Being First is Secondary. Winning is about being smartest.

 

By Tom Dougherty

Dispelling Brand Myths

“Being first in the market is most important — Being best ensures your success” No, being first only assures your brand of an entrance opportunity. The market graveyard is littered with failed and failing “firsts.” Miller Lite is a perfect example. Being biggest simply says no one has successfully challenged you. SONY was once the world’s biggest electronics brand. Today they have given up leadership in VCRs, TV’s and just about every other category that they once dominated.

A Telling Example- Pampers and Luvs

Being first in the market belonged to Pampers
Luvs was not first

Over 40 years ago P&G launched Pampers brand disposable diapers. Pampers built the category and by 1968 they owned the category — with the brand name becoming synonymous with the delivery system. It quickly became P&Gs most profitable and dominant brand. The brand continued to build the category stressing product efficacy and innovation. But something happened in 1968.
Kimberly-Clark entered the market with Huggies. It quickly became P&Gs biggest competitor. But Pampers forged on. They sold leakage protection, barrier leg cuffs, absorbency and a host of other product innovations. What they did not sell was a brand. P&G looked to further segment its market and launched LUVS.

By not being first in the market has been a challenge to buggies
Read our secrets to packaged goods branding here

Here is our Market Study on Packaged Goods

An article on the warfare in packaged goods

Packaged Goods is a battlefield

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *