the example of cricket. There were some new innaovations such as power play, super sub etc. But the very basic texture of it was not lost. Even today it is played with a bat and a ball. If you change the way it is played, and still call it cricket, I feel it is absurd.
@I beg to differ... its probable that I agree with every word of yours personally
I do not understand your personal and professional paradox.
Should he ask for your valuable opinion before going on-screen next time? Haha! Responsibility!! Huh! That strange disease is non-existent in reality, only compulsions may be diplomatically termed as responsible behavior.
ReplyDeleteThe 4Ps are not being disposed off na. So improvization alone is taking place on the same fundamentals. Very similar to your take on cric. Absurdity is the first name of innovation. Success or failure decide which name is to be coined..
Its a vain attempt...Give up...You can never understand me..
I never said that he/she should ask me or for that matter anyone else before going on screen. I intended to say that he /she should introspect before making such statements.
ReplyDeleteAnd moreover when a comprehensive definition is given then why try to modify it and reduce its scope. I said I did not know what the other Ps were referred to as. So I cannot take a stand on it.
Responsibility or compulsion, whatever, it is your duty to speak right when you are in public. All the souls on this earth are not as wise as you are to understand that we need not follow every other person's view who is percieved to be knowledgeable.
Understand you? If you were static I would have understood you or for that matter anything else. But when you thought processes are changing day by day how can I say I understood you. I can never understand you or even myself completely. If I say, I truly understood myself, then that is my end, mentally or may be physically too.
Stay Hungry, Stay Foolish
- Steve Jobs
You entirely missed my point, brother. I was saying that that person may have truely believed that he was right. What maybe comprehensive to you needn't be so for others. The point was to enlargen the scope not reduce it( which is common in all disciplines of study). It is precisely to understand these better than Mix was formulated. If times change, so must that.
ReplyDeleteWhat I was infact citing is my lack of knowledge and what such formalities mean to commoners like me who form the majority.
"You say you found me, but until you find yourself you can't find me, and the day you truly find yourself, you will remain yourself" - Friedrich Nietzsche
That is exactly the point. If majority are commoners who lack knowledge, how can the person be careless and make his point and believe that he was right when there is substantial evidence that proves he is off the path.
ReplyDeleteBut of course if the change re-engineers the marketing mix and increases its scope then it might be acceptable. But I cannot comment on the present situation since I do not have data on whether the person has really increased the scope or has just been plain silly in saying so.
The only thing that is constant in the world is change (It should be positive though)
hi... santhosh u have enlightened me by posting this on one day before the advertising exam, from my knowledge i know only 4'ps of marketing and packaging is included in product but by ur post i came to know that packaging is one more p added to the marketing concepts... the main part i understood is how will the advertisements(tv show is also one type of adv) influence the concepts also....
ReplyDeleteIt might be true now a days because previously if we see the customers they use to concentrate only on products where it is available and wats the price and how it is came to know.... as we see example as main product for human beings water and food like rice wheat but now a days customer are conscious about packaging also like kinly water bottles himalaya water by their packaging its attracts the customer and also now a days even rice are coming in 5kg 25kg bags with nice attracting packaging even if we see atta also like ashirvad, annapurna they also attracting by their packages but previouly people use to buy loose atta...so as the economy and environment changing packaging added as one more p as marketing concepts as we all know marketing is a part of management and "management is inexact science and fine art" ...
I dont y u ppl are fighting for a small issue.. every one will have their own perception ...in her view packaging might be extra p in marketing concepts... we are not supposed blame others about their saying.... i think u ppl forgot the quote "sabka suno apna karo" .....