Michael Jordan Teaming up with Nike - Case Study Example

Name: Instructor: Course: Date Co-branding In the current brand centric age, co-brands seem to be everywhere. From credit card companies, fast foods to the fashion industry, co-branding seems to be making a mark on business strategy since the 1950s. When two brands merge, the merge can at times boost the popularity and success of the brand (Chang 45). However, before co-branding, strict considerations need to be made for the same co-branding can also not be effective and brands may take a considerable amount of time trying to hoard a tarnished reputation. Over the years co-branding has been applied with the aim of forming multitudes of partnerships. Through co-branding the involved companies strategically merge their products, colors, services as well as logos so as to come up with a new product or service (Hooley, Piercy and Nicoulaud 99). Through co-branding products usually enter into new marketplaces and thus the brands are able to meet a new audience and at the same time boost their sales and profits. Michael Jordan is teaming up with Nike In this advert, the then basket legend Michael Jordan teamed up with Nike in making a new shoe referred to as Air Jordan. Through this co-branding, the shoe was seen as being the most successful as well as widely recognized shoe in the market. Since it was first designed and sold in the year 1984, over twenty three new versions have been produced. The co-branding seemed to be the biggest as well as the most successful in Nike’s history. A campaign that had been started just for shoes has over time grown so as to incorporate almost all basketball attires. The major reason behind the success of air Jordan was based on the fact that it was new. The shoe also looked flashy and it was comfortable and based on the fact that Michael Jordan would be able to dunk from the foul line when wearing them, then everyone would be able to do it. Another major reason behind it success is based on the fact that Nike undertook numerous marketing activities (Chang 45), Nike was aware of the fact that if they were able to find the right celebrity to sign a contract with them they could be leading in the shoe industry. An additional factor to their success was that there were no shoes that were being marketed by the pro-athletes. Thus it was just a matter of having the right person, at the right time and at the right place. The co-branding in this case was able to enhance the perceived value of the co-branded brands. A good example of this is there was an increase in profits as well as the brand image. This is based on the fact that through co-branding, Nike was able to gain reach to new customers and this in a way also led to an increase in brand value and profits (Chang 45). The co-branding has affected the customer’s perception of the brand based on the fact that a leading legend in basketball was chosen for the advert. Thus, they were able to gain a lot of awareness of the brand as compared to when a person who was not a celebrity would have been chosen to advertise the shoe. Pepsi and Doritos advert Regardless of which country, all games are usually characterized by the presence of snacks and beverages. During most recreational activities most people tend to take snacks as compared to real meals. This co-branding and advert was created during the football season and the two joined forces so as to impel the co-consumption of beverages and snacks. The major reason behind the success of this brand is based on the number of football fans that are there and thus, based on the advert a great number of the football fans are more likely to consume both Pepsi and Doritos. Another major reason for its success is that, the advert was done before the end of the football season and thus they were able to retain and attract new customers with the aim of boosting the co-consumption (Hooley, Piercy and Nicoulaud 99). Co-branding is commonly said to have some perceived value and through the co-branding of Pepsi and Doritos, the advert was able to enhance some of these values. For instance, through co-branding there would be an increase in the number of customers buying the brand. Football fans would view it as being better to take Pepsi together with Doritos as compared to any other drink. Also the advert depicted that taking Doritos together with Pepsi can create a super powerful combination of cooling lime and spicy hot. The co-branding of the products have affected the customer's perception of the product in that they may view it as being better and thus they are likely to take it at a regular rate as compared to when the co-branding had not taken place. Citibank and Emirates master card The MasterCard seems to offer a perfect companionship for all travelers and it comes along with a number of travel rewards as well as complimentary benefits. A major reason for the success of the co-branded master card is based on the perceived benefits of master cards. Through the use of the master cards, customers are able to enjoy some special enhancements in that, co-branded MasterCard’s offers one more value as well as purchasing power and more so in the cashless world that we are currently operating in. Another major reason for the success of the co-branding is based on the fact that MasterCard are now accepted in a great number of places and businesses such as in hotels, petrol stations and in the malls. Also with a MasterCard, one can be able to gain access to his money from any part of the world. This aspect has really played a leading role in the use and acceptance of master cards by a great number of people (Hooley, Piercy and Nicoulaud 99). The co-branding between the Citi bank and Emirates has been able to attain the perceived values that are closely associated with co-branding. In relation to these, both Citi bank and Emirates have benefited in that, each of them has gained new customers due to the other. For instance, Emirates travelers who were not customers of Citi bank can view the co-branding as being beneficial to them based on the rewards that are offered and thus they may opt to join Citi bank and vice versa. Another major reason for its success is based on the fact that, customers are able to view and analyze their spending based on the statements offered to them. Through this people are likely to be more conscious when it comes to their spending and thus they are likely to spend less. In this case co-branding seems to have affected the perceptions of the customers in regard to the two products (Joshi 55). This is based on the fact that through co-branding Citi bank and Emirates became well known. Google and kitkat This is another co-branding that was successful. Google puts out a new KitKat Android operating system. This co-branding is seen as the first in which Google has worked with nestle. A major reason for the success of the co-brand is based on the fact that through the use of kitkat, Google was trying to assure customers of the availability of the brand for all and also lower prices for tablets and phones. Also, Google was able to keep up with its sweet naming history, which they have adopted over the years The co-branding of the two brands has in a way achieved the perceived values of co-branding. So far the deal between the two companies seems to be paying off and mostly in regard to social engagement (Joshi 55). The OS has attracted numerous YouTube views and twitter impressions and thus the pairing of the two seem to be working. Through the large number of views and impression brand awareness has been heightened to newer levels. Customers who would not have known of the existence of either of the brands have been able to know it and thus they are more likely to buy the co-branded brand. Loyal customers of Google are likely to be introduced to Kitkat and vice versa, and thus there will be a greater customer base for the new product which ultimately means greater profits on the side of each of the organizations. The two brands were also able to rely on each other’s reputation. Nike and Apple The Nike and Apple co-branding was another major success. The two companies co-branded and formed Nike+. Through the technology, Nike shoes are able to track all the running data in an iPod. A major reason for the success of the two brands is based on the fact that the two brands seem to be strong and people are more likely to have both of them. Also, prior to the merge, the two brands had a large following and thus their merging meant that they would benefit from each other in that each of the customers from either side would in a way purchase the other brand. Based on this, the co-branding seemed to be a success for both companies. Another reason for the success of the brands is based on the convenience that the co-brand offered to them (Joshi 55). The co-branding of the two brands in a way enhanced the perceived benefits of co-branding since in that, each of the brands brought with them their success. Also, there was an increase in profits for both sides since each of them gained new customers through co-branding and new customers flocked into shops to see what the duo could be offering to them (Judith and Brian 11). Also, both Apple and Nike had undeniable ability to add on some value to each other and thus they were able to create something that seemed greater than the total of their parts. Also based on the success of the two brands, customer awareness of the products was enhanced and thus sales were on the increase (Judith and Brian 11). Works Cited Chang, Wei-Lun. “Roadmap of Co-branding Positions and Strategies.” The Journal of American Academy of Business, 15. 1 (2009). Print. Hooley, Graham, Piercy, Nigel and Nicoulaud, Brigitte. Marketing strategy and competitive positioning. London: Prentice Hall. 2008. Print. Joshi, Rakesh. International Marketing. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005. Print. Judith, Washburn and Brian, Till. "Co-branding: brand equity and trial effects." Journal of Consumer Marketing 17.7 (2000): 591 – 604. Print. Read More