Skip to main content

Aim High

I mentioned in a previous entry that a significant amount of what a product manager does is recommend strategy that contradicts basic instincts. I listed four examples of such instincts.

One of the instincts I failed to mention, however, was the seemingly unstoppable temptation to lower prices or offer temporary discounts to stimulate demand for a company's product. In most cases, a good product manager will advise the opposite - maintain a stable price that reflects the value of the product rather than offer discounts.

I've mentioned that John Moore, in his Brand Autopsy blog, recommended that company executives visit the Brand Autopsy Discount Detox Center when they become addicted to price discounts.

Skimming through one of my favorite classic books on marketing, Al Ries and Jack Trout's Marketing Warfare, I recently came across these passages (excerpted from pages 90-92):
"Psychologist Robert B. Cialdini tells the story of a jewelry store in Arizona that couldn't sell an allotment of turquoise pieces. Just before leaving on a trip, the owner scribbled a note to her head sales person - 'Everything in this case, price x 1/2,' - hoping to get rid of the jewelry, even at a loss. When she returned a few days later, every article was gone. But because the salesperson had read the 1/2 in the scrawled message as a 2, the entire batch had been sold at twice the original price, not half. For many products, high price is a benefit. The price adds credibility to the product."
And later:
"There are two good reasons why high price represents more of a marketing opportunity than low price. One is the tendency of the prospect to equate quality with price. 'You get what you pay for.' The other is the potential for higher profit margins with a higher price. The higher margins allow you to finance the critical 'pursuit' stage of a flanking attack."
Brand management isn't about instincts, it's about well-established branding principles.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Spreadsheets Suck for Prioritizing

The Goal As a company executive, you want confidence that your product team (which includes all the people, from all departments, responsible for product success) has a sound basis for deciding which items are on the product roadmap. You also want confidence the team is prioritizing the items in a smart way. What Should We Prioritize? The items the team prioritizes could be features, user stories, epics, market problems, themes, or experiments. Melissa Perri  makes an excellent case for a " problem roadmap ", and, in general, I recommend focusing on the latter types of items. However, the topic of what types of items you should prioritize - and in what situations - is interesting and important but beyond the scope of this blog entry. A Sad but Familiar Story If there is significant controversy about priorities, then almost inevitably, a product manager or other member of the team decides to put together The Spreadsheet. I've done it. Some of the mos

Use Case as a Black Box

Consider the following use case: Purchase Items Actor: Purchaser Precondition: Purchaser types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40. Postcondition: For the average Purchaser acting at full efficiency, the number of seconds elapsed is no more than 30 + 20 * n, where n is the number of items purchased. The name of the use case represents a functional requirement. What does the product do, or enable the user to do? Purchase items. What are we to make of the preconditions and postconditions? What relationship do they have to the requirements for the product? Answer: the preconditions and postconditions are the nonfunctional requirements attached to the functional requirement . Another way of expressing the nonfunctional requirement would be as an attribute and associated constraint: Usability: For a Purchaser who types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40, it shall take no

Henry Ford's "Faster Horse" Quote

You may have heard the ( apocryphal ) Henry Ford quote: If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse". Over at the On Product Management blog , Saeed gives his take on this infamous quote. He "hates" it, and gives some compelling reasons. Saeed is spot on in his explanations. Personally, I think the quote is great, but it's a matter of interpretation. The valid point of the quote is not that it's a bad idea to facilitate a conversation with your market to better understand it. The valid points are: You must ask the right questions to get valuable answers. You must interpret the answers thoughtfully - often outside their direct meaning - to glean reliable information. Asking questions is not always the best way to "listen" to your market. (E.g., sometimes pure observational studies are more reliable.) Nonetheless, I find the quote is helpful to combat "armchair product management" in the