Ziang's rssBranding
Using Nikon
02/05/08 23:56
NOPES, I've not changed ship and moved to Nikon, as the title suggest.
I always thought Nikon makes good lenses. Expensive somehow, but quality lenses. Many photographers can attest to that, which is why most people are swearing either by Canon or Nikon. For the mainstream that is. But I never thought they would provide spectacle lenses, which is actually a cheaper form of glass than professional camera lenses.
Not until I had my specs made that I know I could be more wrong in this.
The first week of wearing the specs is ok. I guess things look sharp - not like other brand of lenses aren't. Maybe the colors are better - don't ask me!
Nonetheless, the brand itself is a selling point - I'm sure most folks would choose Nikon lenses as compared to some other lesser known brands such as Hoya. A strong brand provides a certain promise to its loyal customers - in terms of durability, performance etc. This is a perfect marriage of convenience - since spectacle lenses are effectively optics, marrying to a brand known for its lenses is certainly a match made in heaven - sure win formula. By providing a differentiator, a brand is able to compete with others other than price - a boring yet the whole truth to why companies are building brands.
What about me, one might ask? A Canon user who use Nikon brands? Isn't that blasphemy?
Well, I guess I believe more in trusting what works best, than following a brand mindlessly.
I even have a Nikon NC filter to my Canon lens
|
Doing the wrong things, for the wrong reason
01/04/08 00:08
Photo credited to Straits Times
THIS should appear old to you, as the articles were featured a week ago. Well, there were many comments about the transition of SIA's agency from Batey to TBWA\, and those are already old news, forgive the pun.
While many people expected a new agency to inject zest and life to an established brand, sometimes, it appears that the top management themselves need some injection of new blood. SIA used to be the pride of Singapore, with the famous sarong kabaya as famous as our Singapore girl. Some might say that the girl might appear too subservient for their liking, well, I don't go into personal attacks like this
.So what did went wrong? I guess its a cumulation of several factors, most notably people's pride getting into them. Disciplinary problem start from the very top. If you have pilots with porn caught in your laptops and getting fined, that's hardly good news for your company. Looking upwards in the hierarchy, the decision to go purely business and above for some flights went off really bad, as Singaporeans can't even get to travel in their pride. Attempts to mask it up were credited to creating a premium experience, and a quality brand.
Can you imagine feeling proud of something which you can't even call your own? I would say it's really a blatant monetary move to ostracize the poorer folks, and to earn more dollars from the rich.
The decision to change agency and flexing your arm around the new agency is even worse. News travel fast that TBWA\ got their warning letters by SIA barely months into their newly formed relationship. Advertisements that came out of agencies were okay, nothing to shout about.
Why change then?
The worst part of it is having the airbus grounded. Not once, not twice. 3 times. What's the big deal about having it first, if the company has 3 groundings 3 months into operations?
What can save SIA's fate from plummeting into mediocrity? I guess somewhere out there, the bosses must stop counting his dollars and start thinking about public opinions. Anything worse can result into the same fiasco as Terminal 5, Heathrow Airport. Systems gone down, lack of manpower, tonnes of luggage to be sorted out...
They don't even dare to show theirs ads now, after this disaster.
Okay, I'm exaggerating. An airline is nowhere as big as an airport disaster. Well, you do get the idea, don't you? Is it all about the money on hand, or salvaging one's relationships with customers?
Odd one out
26/03/08 12:38
JUST decided to take
up this project which many has done.
A Picture A Day - A.P.A.D. Only If I can afford the time that is.
Guess what's wrong with this picture? I think the ad agency which outsource this project must have been lazy and forgotten to check every single alignment - bad bad stuff for the company. While one might think this is meant to be special, there is nothing to shout out if for the whole length of the station this is the only odd one out - unless Canon decides that it wants to revolutionize a new way of shooting.
My girlfriend likes this new series of cameras though. I guess sometimes small mistakes might just be overlooked - just don't do it too often
A Picture A Day - A.P.A.D. Only If I can afford the time that is.
Guess what's wrong with this picture? I think the ad agency which outsource this project must have been lazy and forgotten to check every single alignment - bad bad stuff for the company. While one might think this is meant to be special, there is nothing to shout out if for the whole length of the station this is the only odd one out - unless Canon decides that it wants to revolutionize a new way of shooting.
My girlfriend likes this new series of cameras though. I guess sometimes small mistakes might just be overlooked - just don't do it too often
Word of mouth - and how it hurts
25/02/08 23:57
Today's papers featured an interesting
article - writ
of seizure against Nokia Singapore
Nokia forced to cough up more than $1,000 over faulty phone
By Alfred Siew, Technology Correspondent
EARLIER this month, Ms Tan Geok Hoon marched into Nokia's office, brandishing court documents and threatening to seize the assests of the cell-phone giant.
A bailiff stood at the side of the 43-year-old sales manager, ready to reposess the company's things.
Ms Tan was enforcing a small claims court decision that ordered the world's largest cellphone maker to pay her $778 for a faulty cellphone she bought last year.
The moment, which Ms Tan recalled recently, marked the culmination of a seven- month David-versus-Goliath battle.
The story of one woman's fight against a mighty firm made its rounds in several online forums last week, casting the spotlight on how the world's top phone maker handled unhappy customers.
Things all started in August last year, when Ms Tan bought a Nokia E61i phone from a StarHub store.
Ms Tan said the phone would not power on in the first week, but a Nokia service centre refused to exchange it for a new one.
Frustrated after sending it for repairs several times, she turned to the Small Claims Tribunal in November.
At this point, Nokia tried to settle the matter privately, by offering to exchange Ms Tan's phone with a new one, or to refund her $388. This was the purchase price that came with a two-year StarHub subscription.
She rejected the offer, looking instead for $778 - the full retail price of the phone.
Ms Tan told The Straits Times: 'I didn't claim for more than what the phone cost because I'm not greedy for Nokia phones.'
There were two consultations and one hearing before the small claims tribunal. Nokia missed the last two sessions, claiming the relevant department had not received the notice on time.
As a result, the company was ordered on December 18 last year to pay Ms Tan $778 within 15 days.
But it did not.
Said a furious Ms Tan: 'I gave them warning at every turn. I gave them time to respond, but nobody called me or discussed it with me.' So she turned up at Nokia's Alexandra Road office with the court order seeking payment.
This time, the company agreed to pay up, but only if she signed an acknowledgement form that had a clause preventing her from discussing the matter further. She said 'no' and left. When she returned on Feb 11, she had a writ of seizure in hand and had a bailiff to force Nokia to pay up - with no strings attached.
In the end, the cellphone giant coughed up more than $1,000, including bailiff fees and transport charges. Nokia spokesman Foo Wen Dee said this was the first such incident and it regretted the matter was not settled amicably.
She added that the company was investigating why its officers had not resolved the issue earlier.
Ms Tan shared the victory on online forums here, and Nokia drew flak for the way it handled the case. 'I want to let people know that sometimes there's no point talking... if one side doesn't respond, then we have to take action,' she said.
Since the postings appeared in the past week, netizens have asked if more electronics firms should allow exchanges if a product fails shortly after purchase. Some firms do so on a case-by-case basis, while others offer it for certain products like hard disks.
In case you're still wandering, a writ of seizure is the same as demanding the assets of whoever is at stake to be liquified for payment.
A real fine case of consumer power, where the consumer has to be right.
It was a good conversation between a fellow colleague and my boss, and sadly, we agreed that such examples are hard to come by. Most Singaporeans choose to live and let by after a complaint or two, if the company refuse to budge or reply. What's the issue then?
Singaporean companies are living in a naive world.
In this world, there's lots of channels for word of mouth to start and spread. The effects are far reaching, and people do believe them better than reviewers of products by the company. A certain number of companies are still living in the Stone Age - thinking that consumers buy into whatever they are fed with.
I guess these companies deserve it if they got into trouble then. They really ought to google the term, "emancipated consumers".
Consumers nowadays are way smarter than retailers. We know where to source for good deals, and we know how to make ourselves heard. I guess Singapore education must have taught them to follow the rules, and when there's no rules, listen to orders.
Baaah.
Choose to ignore a complaint can lead to huge repercussions - in this case, the Nokia brand is definitely affected. Many consumers will choose to think thrice when buying a Nokia phone. What's the point of opening up so many customer care, spending millions on advertising dollars, differentiating between the "N" and "E" series to cater to different consumer groups, when such a case will wreck it up? Trying to clear up this mess will cause it even more.
I guess the branding managers over at Nokia forgot the idiom - Rome was not built in a day. Now they have to mend up the hole which they wrecked.
2 weeks ago, SPH Singapore committed a similar fault - they published an article which shows the steps to install Mac OS X on a PC. FYI, that's illegal. Members of Apple forums were disgusted by the article, and I was but a few of them who sent in an email to request for an answer.
Of course, the editor did not even bother to reply me. Being a nice guy, I emailed Steve Jobs, and here's the reply:
Dear Mr. XXXX,
Your letter to Mr. Steve Jobs was forwarded to me from Apple's Office of the General Counsel for appropriate handling. Thank you for bringing this to our attention, and for your support of Apple.
Best regards,
Apple Inc.
Associate General Counsel
Kevin Saul
Of course, the best outcome of it would be an apology from the editor, in the Straits Times, if Apple were really to follow up.
Let's just wait and see. Maybe Apple is another example of company who choose to ignore views from consumers. Then again, they replied to me, didn't they?
Nokia forced to cough up more than $1,000 over faulty phone
By Alfred Siew, Technology Correspondent
EARLIER this month, Ms Tan Geok Hoon marched into Nokia's office, brandishing court documents and threatening to seize the assests of the cell-phone giant.
A bailiff stood at the side of the 43-year-old sales manager, ready to reposess the company's things.
Ms Tan was enforcing a small claims court decision that ordered the world's largest cellphone maker to pay her $778 for a faulty cellphone she bought last year.
The moment, which Ms Tan recalled recently, marked the culmination of a seven- month David-versus-Goliath battle.
The story of one woman's fight against a mighty firm made its rounds in several online forums last week, casting the spotlight on how the world's top phone maker handled unhappy customers.
Things all started in August last year, when Ms Tan bought a Nokia E61i phone from a StarHub store.
Ms Tan said the phone would not power on in the first week, but a Nokia service centre refused to exchange it for a new one.
Frustrated after sending it for repairs several times, she turned to the Small Claims Tribunal in November.
At this point, Nokia tried to settle the matter privately, by offering to exchange Ms Tan's phone with a new one, or to refund her $388. This was the purchase price that came with a two-year StarHub subscription.
She rejected the offer, looking instead for $778 - the full retail price of the phone.
Ms Tan told The Straits Times: 'I didn't claim for more than what the phone cost because I'm not greedy for Nokia phones.'
There were two consultations and one hearing before the small claims tribunal. Nokia missed the last two sessions, claiming the relevant department had not received the notice on time.
As a result, the company was ordered on December 18 last year to pay Ms Tan $778 within 15 days.
But it did not.
Said a furious Ms Tan: 'I gave them warning at every turn. I gave them time to respond, but nobody called me or discussed it with me.' So she turned up at Nokia's Alexandra Road office with the court order seeking payment.
This time, the company agreed to pay up, but only if she signed an acknowledgement form that had a clause preventing her from discussing the matter further. She said 'no' and left. When she returned on Feb 11, she had a writ of seizure in hand and had a bailiff to force Nokia to pay up - with no strings attached.
In the end, the cellphone giant coughed up more than $1,000, including bailiff fees and transport charges. Nokia spokesman Foo Wen Dee said this was the first such incident and it regretted the matter was not settled amicably.
She added that the company was investigating why its officers had not resolved the issue earlier.
Ms Tan shared the victory on online forums here, and Nokia drew flak for the way it handled the case. 'I want to let people know that sometimes there's no point talking... if one side doesn't respond, then we have to take action,' she said.
Since the postings appeared in the past week, netizens have asked if more electronics firms should allow exchanges if a product fails shortly after purchase. Some firms do so on a case-by-case basis, while others offer it for certain products like hard disks.
In case you're still wandering, a writ of seizure is the same as demanding the assets of whoever is at stake to be liquified for payment.
A real fine case of consumer power, where the consumer has to be right.
It was a good conversation between a fellow colleague and my boss, and sadly, we agreed that such examples are hard to come by. Most Singaporeans choose to live and let by after a complaint or two, if the company refuse to budge or reply. What's the issue then?
Singaporean companies are living in a naive world.
In this world, there's lots of channels for word of mouth to start and spread. The effects are far reaching, and people do believe them better than reviewers of products by the company. A certain number of companies are still living in the Stone Age - thinking that consumers buy into whatever they are fed with.
I guess these companies deserve it if they got into trouble then. They really ought to google the term, "emancipated consumers".
Consumers nowadays are way smarter than retailers. We know where to source for good deals, and we know how to make ourselves heard. I guess Singapore education must have taught them to follow the rules, and when there's no rules, listen to orders.
Baaah.
Choose to ignore a complaint can lead to huge repercussions - in this case, the Nokia brand is definitely affected. Many consumers will choose to think thrice when buying a Nokia phone. What's the point of opening up so many customer care, spending millions on advertising dollars, differentiating between the "N" and "E" series to cater to different consumer groups, when such a case will wreck it up? Trying to clear up this mess will cause it even more.
I guess the branding managers over at Nokia forgot the idiom - Rome was not built in a day. Now they have to mend up the hole which they wrecked.
2 weeks ago, SPH Singapore committed a similar fault - they published an article which shows the steps to install Mac OS X on a PC. FYI, that's illegal. Members of Apple forums were disgusted by the article, and I was but a few of them who sent in an email to request for an answer.
Of course, the editor did not even bother to reply me. Being a nice guy, I emailed Steve Jobs, and here's the reply:
Dear Mr. XXXX,
Your letter to Mr. Steve Jobs was forwarded to me from Apple's Office of the General Counsel for appropriate handling. Thank you for bringing this to our attention, and for your support of Apple.
Best regards,
Apple Inc.
Associate General Counsel
Kevin Saul
Of course, the best outcome of it would be an apology from the editor, in the Straits Times, if Apple were really to follow up.
Let's just wait and see. Maybe Apple is another example of company who choose to ignore views from consumers. Then again, they replied to me, didn't they?
Apple.inc @ MacWorld - please get your ideas right folks
16/01/08 12:32
As usual, in the yearly Macworld Conference, Steve went on to announce his big thing: product releases. It is often a day of anticipation for many Mac fans worldwide, and is almost a sacred event akin to that of a religious day.
Okay, this sounds too drastic, but you get the idea.
Apple has always marked itself as a iconic brand, a brand for people to follow. AAPL, its stocks, is hovering around usd$200. What is the problem with this? Some might say the stocks reflect the true value of the company, and some will think it is inflated. I tend to think to the latter. After yesterday's product announcement, many people are disappointed and stocks fall. What does this tell you?
Apple's consumers are changing.
Back a few years ago, if Apple were to release this product in the premium sector, I can see stocks rising. However, with the move towards consumerism, many people have forgotten that Apple as a brand stands for premium and good quality products. With yesterday's announcement, people's reactions are that the laptop is priced too high and many people complain about the features and specs.
Come on, this subnotebook is not meant to replace MacBooks, wake up, dorks.
By introducing a premium subnotebook between MacBook Pro and MacBook, Apple is trying to bridge the gap between affordable and professional. A product that is highly desirable by people who don't complain about price but more about aesthetics, size and weight. Most people don't understand this though. With the switch to Intel, expectations have rocketed to sky high levels, and people think they have a right to a all in one cheap and thin laptop, like that of Asus Eee PC. I would really be surprised if Apple were to introduce a laptop of that category, for it just doesn't fit in with an innovative company which always create products of desirability. Neither does Apple want to price the product to be near MacBook Black too, for it will cannibalize sales.
Folks, do think of Apple as a company you support and the brand behind it. ok? Don't blindly think, shit they're introducing such an expensive product and this is not what I want...duh!
The PR fiasco aside for iPhone's drop in price, I really think this time round, Apple has got it right, contrary of most people. They just don't understand what Apple stands for. Yet, they are the people who caused Apple's stocks to be inflated to today's price level. People who are looking at cheap and good stuff buying Apple's stocks in a crazy fashion and only to sell it away once their wishes don't get satisfy.
I guess people who thinks Apple is coming out with a cheapie should switch alliance now. Cheapskates :p
That saying, I don't foresee myself getting one soon. A MacBook Pro still serves my needs better
F1 racing...in Singapore?!
14/05/07 01:06
Brand Look - Tiger Airways
12/05/07 00:47
Creative...& Mr Sim, I hope you're reading this...
08/05/07 01:44
Environmentalism, from another angle
06/05/07 02:24