Apple was a brand name in the world and utilized this to get higher returns from the international market. The initial strategy included targeting a particular group of people who could afford to pay more towards a more technically enhanced product introduced by Apple. The Phone was able to remain consistent throughout the U. S. And other countries having the same specifications and designs. This approach may work for some areas, but this led to problems because it was not able to address particular issues in regards to the Phone where few markets were unable to accept the Phone in its original form.
This resulted in the inability to modify the Phone to suit the local needs or limiting any future aspects of edification. Apple was not able to completely expand its efforts in a significant market such as Japan. Apple’s G technology was recognized in many other places in the world but was unsound terribly when it came to the Japanese market. The fact of the matter the Japanese market had been previously introduced to the G technology in Japanese cell phones decades ago, therefore it was no surprise, and it was already being utilized.
Phone’s G technologies had nothing new to offer. The Japanese market had already attained the maximum gratification and benefits from the G technology. Coffman and Sank (2010) In edition, many mobile phones in Japan allow their users to use their phones as debit cards or train passes. Apple’s strategic team expected to capture the Japanese market as their primary target but was not successful. Japanese consumers were already utilizing features such as digital TV viewing, color display, satellite navigation and music player.
Basically Japanese consumers were not excited about the idea of a new smartened, the Phone contained features that have been utilized already. Japanese consumers did not find any additional value of the Phone for a need in their lives. In addition to the ace value for the Phone, Apples attempt to skim the market with high prices, the led to a further decline of the Phone in the Japanese market. Apple learned a very valuable lesson dealing with the Japanese market, analyzing the strength and weakness of a product not only in a global aspect but also in a local perspective as well.
When a strategy is adopted by a company such as Apple, it may seem perfect, but criticism of the product from a major local market can lead to the deterioration of the reputation of the company not only in the same market but also in the surrounding region. The strategic am/managers should define the requirements of a particular local market by assembling a meeting that include businessmen, entrepreneurs, customers and suppliers of the market to compile strategies while keeping awareness to the views supported by the stakeholders and assimilating their ideas while creating a strategy.
Apple learned another valuable lesson, the failed attempt to gain the understanding of the Japanese culture. It should be expected of efficient marketers to understand the cultural values and needs of the local. It is important to understand their needs so that they can customize their reduces for the target intended. Apple totally failed at this approach when they introduced the Phone to the Japanese market. Apple underestimated the Japanese market by expecting the Japan consumers to adjust with the Phone instead of altering the features in order for the item to be accepted by the community it targeted.
Apple failed to convince the consumers to give up their traditional way of choosing a product and provide them with a direction to choose a new product and look for the new features offered by it. Apple was not able to convince Japan’s consumers with its failed attempt to racketing the Phone to stop using their traditional local phones. Apple failed to create an environment where Japanese consumers would find excitement in the touch screen feature. Many are accustomed to the touch screen on a smartened, but the Japanese market was not impressed. It was enough for them to give up their traditional product for a new one.
The touch screen feature was groundbreaking, Apple did not take leverage and failed in creating impact on the customers in Japan and ultimately failed in inducing them to go for the new and innovative product in the smartened industry now as phone. A simple tactic Apple could have utilized to concentrate on the products primary features instead in relying on the brand name. Apple has a prominent image to the rest of the world but failed to create a lasting impression with the Phone in the Japanese market because they fail to meet the local’s needs Of the community.
When a need is already being fulfilled by another mobile company, Apple was not able to add ant new and completive edge to the Japanese market. The four major factors of the marketing mix are the price, place, promotion, and product. Fact: The product offered by Apple was competitive in the rest of the world, but it was not the case in Japan as the Japanese already had substitutes. Apple failed to deliver that competitive edge over the existing Japanese mobile technology. The price for the Phone offered by Apple was rather high while the Japanese consumers already had the option of choosing other products that contained similar features.
It can be stated Apple was not able to take advantage of the circumstances by creating a need for the Phone with the use of effective marketing campaign. Japan has its underlying forces and necessities, yet Apple was unable to take advantage of the whole situation and failed to convince the consumers to use the product. Apple’s target was off by not considering the local consumers persuasively. Apple relied mainly on their name/brand and failed to consider modifying the product features to meet the needs of the Japanese community.
Case II: Would Mackey Mouse eat Shark Fin’s Soup. Walt Disney’s attempt to offer Shark Fin’s Soup at Hong Gong’s Disney Land did not land the expected amusement of the community of Hong Kong compared to the delight of the Chinese culture. Shark Fin’s Soup is insider to be a significant dish among the Chinese culture; many did not support the idea of using an endangered species as a source of food. Those amongst the non-Chinese culture felt Walt Disney was making it acceptable for catching a species that has already become endangered.
Walt Disney’s organization was well known for the values of culture, social and religious aspect of people, but because they chose a different country to introduce the Shark Fin’s Soup, their reputation is not appreciated. One lesson learned, consumers have a global perspective and are not only concerned with the remises made an organization locally, but also expect the organization to behave in the same way in other parts of the world. Expecting such behavior will ensure that the community operates and remains fulfilled with the processes by that organization.
The saying “what works for one may not function for all” goes deeply into this analysis. Walt Disney failed to recognize different cultures bring to various aspects or meanings of life. The process of introducing Shark Fin’s Soup should never bring harm to the local environment and also the process should not clash with the cultural, social ND religious values of the people living in that community. In this particular situation, the customers from both USA and Hong Kong were together and registered their protest against the making of a soup that involved any dealings with an endangered species.
Globalization allows the majority of the consumers coming from different parts of the world share the same frame of mind to sacrifice their needs to shun against a brand or an organization when they discover or feel that it is either exploiting or disturbing the ecological system of the globe. Another lesson learned by Walt Disney was the problems hey faced by not focusing on corporate responsibility. Many groups such as environmental groups expect Walt Disney to set an example because they are such a huge organization; they attract people’s attention worldwide.
It is imperative that Walt Disney abide within the business ethics; this includes any encouragement of hunting of endangered species for any use. This is the reason environmental groups were disappointed with the findings of Walt Disney’s contribution towards worsening the environment by allowing this action. Walt Disney is expected to set an example and educate other organization to take the resourcefulness and save the environment, but in this case Walt Disney failed did not uphold their image and reputation.
A solution could have been easily researched for an environment-friendly substitute to fulfill all requirements. This alone could have ensured the community of Hong Kong that Walt Disney is an organization has a commitment of complete devotion to helping aid in the decrease environmental footprints that are left behind by many. In conclusion, Apple nor did Walt Disney study the needs of the local consumers. Both relied on the Brand/Name to target their customers. This minor neglect caused both organizations to be affected financially and a weakening image of both organizations.
Both have a vast customer base that was profoundly affected as a result of their actions. Both will need to work hard in the future to save their image and regain a position where they have a competitive and strategic advantage against other organizations.