Lululemon uses eavesdropping strategy

Lululemon Athletica, high-end yoga attire, strays from the traditional branding techniques that drive businesses today. While many companies rely on their websites or social media to receive complaints and feedback, Lulu has a different way of doing things... eavesdropping.

With a market value of $10.4 billion and sales of $712 million last year, Lulu is doing something right. The company doesn't rely on collecting costumer data, driving sales through discounts or building new stores around the country to increase sales. Instead, it stays in close contact with its customers and uses a sense of scarcity.

That's right... whether you think it's creepy or not, the staff of Lululemon are told to stand outside of dressing rooms and fold clothes in the store, rather than in the back, to eavesdrop and hear complaints first hand. They then create customer-employee relationships and use complaints to tweak the store.

Lululemon also focuses on the scarcity of its items. New colors and seasonal items usually get three, six or 12-week life cycles to encourage customers not to wait. For example, "Paris Pink" clothing items were supposed to have a two month cycle, but sold out after the first week.

Lulu's branding tactics of creating in-store relationships with the customers, along with short life cycles of clothing items are what has driven the success of the company. I think that society is relying too much on social media and not enough on personal relationships. Although I think social media is beneficial to branding, businesses should not forget the importance of in-person interactions.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052702303812904577295882632723066-lMyQjAxMTAyMDIwMjEyNDIyWj.html?mod=wsj_share_email

Mega Millions

The Mega Millions lottery drew attention all over the country last week when Friday’s jackpot reached a record-breaking $656 million. The jackpot sparked more and more interest as it continued to grow over a nine week period. By Friday, Americans had spent nearly $1.5 billion on Mega Millions tickets and people all over the country logged on to Facebook and Twitter to comment on the lotto.

The huge jackpot gained national attention and coverage without Mega Millions having to lift a finger. The prospect of winning $656 million generated plenty of buzz on its own.

However, this may also have a negative impact on Mega Millions. Economists suggest that a “negative hangover effect” sometimes exists when people come hyped about a lottery but then do not come out on top. This probably will not occur in this case because the people who always buy tickets will likely continue their regular play patterns.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-01/mega-millions-lottery/53932490/1?csp=34news

More Kardashian News

 http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/runway/kim-kourtney-khloe-launch-kardashian-kollection-swimwear-003521282.html

There is more news now over Kourtney Kardashian. Many are in an uproar regarding the sexy new swimsuit ad the Kardashian girls are in. Kourtney's "unseen baby bump" is the topic of controversy. Apparently, this photo shoot occurred in late January. There were paparazzi photos of Kourtney shot at the same time in which she had more of a baby bump than that. According to the source, she was about 3 months pregnant at this time. The issue is why would they do a bathing suit ad with her wearing a skimpy bathing suit whenever they know she is pregnant? If it is that big of an issue then why didn't she wear the coverup that Khloe is wearing? 

In my opinion, people give WAY too much credit to his family and people care WAY too much about this so it is kind of annoying that people would care about this and notice this to this extent. What are you all's thoughts??

Lessons from a tattered pink ribbon

A few months ago, the Susan G. Komen for the cure foundation created great controversy when it announced its decision to end funding for Planned Parenthood. The foundation reversed its decision quickly, however, it still was not enough to downplay the protest. Fundraising is now in a frenzy and highly ranked execs are resigning their positions. Events have even had to be postponed because the foundation is insure of fundraising.

It is crazy how one simple decision about a policy can make or break an entire foundation. In the article, it states some lessons that all organizations should learn from this crisis.

1. Never underestimate the power of social media. It was blogging that led this issue to mainstream news.

2. Always develop a crisis plan. No plan was developed prior so the organization was caught "flat-footed."

3. Maintain message consistency. Contradictory messages can damage credibility of not only an individual but an entire organization.

4. Prepare stakeholders in advance. You do not want your staff and its affiliates to be caught offguard of any changes in policy that are taking place within the company.

An organization so widely known as this one is going to be mending their image for a while. Now, they must spend the next months trying to regain loyalty which has been shaken up by this controversial issue.

http://www.prweekus.com/lessons-from-a-tattered-pink-ribbon/article/233957/

UPS Backfire

A few weeks ago UPS ran a TV advertisement dealing with the NCAA basketball tournament that tried to connect a pass that won "the greatest game" to its theme of logistical excellence. This blog post received 482 shares and 181 comments. Why?

In a 1992 game, "The Unforgettables" from the University of Kentucky had pulled ahead by one point in the closing seconds of overtime against Duke who were the defending national champions. Little did they know, the game wasn't over yet. Duke player Grant Hill threw the ball almost the length of the court to Christian Laettner, who turned and made the winning shot leaving Kentucky no time to answer.

“Everybody remembers the shot. But what about the pass? No pass, no shot,” the narrator says. “You need a special player to get the ball exactly where it needs to be, exactly when it needs to be there.”

Kentucky fans exploded. Not only was this the most heart-breaking loss in the history of their sports program which UPS was now playing over and over again, but UPS has major facilities in Kentucky.

UPS decides to address the controversy in a blog trying to sooth irate Kentucky fans by creating a post by an actual Kentucky graduate that explained the thinking behind the ad.

“I know our new ads will anger some UK fans, but if you truly look at that game with an objective eye, it’s hard to think of a better example of what determined people working together toward a common goal can accomplish—and that’s what UPS is all about.

“No one should think that UPS has some kind of anti-UK bias. On the contrary, UPS loves Kentucky. We love it so much we established our primary air hub in the commonwealth, which has driven the creation of 33,000 jobs with $300 million in annual payroll.”

This also didn't work. Kentucky fans responded with:
“Here’s an idea for your next UPS ad. How about you detail the ‘logistics’ of a major company receiving huge tax breaks from a state as an incentive to move there. Then you could show the ‘teamwork’ required to make an ad highlighting the most heartbreaking moment in that state’s sports history. Sounds like another winner.

“It’s bad you wrote this post trying to justify the ad, but to do so in such a condescending manner explaining to everyone how great the play was makes it even worse.”

Many Kentucky fans vowed never to use UPS again. UPS could suffer greatly from this ad.

http://www.prdaily.com/socialmedia/Articles/11211.aspx

Skittles: “Taste the…Backlash?”

Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea brands were thrust into the spotlight after the story of Trayvon Martin’s murder. Trayvon had purchased the candy and the drink shortly before he was shot. Now, Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea are experiencing social media criticism for not extending sizeable donations in Martin’s name.

Should these brands be facing public backlash for something they didn’t want? Specifically, some say Skittles has benefitted from the unwanted publicity. BuzzFeed has a collection of tweets to that end.

Many people have written complaints on the Skittles facebook wall, but the brand is not weighing in on the conversations. The Skittles social voice is remaining silent.

For the full story, go to: http://www.prdaily.com/Main/Articles/11236.aspx

"Operation Hackerazzi"

Read the article here.

Following a year long investigation dubbed as "Operation Hackerazzi" by the FBI, the Florida man that was arrested for hacking celebrity emails and posting their nude photographs on the Internet has agreed to plead guilty to nine felony counts.

The felony charges, which include wiretapping and unauthorized access to a computer, could land him up to 60 years in prison. Some of the more prominent celebrity victims included Christina Aguilera, Mila Kunis and Scarlett Johansson.

Overall, prosecutors say that the unemployed Florida man illegally entered the email accounts of more than 50 entertainment industry professionals and obtained the email addresses of fellow stars from their contact lists.

The most frightening part of the scandal, for me at least, is how he managed to weasel his way into the accounts, though. He didn't need any extensive hacking skills or programs; all he had to do was search through publicly available data to figure out password and security questions for the celebrity accounts.

Obviously, celebrities should be much more careful with the amount and quality of information they disclose to the public on mass media outlets. But the issue I want to bring up is the question of whether the photographs should have even been taken in the first place or not.

I'm not by any means saying that the hacked celebrities were to blame or that what the hacker did was anything less than 100% wrong. My point is simply that the whole thing could have been avoided if the celebrities were smart enough to not take nude photos.

Johannson told Associated Press that the photographs were taken for her now ex-husband, Ryan Reynolds. But once something is published into a media document and stored in a hidden file or folder for 'safe-keeping' it's like a sitting duck that's always just a milli-second away from going viral... no matter how safe we think it is.

Why take a chance when the costs could have such devastating effects? In my opinion, nude photographs are irresponsible in any circumstance, even if you've been happily married to the recipient for 30 years. I think Skype is a much safer, less-permanent alternative for couples. Plus, nobody wants those skeletons in their closet after a nasty divorce.