Look inside yourself

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

Do you want to innovate?

Do you feel that your business needs a change?

YOU ARE WRONG!

You are wrong because you seek solutions outside. You are unhappy with what you have and search for the Holy Grail. You believe that the neighbor’s grass is greener.

I was recently asked to consult a company that struggled with its sales and profits. They expected me to come with a program that would create a paradigm shift and that will transform the entire company into something totally new.

All I did was putting together some ideas from various areas of my expertise and presenting them to the marketing managers. “What can you do with this?” I asked and the ideas started to flow backed by data that the company already had. Within an hour we had a basic plan on how to progress. The entire team was mobilized enthusiastically knowing that they can do it.

Never look for external solutions. Look inside you! You know best what the solution is.

Bookmark and Share

Think Beyond the Commodity Mindset; Turn your Offer into Luxury

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

TEVA is trapped in a mountain of debt exceeding $40 billion.

Fourteen-thousand employees which made up 25% of TEVA’s workforce will be laid off. It needs to think beyond traditional restructuring.

This is hardly news. That’s the nature of the business landscape that exists in an unfortunate vicious cycle: grow, borrow, expand beyond capacity, and restructure to start all over again. Not every company fully experiences this entire cycle. Many companies will fall victim to their debt and become prey to their hungry competitors.

According to McKinsey, 95% of companies don’t understand their value proposition, and consequently, trade on price. Alternatively, we can say that these companies show one fundamental symptom: They have the commodity mindset. This mindset is our own creation. We need to first understand how we create this mindset, what it entails and how can companies cure it.

The creation of the commodity mindset

The commodity mindset is a set of beliefs and assumptions that put together lead to a business trap. As the old saying goes: “We buy with our hearts, and then justify it with our heads”. Organizational behavior is no different, and companies are creative enough to explain their success. They won’t look further. They won’t check whether the explanation to this success is valid at all or whether they can explain their success in a different way. Their mindset becomes “one solution fits all”. They will rely on surveys and reports because they support their logic. Their offers are solutions to hypothetical problems. Hypothetical, because these companies never checked with their customers what their real problem is.

However, even when companies have successful solutions, the solutions are always easily copied by competitors and leads to price war. The only way to win is to slash prices and to reduce profit margins. Not one company would survive this way. It would either come out with their money, or will end with a loss.

When it is impossible to make even one dollar of profit the way of growing is by becoming bigger. Companies try to take over their competition as a means of survival. This defensive behavior may save the company from losses, but will not help it grow.

This mindset doesn’t allow companies to raise prices and blocks their growth. The only way to grow is by becoming larger and more potent. Regrettably, with no profit and no cash these company need to borrow.

Hoping to curb the competition is a false hope and wishful thinking. Competition will always exist and will put so much pressure over the profit margins that the borrowing company will not be able to pay its debt unless it divest serious portion of itself and raise the necessary funds. The only way to continue is restructuring.

Hence, the commodity mindset is set because of two reasons. Firstly, we were educated to appreciate the superiority of logic over emotion. The easily copied “one solution fits all” is a tribute to our rational thinking. Secondly, we perceive the principle of the “survival of the fittest” in its primitive, animal-world format. Companies prefer emotionally to defend their offer through price war where even the winner will be left licking its wounds. Consequently, companies following this commodity mindset committed one cardinal sin – they never talked to the customer.

Talking to the customer

Can we rely on reports and surveys? Not really. That’s how Blockbuster lost its market to Netflix. Reed Hastings, Netflix co-founder and CEO explained how he met with Blockbuster and tried to convince them that their business model is outdated. Managers of Blockbuster explained from one their reports that “our customers like to come in, to check the DVD boxes and to read the reviews on their back”. However, Netflix’s Hastings visited Blockbuster’s outlets and actually talked to the customers to hear a different story. The rest is history. Blockbuster went bust, and Netflix took over the market.

You’d think that marketers are immune and know their way. After all they should know who the customer is and they should talk to him. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The marketing buzz is that video use in social media will spike up in 2018. I asked a friend and he quoted 42 marketing statistical researches supporting this argument. Those statistics have one similar flaw – none of them checked the customer’s view. Marketers are now busy producing videos, justifying it with statistics which is totally unsubstantial. LinkedIn users know very well that the text-only posts are the most read and most viral. They know this from experience, not from statistics.

The alternative marketing approach

When talking to customers you will discover two important points. Firstly, the belief in “one solution fits all” is wrong. Each customer has his own particular needs to satisfy and all are using the same product as a means only to their particular goal – satisfying their particular needs. These individual needs are a challenge to the marketer who needs to synthesize them into larger segments.

Secondly, and contrary to the logic approach of the commodity mindset, customers are motivated by emotion and not by logic. Luxury is doing exactly this. It uses the bare product, the commodity as a platform for delivering the added value – answering to the emotional needs of the customer and cashing on it. Luxury is expensive because it is laden with emotional added-value.

In 1988, Mazda introduced its 626 model to the UK market, and it was compared to the Mercedes-Benz and BMW models that were sold for $49.000 or more. Mazda asked in its advertisements why customers pay extra money when they can get a similar car for less. Mazda missed the point. Though the 626, Mercedes-Benz, and BMW all offered a similar product, people would rather pay for the added value that the Mercedes-Benz and BMW offered that couldn’t be found in the 626.

Hence, the alternative marketing approach is luxury marketing or marketing based on principles of luxury. There is a fundamental difference between the commodity and the marketing approaches. The commodity approach is based on removing any chance for choice – one solution exists and it should satisfy all. On the other hand, the luxury approach is a tribute to the underlying quality of man – his ability to choose. Therefore, any luxury-type marketing offer is based on several good options to choose from.

For developing these options we start with careful market research that would reveal the subconscious, emotional needs of the customer. It follows with segmentation practice that will synthesize these various needs into large enough segments to market.

As a result, the company will have several products, each fitting a different segment’s emotional needs. Because of the emotional added-value of each offer the company will be able to raise its profit margins. The more laden with emotional added-value the offer is, the higher the margins will be.

It is impossible to stop competition, and all the company can strive for is to dictate the rules of competition only. The way to compete is to have a direct dialogue with the customer and to authentically answer his emotional needs. The competition will have to do exactly the same – find its own authentic voice, create an intimate dialogue and answering the customer subconscious needs in its own way.

However, this approach is based not only on identifying the particular needs of each customer but also on segmentation – synthesizing these particular needs into coherent segments. There are no rules here and each company would be able to define its particular marketing approach. There will never be one winner takes all.

The case of TEVA

Not only I am not familiar with the pharmaceutical industry, any professional advice needs to be supported by prior sound research that I never conducted. Nevertheless, we can examine few of the challenges that TEVA might face.

Elementary to luxury marketing is that the customer will have a choice that reflects his particular emotional needs. This is usually not the case when the patient accepts the decision of the physician that doesn’t take the patient’s emotional welfare into account. How can we allow the end-customer the ability to choose between equally good solutions?

Next, we need to understand the physician’s motivation. Faithful to our approach this group – the physicians is segmented as well. Finally, the health insurance companies, which finance the treatment are also not all cut from the same fabric. They all have their motivations that need to be satisfied. In my research on boards I could clearly identify patterns of behavior that need to be satisfy. It is not enough to say that these companies like to act in a thrifty way. The question is why they act so and the answer varied and reflects the decision makers’ worldviews.

However, as the problem becomes more complex it may allow TEVA to develop its unique answer that will satisfy the true needs of all stakeholders at once. A solid answer will position TEVA as resilient to competition and allow the company growing with better profit margins.

Bookmark and Share

When will they ever learn?

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

Back in 2013 I visited the JCK show in Las Vegas. The JCK show is one of the largest diamond and jewelry shows in the world and almost everyone in the diamond industry attended either as a presenter or as a visitor. One of the highlights of the show is Martin Rapaport’s review of the diamond industry. Rapaport’s speech recalled for me the immortal Pete Seger song, “Where Have All the Flowers Gone?” because it seems that the industry has not changed its practice despite reality continuing to slap it in the face.

Let’s start with a bit of history. Before the big discoveries in 1882 there was not a diamond industry to speak of. Upon the discovery of the large mines in South Africa, Ernest Oppenheimer and Sir Cecil Rhodes established De Beers. Their major fear was that there might be a surge in diamond supply that the world wouldn’t be able to absorb. So they offered to buy the entire world supply, and act as a buffer, releasing diamonds according to need. Of course, De Beers wanted to profit from their position but they never withheld diamonds just to create artificial demand in a typical monopolistic manner. Following the Great Depression in 1932, De Beers risked becoming insolvent when it could not sell a single diamond while, on the other hand, could not raise enough money to honour its obligation to purchase the diamond production any further.

Fortunately De Beers survived and realized that its responsibility was to create a diamond market, or to create the consumer demand for diamonds.  In 1938 Harry Oppenheimer, Ernest’s son, hired N.W. Ayer to help De Beers market diamonds. This move proved to be a tremendous success and the “A Diamond is Forever” slogan was coined, which is arguably considered one of the best marketing slogans ever.  De Beers grew based on its ability to control the diamond rough market and to sell the production according to the real demand, taking care not to clog the industry’s arteries. In the 1950’s when the Russians started to sell their diamond production to De Beers, it presented a problem since the Russian production was of much smaller diamonds. Nevertheless, De Beers successfully started to market the anniversary ring as a means for marketing these small diamonds. Prices went up gradually, but in a sensitive way that reflected real consumer demand.

Things started to change in the late 1970’s. There were many factors involved. The introduction of grading reports (or “certificates” as they are known in the industry) increased the categories diamonds were divided into tenfold. Instead of ten categories the industry now had a hundred, and each had to be priced differently just to justify the grade. In no time, prices increased dramatically, but this time the reason was different. The increase in price was no longer geared by true demand but by internal market forces. People started to speculate and with the help of the bankers the industry bought rough with the hope of selling it later at higher prices. De Beers did not want to see a diamond stockpile grow outside their control and in August 1980 they managed to cut this speculative trend abruptly. As a result, the market came to a halt and started to build itself back slowly. Manufacturing of rough, on the other hand, did not stop and De Beers found itself in a position where it had to buy diamonds without clients to sell to.

Into this scene, Nicky Oppenheimer, the third generation, entered. Unfortunately, Nicky did not have the view of his ancestors who knew that the success of De Beers depended on the success of its market of true consumers in which they had invested money and energy to develop. Instead of building a healthy consumption that would eventually benefit De Beers, Nicky Oppenheimer was concerned with his company’s success – he wanted to make money. Looking at his stockpile, Nicky realized that the lion’s share of the value of it came from a very thin sliver of the goods – the better quality. Well, De Beers could survive by creaming its stockpile and hoping for better times to sell the rest.  De Beers embarked on faulty market research that created the infamous 4C’s, promoting larger and more expensive diamonds.

Shortly before the 1980 crash, the Indian polishing centre started to grow. The Indians found ways to polish diamonds which only a few years earlier were considered unpalatable. However, De Beers effectively stopped looking for solutions for the diamonds polished from its rough. No marketing idea was introduced to promote the cheap Indian polished diamonds. This revealed the lack of basic marketing thinking in the diamond industry, which is about understanding the unique link between the consumer and its supplier. Local or international, the consumer needs to see what unique offer he gets at the retailer. However, by writing off the consumer, the focus switched to the retailer, and suppliers wondered how they could build loyalty.

Especially with the cheap Indian goods it was difficult to differentiate between supplying offers: they all looked the same and there was an exit barrier and no loyalty. These diamonds were approached as commodities where the cheaper offers won. To offset this problem, programs were created with the aim of tying up the retailer long-term, forcing them to buy goods that reflected the production needs of the supplier, but which were not relevant to the market situation. Instead of appealing to customers’ emotional needs, retailers followed typical push tactics by offering discounts and promoting sales similar to other retail sectors. With the help of De Beers, the suppliers helped those retailers promote these programs. As a result, the bigger the retail account, the more support they got as they had the ability to push more goods down the supply chain, at least theoretically.

Over time and especially when the Internet became an integral part of the business, sellers of larger and more expensive goods followed suit, turning the entire diamond market from luxury into commodity. People started to trade “paper” or “certificates” and nobody bothered to use a loupe and tweezers, the tools of the industry. To counter the price erosion, more and more programs were created. Suppliers were ready to act as bankers and extended lavish credits without knowing what they were doing, with the hope that they would manage to tie up their retail customers who would eventually sell their goods and send the money upstream. Instead of focusing on the diamond consumer, the industry looked the other way, trying to please its bankers.

Toward the beginning of the 1990’s I started to gain interest in the diamond consumer market, realizing that the reasons behind people purchasing diamonds are totally different from what the industry that trades and sells their production believes. I could not find answers to why people really buy diamonds within the industry. Nobody knew or even cared to know. The diamond industry totally lost contact with the diamond consumer.

Meanwhile, De Beers went into strategic review and came up with two results. Firstly, its $5 billion unsellable stockpile was worth nothing and secondly, it officially ceased to be the custodian for the industry. The industry which fully relied on De Beers to create its consumer market found that the captain had abdicated the ship.

Nobody seemed to care. As early as 1998 I warned whoever wanted to listen that the industry was heading toward insolvency but nobody really listened. Without much understanding of what they were doing and with the encouragement of De Beers, the industry went into branding itself just to see how $5 billion in cash and bank money, or a third of the industry capitalization, can evaporate within three years without selling one extra diamond to make up for the loss.

Meanwhile, De Beers tried to push its dead stockpile down the industry’s throat. Abdicating its role as the industry marketer, De Beers’ relationship with the market took a new turn. Companies were put into competition based on who could better please De Beers’ bottom line. Which customer had the financial muscles to purchase more diamonds long-term? Companies were not required to show that they could sell but that they could buy from De Beers on a steady basis. Most of the goods were the cheap Indian type and with bank generosity, Indians bought the entire stockpile, polishing it and creating a new unsold stockpile, this time of polished diamonds. The industry was operating completely in reverse — instead of focusing on the end of the supply chain, it was trying to please the beginning.

The industry was now at the mercy both of its bankers and De Beers, totally disregarding the diamond consumer and his needs. With the financial meltdown in 2008, banks were at a very shaky point and needed to justify the credit they extended to the diamond industry, which they could not do, and the industry started to panic and called for an emergency meeting which I attended. I must admit that I was wrong as eventually the industry survived, again with the help of its bankers.

However, five years later things haven’t changed. The industry owes $15 billion to the banks, or more than the annual cost of rough. From another perspective it owes 65% of its polished diamonds’ value to the banks and still it hasn’t realized that there is only one way to do business – by satisfying the consumer’s needs. Visiting the JCK show tells the story. On one part of the show floor you find the manufacturers, dealers and distributors – the diamond industry insiders who keep on dealing among themselves and complaining that they do not make any profit, as if living in a bubble and totally disregarding the retailers. The retailers are found on the other side of the floor, checking new packaging, software and other materials for their stores. These two parts of the supply chain do not meet.

And as for marketing, in his last slide, Rapaport had two important lines. The first was “We need marketing,” and the last one was “He who owns the customer owns the industry.” Well, Mr. Rapaport and my dear colleagues in the diamond industry, you have no marketing and it seems that you don’t care about it at all. Consequently, you do not own the customer and, according to Rapaport you don’t own your own industry.

You say of this article...

Bookmark and Share

How to profit from likes

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

Gary Gilmore was executed on January 17, 1977, at 8:07 a.m. by firing squad at Utah State Prison in Draper, Utah. His last words were “Let’s do it!”

These words inspired Dan Wieden to coin Nike’s slogan “Just Do It.” It is considered one of the best taglines of the 20th century. Nike’s campaign based on this tagline propelled Nike’s American market share of sport-shoes from 18% to 43% within ten years.

Jerome Conlon, then Nike’s Director of Marketing Insights & Planning illustrates the challenge. America faced increasing obesity, a recession and reduced funding for school sports. Nike was popular among male athletes, but it was losing the female market share to Reebok’s aerobic shoe line. To win in the game of business, Nike needed to become popular with women, youth and baby boomers.

Nike’s aim wasn’t the one million professional athletes; it wanted to unleash the athlete within 150 million Americans. It appealed to the dreams of people, and their inner yearning for healthier life. All they needed was to put on a pair of runners and start jogging. All Nike wanted them was to purchase a pair of shoes and “Just Do It.”

Did this campaign help the US to combat obesity and procrastination? Not at all. Wearing Nike’s sneakers became a statement. Not an athletic statement, as one might think but a “me, too” statement. One million professional runners used the shoes to compete, and the rest were just clicking a mental like every time they saw a Nike ad. Eventually, these likes turned into purchases.

Every time people wore their Swoosh labeled shoes, they sent out a share, and their friends got a mental notification.

Eventually, these likes turned into purchases.

How can you financially benefit from the likes to your posts?

You say of this article...

Bookmark and Share

One Question

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

Any call for creativity or innovation intrigues me. So, when I got a call to join a brainstorming event with tens of thousands of participants I expected to get some stimulating ideas, some exciting questions to bite in.

I managed to find this post which claimed that the 100 questions on its list inspired 454,000 ideas. The call for action was to add more to this long list of ideas. Well, I stopped at the first question wandering what I am missing, what went wrong with me and why I couldn’t be triggered by any one of those questions?

Here is the first question on the list. How might we increase the productivity of Singapore?

Well, I cannot answer this one but at least I have a few questions:

1. Why is it so important to increase the productivity?

2. What might happen if we didn’t increase productivity?

3. What are the hindrances that blocked productivity?

4. How do you know that these hindrances are what block productivity?

5. Why were these hindrances created /imposed on in the first place?

6. Why weren’t they removed until today?

7. What are the untapped or underdeveloped capabilities of Singapore that might help us increasing productivity?

8. Why were they left untapped until today?

I can go on and on but one question nagged me, and it can be developed further: Why do you consider this type of question “innovative” or “out of the box”?

Moreover, checking the above list of questions you can apply them to most of the 100 questions presented.

This leaves me with one question?

What can be the one tough question that will really force us to think out of the box, to delve deep inside and to let our creative juices run? Maybe we won’t find a remedy for Singapore but a good question will broaden our horizons and allow us to think differently. Isn’t this what this group about?

You say of this article...

Bookmark and Share

Transform yourself

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

I am so happy to move forward with the new initiative of Janus Thinking. We are creating a new community for all those who are interested in my ideas about luxury, marketing, management, leadership and diamonds. Looking at what I discussed in the past it is clear that the call is for you to transform yourself. But, how can you do it?

The first lesson is here – a video that will introduce you to how to think about transformation. Above appears the trailer to this video and to get the full video please go to
www.janusthinking.com/video .

Join our community for more ideas and insights.

Yours,

Isaac

You say of this article...

Bookmark and Share

Becoming a Creative Warrior

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

I recently had the honor of being interviewed by Jeffrey Shaw on Creative Warriors Unite. We spoke about the behaviors behind luxury marketing, reaching people’s deeper desires, and creating memorable experiences.

It was interesting to learn Jeffrey’s insights into my ideas. He shared how as an experienced photographer, clients would ask him to take “family photos.” Many people could take basic photos, so why would they call him? People were really seeking a photographer who would capture the emotion of moments that they would treasure for the rest of their lives.

You can listen to the podcast at
http://creativewarriorsunite.com/behavior-luxury-market/

You say of this article...

Bookmark and Share

This is luxury, too!

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

dining-table-1348717_960_720 Permit me to acquaint you with the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish society. While by most measures – morally, intellectually and educationally – this might be considered elite.  However, many choose to live in poverty seeking high social standards. Their budgets are tight, but properly feeding their family is important, seeking out cheap solutions. Suppliers to this sector know that money talks –selling food staples with low margins, benefiting instead from economy of scale. The average household is 8-10 heads.

Furniture needs to be durable and long lasting. IKEA is well designed but won’t survive years of active children.  Carpenters serving this sector learned how to manufacture what is best for this society. Most apartments are tiny with no extra space. The measurements need to be concise, or the carpenter will need to start again.

A recent debate in Hamodia, the only one newspaper that the Ultra-Orthodox utilize, discussed complaints about dishonest furniture stores. These stores asked for payment in full when ordering, but didn’t properly deliver. The examples were many. Delivery time was not respected, the furniture didn’t fit, or the color wasn’t right. One of the recommendations people gave was to always buy at a store that has a sign above it. Many stores keep costs down in this community by not having a sign.

Next, the store owners came with their stories. Payments canceled and custom-made furniture refused and could no longer be sold. This at the cost to the store owner. Two sides of the story, the customers and the suppliers.

The newspaper brought one best-practice example. The story is about a woman with a shop without a sign or a name. She has run a successful business for over thirty years. She insists her relationship with the customer is purely business, friendship is not part of the deal. She asks for a down payment upon ordering and for a moderate payment plan allowing for prefixed instalments. Over the years she has had a bad experience or two, but nothing dramatic. Mistakes happen and she offers customer service to make it right. Above all, she delivers on time. Her secret is paying her suppliers in full and in advance, motivating them to deliver as quickly as possible. The last principle that she shared was that trust is paramount. She believes in what she offers and trusts the customer.

Many lessons can be learned from this story. Instead of competing on price she competes on insecurity, a common theme. The customer delays payment and the supplier wants full payment up front both trying to reduce their risk. After all, nobody can really guarantee the furniture will arrive as ordered and on time. This woman does exactly that – she does whatever is needed to reduce the insecurity factor. Delivery is on time and if it’s not right, she makes it right. Her margins are high because she has removed the risks, keeping her customers and suppliers happy. That’s how she is successful in this competitive business for over thirty years.

The final point is interesting. She is a supplier not the customer’s friend. No birthday cards or occasions celebrated with her clients, no fancy store and not even a sign. She focuses on what she offers –her customer’s peace of mind.  She knows what they need –remove the uncertainty – and that’s what she successfully delivers in this highly competitive market.  This is luxury.

Milo says of this article...

I think that what you posted was very reasonable.
However, what about this? what if you were to create a awesome
title? I ain’t saying your information is not solid, however what if you added a headline to maybe grab a person’s attention? I mean Janus Thinking :
Janus Thinking enables brand owners to personalise luxury for every customer
is a little boring. You ought to look at Yahoo’s home page and see how
they create news titles to get people to open the links.
You might add a related video or a picture or two to get people excited
about everything’ve written. Just my opinion, it could bring your posts a little bit more interesting.

Vicky says of this article...

Fantastic website. Plenty of helpful info here. I’m sending it to a few friends ans also sharing in delicious.

And naturally, thanks to your effort!

football game says of this article...

I am glad to be one of the visitants on this outstanding website (:, thanks for posting.

Handmade made by me says of this article...

I do not know if it’s just me or if perhaps everybody else
encountering issues with your site. It looks like some of the text
in your content are running off the screen. Can someone else please provide feedback and let me know if this is
happening to them too? This might be a problem with my web browser because I’ve had this happen before.

Appreciate it

fish produce wastes says of this article...

I just now wanted to thank you one more time for this amazing
blog you have produced here. It’s full of ideas for those who are truly
interested in this specific subject, primarily this very post.
You’re really all so sweet and thoughtful of others plus reading your site
posts is a fantastic delight to me. And that of a generous present!

Ben and I will have pleasure making use of your guidelines
in what we have to do in the future. Our list is a kilometer long which means your
tips will certainly be put to great use.

You say of this article...

Bookmark and Share

Turn your business into a luxury one

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

A common misunderstanding about luxury is that it is part and parcel of certain products or services. This is the wrong approach! Luxury is, in reality, a specific approach to marketing a good or service so that it touches the deeper needs of a customer. For example, in my article “Why diamonds stink more than fertilzers?” the term used to describe the success of ICI– Fertilizers was “segmentation.” Nevertheless, a close examination revealed that fertilizers were marketed as a luxury. Yes, even that stinky substance could successfully become a luxury item by following the rules. How about your business?

There are a handful of factors which characterize luxury. One prominent factor is price. A luxury item is expensive and is never sold at discount. ICI-Fertilizers managed to sell fertilizer as a luxury at higher prices while their competitors sold fertilizer as a commodity at prices that barely covered their costs. Many times almost an entire industry lowers their profit margins to a dangerous level while one company maintains high prices, Apple, under the guidance of Steve Jobs, is a good example. Many companies left the market because they couldn’t compete any longer, but Apple kept selling PC’s at high margins, becoming the largest and the most profitable company in the industry. This was possible because they followed the rules of luxury.

Let’s examine the PC, they are bulky, ugly and tend to have a narrow range of colors and designs, and the software is not great. On the other hand, Apple asked themselves what were the customers’ needs. They realized that nobody needed a PC, and a PC was just a means to a goal. By understanding the deeper needs of the customers Apple designed its computers to deliver those inner needs creating its legendary interface. The end result was a machine whose role was to satisfy the user’s needs. Apple doesn’t charge for its PC’s, it charges for satisfying deep needs, something that no other company had managed to do. This approach brought in more money, higher margins, and loyal customers.

On the other side of the coin we have diamonds. What should be considered the pinnacle of luxury has turned into commodity. Instead of understanding why the customer wants a diamond and satisfying that particular need, the entire industry is focused on offering a product that actually doesn’t have much use. Consequently, diamonds became commodities and people slashed prices to a point that brought the industry to a state of bankruptcy.

To turn something into a luxury is not easy. On the one hand, if one follows a limited number of rules it is possible. Following those rules calls for commitment, changing our mindset, high moral values, and ultimate responsibility for what we are doing. In my workshops I stress the importance of personal values and caring for the customers. Do it right and commit to it and your offering will become a luxury, providing you with tremendous satisfaction.  Do you have the courage to jump into the water and start swimming?

In the next few articles I will explore other aspects of luxury. Stay tuned.

 

25-Beats says of this article...

This was super informative! So glad I just redad this.

"lagu terbaru di stafaband" says of this article...

For most up-to-date information you have to go to see
world-wide-web and on web I found this web page as a best
web site for most recent updates.

2017 Chevy Cars Release says of this article...

Can you tell us more about this? I’d want to find out some additional information.

Advertising Agency St Joseph MO says of this article...

Fantastic post however I was wanting to know if you could write a litte more oon this
topic? I’d be vety thankful if you could elaborate a
little bit further. Thanks!

You say of this article...

Bookmark and Share

Why diamonds stink more than fertilizers?

Isaac Mostovicz writes...

Let’s talk about fertilizers which are probably the most unglamorous stinky product exist. The reason for it is my mentor, Professor Malcolm McDonald, one of the world’s leading marketing experts. Prof McDonald was engaged in 1988 by the International Fertilizers Association. Before starting, the president of the association told Prof McDonald that “we have declared officially fertilizer as a commodity”. Prof McDonald responded that this explains why, when going on the internet, he discovered that there was not one single manufacturer of fertilizers in the world making one dollar of profit.

A member of the association was ICI Fertilizer, part of the Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), the largest manufacturer in Britain throughout its existence.  ICI Fertilizer was on a brink of collapse and they reached Prof McDonald for help after trying everything else. When asked who buys from the merchants the answer was that “they all buy on price” and “that’s what our sales force tells us”. Prof McDonald made a point that in all research he’s done on every continent in the world and for all of big companies in the world he couldn’t find any market anywhere in the world where the price segment was greater than ten percent. Actually, fertilizer companies were ignorant of what the true needs of the farmers were.

Ninety percent of the consumers had totally different needs that weren’t addressed by ICI Fertilizer who was focused on price. Prof McDonald segmented that ninety percent into six segments, each following a different marketing approach.

Within six months ICI Fertilizer became the most profitable subsidiary of ICI and the only profitable fertilizer company in the world.

All one needs is to replace “fertilizers” with “diamonds”. Commoditization is the main problem of the diamond market today. We know that we are right because we did it. Even nowadays we manage to successfully service our customers and we don’t suffer from any of the current market malaise. I am sure that Malcolm McDonald is proud of me, his student.

Until now we ran a boutique operation gaining knowledge and experience nobody else has. It is now time to try and to help our colleagues and to revive this beautiful industry. Are you ready to join us in our trip?

Anonymous says of this article...

Genuinely rather interesting site. Very great in the direction of browse and extremely a great deal attention-grabbing articles. Yes time consists of not nevertheless come back and greet.

Anonymous says of this article...

Genuinely incredibly interesting web-site. Extremely good in the direction of study and incredibly significantly appealing written content. Totally time is made up of not nevertheless arrive back and greet.

3-Week-Diet-skick says of this article...

Excellent blog you have got here.. It’s difficult to find excellent writing like yours nowadays. I seriously appreciate people like you! Take care!!
what do you eat on the three week diet

You say of this article...

Bookmark and Share