International Marketing Performance - Essay Example

? INTERNATIONAL MARKETING By International Marketing Frequent conflict, which defines the relationship between Apple and Samsung, could be narrowed down into competition and choice of marketing strategies. Both companies are driven by a mutual acknowledgement of the threats they pose on each other with regard to the control of the market niche (The Growth Agenda, 2012, p. 60). In the past, competition between the two companies revolved around technological innovations, and the drive to eat into each other’s market segmentation. Some of the engagements between the two companies relate to the question of strategies as contextualized within the domain of marketing. An understanding of the nature of rivalry should begin from an assessment of the nature of products that the two companies deal with. Both companies manufacture highly developed smart phones, ipads, and other technology products with internet-aided applications (The Growth Agenda, 2012, p. 54). The inventory of these products consists of rapid innovations and advancements in technology in very short spans of time. Generally, the products range from simple to highly advanced technological gadgets that seek to satisfy different levels of the clientele. Over the times, both companies have attempted to break into new market segments or take over some of the segments held by their competitors. The course of these pursuits has involved suits of violation of patent rights to other matters that relate to the processes of regulation of the ethics of marketing and general commerce. As such, these companies have devised a range of strategies, which are meant to outpace each other in terms of technologies and marketing (Doole & Lowe, 2008, p.36). Samsung has sought to create pools of loyal clientele who cut across the various aspects of the market. The marketing strategies adopted are basically meant to show the other companies as weaker and less innovative in comparison to its own products. Some of the issues that affect the relationship between the two firms relates to the need to build a foil of the companies against which the technological strengths of Samsung might be manifest. On the other hand, Apple has sought to demonstrate the fact that it has a highly evolving technological framework that determines the manufacturing processes of the company. Generally, technological markets are some of the most fluid and unpredictable as compared to other markets. This is because of the fast-paced nature of innovations and technological factors create conditions that encourage competition between rivals in the same operational zone. Some of the issues that relate to the question of challenges are that it concerns issues of general commercial concern. The emerging patterns and trends of marketing has often related to the question of ethics versus and fair trading practices. There is an evident departure from ethics of marketing because the companies involved have significant control over significant market niches. The competition, rivalries, and conflicts that pit one company over another could be understood within the wider discourse of liberalization of the market economy. In the context of liberalization, some modern marketing practices often involve a determined from conventional and traditional ethics in ways that encourage the private of private interests at the expense of competitors (Hill & Jones, 2012). Malignant aspects of marketing have the potential of swaying the markets in favor of the direction of the companies involves. Such marketing practices often involve direct mention of certain elements that illustrate the weaknesses of the rival (Mooij, 2009, p. 62). On this score, companies may deliberately choose to malign the weaknesses of their rivals with the overall objective of carrying out some form of a market coup on the competitor’s interests. Generally, marketing strategies are designed to affect the targeted clientele at the psychological level. Packaging of the psychological messages is usually meant to affect the aesthetical tastes of the clientele. Technological products such as smart phones have significant connotations with matters of class, status symbols, nuances of progress and other qualities that determine the place of individuals in the society (Kotabe, et al, 2010, p151). Acquisition of smart phones is considered as some kind of endorsement into a different culture and lifestyle. It is precisely because of this reason that Samsung consistently focusses on certain aspects of Apple products in comparison to its own. For instance, some of the issues that relate to recent advertisements by Samsung have tended to demonstrate the fact that most of the features on the latest innovations by Apple are found on Samsung smart phones. Some of these adverts have extended to go beyond the specifics of the market to a direct or veiled criticism of the clientele for their choice of the products of the rival. For instance, Samsung would seek to create some kinds of categories of people and standards such that those who fall outside these categories feel some kind of exclusion from the virtual family of progress. One of the most recent advertisements about the qualities and value of a recent Apple iPhones was packaged in ways that promoted some sense of exclusion of the consumers and admirers of the Apple iphone. Marketing involves the creation of a sense of difference in terms of quality, quantity, and other aspects of value that might attend to the public and private needs of the clientele. On this note, strategies adopted by both companies are related in terms of their capacity to articulate certain issues of technological advancement as understood within the dual concepts of luxury and utility. It might be necessary to consider the fact that most of the issues that attend to the differences of class and privilege are routinely exploited by both companies in their determined marketing objectives of creating new segments and breaking into established segments. On this score, it becomes necessary to inquire into some of the concepts that determine the trends and directions of policy. In essence, the rivalry, competition, and marketing strategies could be analyzed through an analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Technological innovations are some of the strengths that determine the direction of the competition as understood within the context of frequent conflicts between the two technological firms (Michell, 2011, p. 64). However, Samsung seeks to demonstrate the fact that its innovations are newer and have a flexible pricing regime as compared to its competitors. It might be important to consider the fact that pricing remains one of the most significant aspects of the competition that determines the market reach between the two companies. As such, some of the issues that concern the level of competition are determined by the appeal to appeal to the markets and to demonstrate the capacity to galvanize sections of the market in their favor (Ubertazi, 2012). In the context of globalization, there is often the pressure for firms to engage in marketing strategies that shall respond to the global changes that take shape within the global market arena. On this note, the actions of Samsung should be understood as a direct response to the threat posed by a competitor. In the discourse of marketing, an awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of a competitor is often regarded as a key determinant of the direction of the competition (Kleindl, 2006, p.40). Companies manipulate the two variables of strengths and weaknesses for the purposes of attaining some competitive advantage over the rivals. Marketing usually involves the engagement of various processes that regulate market forces and market processes. In this regard, it becomes necessary to consider the elements of change within the discourse of competition in a highly liberalized business environment. Marketing involves the devising of strategies that could be relied upon to entrench the company in highly competitive advantages (Hollensen, 2007). Marketing of technological products require increased a consistent engagement with the developments and innovations of the rivals in order to achieve the required levels of strength as understood within the discourse of global competition. In essence, the overriding interest of the global technological firms is to establish ways in which they might enhance their brand image. Brand building involves a two-pronged method of exposing the weaknesses of other firms and competitors while highlighting the company’s strengths and taking care of other synergies that relate to the competitors real and perceived weaknesses (Keegan, 2010, p. 113). Some of the issues that attend to the strength and weaknesses of companies are usually regarded within the framework of the market forces and policies that regulate the rules for competitions within a global discourse. Generally, an understanding of the nature of competition between Apple and Samsung should be considered within the perspective of some of the stiff competition that define their market presence and fluid nature of the technology market. Works Cited Doole, Lowe, & R 2008, International Marketing Strategy, I: Analysis, Development, and Implementation, Cengage Learning EMEA, London. Hill, C, W & Jones, G, R 2012, Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach, Cengage Learning, London. Hollensen, S 2007, Global Marketing: A Decision-Oriented Approach, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River. Keegan, W, J 2010, Global Marketing, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River. Kleindl, B, A 2006, International Marketing, Cengage Learning, London. Kotabe, M et al, 2010, International Marketing, John Wiley & Sons Australia, Limited, New York. Michell, A 2011, Samsung Electronics and the Struggle for Leadership of the Electronics Industry, John Wiley & Sons, New York. Mooij, M 2009, Global Marketing, and Advertising: Understanding Cultural Paradoxes, SAGE, London. The Growth Agenda 2012, Growth Champions: The Battle for Sustained Innovation Leadership, John Wiley & Sons, New York. Ubertazi, B 2012, Exclusive Jurisdiction in Intellectual Property, Mohr Siebeck, New York. Read More