A look at the television marketMarket Study
“It is truly telling of the state of the industry that the most exciting TV is the one that is not out yet; Apple’s rumored TV.”
The Television Industry: A Television Manufacturer Market Study
Much has changed in the world of TVs. Our television manufacturer market study looks at the category and the changes that are afoot. Many of the brands from long ago are altogether gone and the ones who just recently were kings in the category have lost their luster. It is a market where so much change takes place because so little is said. With everyone fighting to claim and own similar claims, consumers have little room to choose and the industry has transitioned to chaotic.
There are several ways television manufacturers are marketing themselves to the consumers, none of which are emotionally compelling. Below are a few of those areas and why how they get it wrong.
Television Manufacturer Market Study: TV Pricing
Price is no doubt one of the largest deciding factors for many consumers and a true testament to the lack of messaging within the industry. Price is where you find an array of brands with little to no advertising. Their value proposition is simply that their picture looks good enough and their price is low enough that the customer will consider quality of picture a wash between brands and will buy on price alone.
This is the category with manufacturers such as Sony, Samsung, LG, Panasonic, Toshiba, Sharp or Phillips. Regardless of which of these happen to be on the shelf, the specs and the designs remain about the same. The downside to a low-cost strategy is not that consumers don’t value the low-cost provider and remaining a low-cost provider is an ongoing battle. (Wal-Mart, for example, is offering HDTVs under $200 in many of its stores.) When paired against a more meaningful brand value, the lowest cost option will lose out to reasonably priced brands with meaning.
Pricing can be an effective area to compete but there must be value beyond simply price to prompt preference. A good example of this is VIZIO. Take a look at the VIZIO ad below. In it, it refers to its price, but it also talks a lot about quality. Even though price is presented as a value, it is still positioned as a brand worth coveting – not a low-cost option a price conscious consumer has to settle for.
VIZIO Ad (Old):
Now take a look at a VIZIO ad that came later.
The focus is no longer all about price. Price is only a support point to a larger idea of fairness. Fairness, in this sense, represents the ability for everyone to be able to own a VIZIO. While still a bit too internal in focus, it moved away from price at its driver, which is a good thing.
Newer still is the most recent ad below from VIZIO.
VIZIO is selling produce benefits, but it ends with a clear brand message: Beautifully Simple. It makes the choice of choosing VIZIO easy.
Size is equally as risky to claim as price. Once a manufacturer comes out with a bigger screen, the rest follow. Matching all the sizes in the market only gets you into the considered set. It doesn’t create preference.
Take a look at the Sharp ad from a few years ago, marketing its 80-inch Aquos line.
It give consumers no reason for consumers to value Sharp beyond size of the screen, as well as making the assumption that consumers will opt for larger picture over better picture or any other value. Now, there are TVs bigger than 100 inches. As soon as you air a television ad spouting size, you’re already out of date.
This is where the repetitive nature of the industry becomes abundantly apparent. For almost about all of the manufacturers, you can find a handful that talk about nothing but deep black levels, refresh rates, processor speed, thinness, etc. The list of specs is quite long and all of the big manufacturers have a model that will spec as well as the next manufacturer’s. Regardless of the sameness in terms of overall picture quality between brands, there is also a lack of intensity over this value when it comes to brick and mortar shoppers when source inputs and settings all vary from TV to TV.
The value of picture quality is only relevant when discussing the technology of the television (CRT, LCD, DLP, etc.). Overall, marketing picture quality is one of the least cost-effective strategies for manufacturers, given the effort and assets required to claim it and the low return on it.
Battle For Features
By far the most complex of the categories for one simple fact: The television manufacturing industry is one where new features happen on a regular basis. Marketing based on new features means constantly having to catch up. Messaging an idea or emotional value is always the better option because it can transition with new features, keeping messaging consistent rather than schizophrenic. Right now, the major features being promoted are 4K technology and curved screens. Everyone had caught up. So how is a consumer to choose?
Value is also lost when manufacturers try to create preference by marketing the same specific feature as their competitors. It essentially forces the consumer to choose based on a different value entirely because the features are seen as a wash.
The battle for features is par for the course. Features don’t get you more or less market share; they just let you play the game. For example, if a consumer visits a Best Buy, Target or Walmart, they might look at contrast ratios. One might have a 10,000,000:1 and another might have a 20,000,000:1. Sure that’s a gap of 10,000,000:1 but at what point does the eye no longer tell the difference? The 10,000,000:1 still allows the consumer to say, “Look at the TV I just purchased. It has a great contrast ratios.”
And therein lies the point that the manufacturers are missing. The selection of a product is made emotionally. Things like contrast ratios are only important because they provide the consumer rational reasons to explain how their emotional decision was made. Features essentially give the customer permission to make an extravagant purchase and mask it as being wise. The more compelling the brand, the more the customer is willing to link the rational to wise.
Television Manufacturer Market Study Summary
There is little else to categorize the television market beyond product attributes and price. Manufacturers have done a poor job creating a brand identity and brand messaging that frames the aforementioned descriptors in any way that make the consumer prefer a brand.
Below is a chart outlining the positions of well-known competitors in the market landscape. While a few tiptoe around meaning, they all remain worried about appearing too different from the rest. There is a fear of risk associated with branching too far out, even though branching out is how you get the sun.
It is truly telling of the state of the industry that the most exciting TV is the one that is not out yet. Apple’s rumored TV. Product specs and pricing drive scattered purchasing in the short term. But the brand that aligns itself with the personal beliefs that drive purchasing behavior will hold preference for the long term. Until manufacturers realize this, the industry will continue on a volatile path. If that is the case, do not expect the industry leaders to remain the same. It will constantly switch back and forth, without a single brand holding a leadership position.
What is SONY up to?
Another SONY Problem in the making