How most leaders would like their
organization to be more innovative: to develop new products and services; to develop
innovative business processes; to change the rules and boundaries of a market;
indeed to succeed in the footsteps of pioneers such as Apple, Google and
Virgin.
Google has no dearth of money nor popularity, so why co-branding with a chocolate brand?
Google has no dearth of money nor popularity, so why co-branding with a chocolate brand?
No doubt, Google's decision to brand
Android 4.4 with Nestlé’s KitKat chocolate bar is a marketing tact. Like many people even I was curious about this nexus. I asked myself, why Android with KitKat? The guys at Google said, “The intention was
to do something "fun and unexpected", and nothing monetary. Fine, agreed, but why KitKat?
We all know Google (Android) and
Nestle have had their share of good and evil. The US government had indicated
how Androids attracts malware more than any other mobile OS. Nestle on the other hand is indicted of pushing
powdered baby milk into the market of developing countries. I don't see a deal here because if a brand had
some reputation issues, it would be irresponsible of them to associate with something
and destroy their reputation.
As I started this article about innovative
strategies, I knew “this wedding of Android mascot with the KitKat is something beyond fun”. After a meeting at Mobile World Congress in
February with Google, Nestle started working on chocolate bars in the shape of the famous Android mascot.
Why I think this is a brilliant move is simply because, when
two brands come together, they can share the cost, and enjoy the goodwill working together on the project. Both brands will bring in their own loyal
customers, thus growing interest and potential of the new offering. The tie-up with KitKat will make Android a
household name. I also see a possibility
that Google may even want to reduce the prices of tablets and handsets with
this point of easy availability.
Creating a buzz- Yes! That’s exactly
what they did.
Brand building is a costly affair,
and co-branding is the effective strategy that builds a brand. Now you see how KitKat sell a lot more chocolate bars in the coming days, and what is the cost of this promotion: Zero. Likewise, Android just got a massive global rise of awareness for
their new software, and again the cost: Zero.
So the next time stop worrying
about competitors if you are thinking about brand strategy. As said, “Change
the rules and boundaries”, associate with a brand different to your customer
base, let the co-branding be complimentary, and enjoy the returns of this bold
marketing strategy.
Please let me know your feedback. What do you think about Android and KitKat liaison-- is it a good concept, or has Google made a mistake in marketing Android?
I agree about how co-branding could help two individual brands, but why android picked Kit-kat specifically, is completely up for speculation? Could it simply be that Google followed its naming rules and jellybean had to be followed with a confectionary that began with the letter K?
ReplyDeleteWell as you said why 'KitKat they say 'its manly because Kitkat is the favorite snack of their coders. And Google's conventional method is naming after sweets. What I personally feel is, KitKat is very catchy and popular, as simple as that, and yes its in Alphabetical Order (stratigically). The idea is to popularize.
Delete