ALBERTOS REPLIES:
DISCUSSION 1:
Francisco Barragan
Mar 11, 2024, 8:50 AM
Unread
Hello Professor and Class,
I recently purchased a pair of Apple Air Pod Pros for personal and work use. Apple utilizes Prestige pricing for this product. Apple can charge a premium since this product is not a necessity but more of a luxury item. Apple’s strong branding image and premium positioning allow this item to be marked up substantially. The Air Pod Pros has some premium features, such as superb noise cancellation, but lacks sound quality. It works well with the Apple ecosystem, and people prefer tight integration.
The pricing strategy of the Air Pod Pros has significantly enhanced my perceived value of the product. While other wireless earbuds are available in the market, the Air Pods, crafted by Apple, stand out due to their excellent compatibility with Apple products and the superior quality assurance methods employed by the brand. Despite its premium price, Apple’s reputation for delivering exceptional products instills confidence in the consumer, making the purchase a worthwhile investment.
Apple has already made the Air Pod Pros more accessible by building upon its lower entry tier of headphones called Air Pods. While these lack the noise cancellation feature of the Pro, they still offer a satisfactory experience. Apple should consider introducing a lower version of the Pros with noise cancellation at a price similar to regular Air Pods. This strategic move could expand Apple’s consumer base while maintaining the premium brand and quality image of the Air Pod Pros, offering a win-win situation for both the company and the consumers.
Kory Fortin
Mar 11, 2024, 2:09 PM(edited)
Unread
Dear Class,
Recently, I bought a Phone mount/stand for inside the car so I can put my phone in it while driving to ensure safety. It cost $9,98 to purchase. It uses different pricing strategies starting with odd-even pricing as the cost is $9.98 instead of rounding up to a even $10.00 which did on some level make me more drawn to it seeing the cent difference almost like it was on sale because why buy the $10.00 when you can buy the $9.98 instead. Taking the descriptions of the pricing strategies from the textbook (Grand canyon University, 2022), I would defiantly say that it is not every day low price as I bought it from Amazon which has different deals, price discounts from being a prime member, etc. making the price change. I did not buy it as a package with other items, but I did see that it had a bundle with ox cords and phone chargers to buy all three together making it practice the price bundling pricing strategy. As it is a online retail, I would say it has cost-based pricing simply because it needs to not be to cheap but not to overpriced either. It needs just enough to make a profit off the item as something like a phone mount for the car has so many competitors that over the same or similar quality making it dip into the competitive pricing strategies as well. Do to the similar nature of the item in the same market, i would say the pricing strategy or mix of strategies is working as intended with there being thousands of reviews on the item signaling many purchases for it. I have no recommendations for the company that I can think of, but would love to hear others thoughts!
Sincerely,
Kory Fortin
Grand Canyon University (Ed.). (2022).
Marketing: An enterprise view (4th ed.).
John Bandt
Mar 11, 2024, 4:04 PM
Unread
I just bought paper plates this morning so I’m going to use that as my recent purchase. With kids we’ve found it easier to buy paper plates and then we don’t have as many dishes after meals. Anyways, I always order off Amazon and one thing Amazon does that I always find interesting is next to the price they put a price per plate number. Sometimes with the different amount of plates and prices it can get confusing which deals are better so I look at that number a lot, and of course the Amazon Basics paper plates are the cheapest per plate and they are the first one that pops up when I search. I also look at reviews, the more reviews and closer to 5 stars always stands out to me. Even though Amazon lists their plates first, I scroll down to the Dixie brand paper plates and buy those even though they’re 4 cents per plate more, but I remember Dixie cups as a kid so for whatever reason that makes me buy these instead. Dixie plates have .2 more stars than Amazon plates as well so I use that to justify my 4 cents more plates. I would only recommend to Dixie to maybe get closer to Amazons prices for their plates but they still have thousands of reviews as well which tells me people are buying them either way so I don’t think they really need to do anything different.
DISCUSSION 2:
Francisco Barragan
Mar 11, 2024, 6:06 PM
Unread
Hello Professor and Class,
Coca-Cola’s distribution system utilizes a mix of systems, allowing it to be a global business while operating locally. It can achieve this due to its exclusive partnership with its bottling partners. While Coca-Cola does not own all the partners, it maintains some stakes. The Global operations of Coca-Cola work through local channels, which allows one of the 250 local bottling partners to maintain control of territories. Coca-Cola also agrees not to sell, distribute, or allow unauthorized sources to sell its product; it must go through one of the authorized providers. This allows bottling partner exclusivity over the said territory. It is up to the bottling partner to manufacture, package, and distribute the final product to said vendors to sell the product.
Coca-Cola’s approach is locally sourced, allowing the product to be manufactured close to where it will be sold. This allows a close connection with the local market, and the product does not need to travel far to reach its demographic customer base. This allows the bottling partner to be more responsive to the local tastes of consumers in said territory market. Relying on independent bottling partners allows Coca-Cola to invest strategically in maintaining some control over the process or helping a new partner enter a needed territory. This keeps Coca-Cola’s capital requirements low while maintaining minor stakes in the bottling partners. This hybrid approach is a short- and long-term goal of bottling companies and franchising opportunities, where the independent bottling partner is still tied to the Coca-Cola brand. The mix of franchised and independent bottling partners allows Coca-Cola to take a controlling stake if required, then franchise after and keep a minor stake for future control if needed.
This mixed structure allows Coca-Cola to keep a low CAPEX by heavily relying on independent bottling partners and only stepping in when resolving issues. Then, it franchises back to an independent franchisee, allowing for more revenue. The overall approach has been successful for both the Coca-Cola company and the bottling partners.
Kory Fortin
Mar 11, 2024, 7:51 PM
Unread
Hello All,
To start off, chapter 8 in the textbook is packed with information on distribution and everything with it overwhelming so. You cannot deny that Coke-A-Cola has been extremely successful with wide distribution across the world making sure everyone has one of their bottles by keeping control over their distribution and marketing while maximizing their efficiency. I would say that Coke-A-Cola does intensive distribution with how hard they work through themselves and other bottling partner factories to ensure the most people can their product. I think the most unique thing about them is that whole they are a global businesses within the soft fountain drink industry, they make the production, distribution, and selling of their product local to each area they do business in making sure that the product is fresh and in abundance for that region. This is in the long run saves them money by not having to ship loads and loads of product from one of their factories across the nation or seas which could also damage the quality of their drink making people not want to buy them. This is one way they factor in the consumer in their strategy. As the video explains, the bottling partners, which are the wholesalers, retailers, etc. where they make and distribute the product to the vendors and sellers. They sell to both independent and owned bottling partners the rights to make their product for distribution which gives them more money from their investments in those partners based off their success which Coke is largely in control of; therefore, they are always in charge of their own success, marketing, distribution. Basically, they are investing n themselves and making money off themselves in the process. Coke-a-cola is happy, the manufacturers are happy, the multiple regions they make Coke in are happy due to the revenue and spending in those local markets which makes the sellers to consumers and consumers happy as well. Despite having a mix of a distribution and selling system, it is very fluid and well thought out as they have been refining this system of theirs for decades always making bank while doing so showing the positive results. That is how I think they limit potential channel conflicts.
Sincerely,
Kory Fortin
Resources:
Kory Fortin
Mar 11, 2024, 7:51 PM
Unread
Hello All,
To start off, chapter 8 in the textbook is packed with information on distribution and everything with it overwhelming so. You cannot deny that Coke-A-Cola has been extremely successful with wide distribution across the world making sure everyone has one of their bottles by keeping control over their distribution and marketing while maximizing their efficiency. I would say that Coke-A-Cola does intensive distribution with how hard they work through themselves and other bottling partner factories to ensure the most people can their product. I think the most unique thing about them is that whole they are a global businesses within the soft fountain drink industry, they make the production, distribution, and selling of their product local to each area they do business in making sure that the product is fresh and in abundance for that region. This is in the long run saves them money by not having to ship loads and loads of product from one of their factories across the nation or seas which could also damage the quality of their drink making people not want to buy them. This is one way they factor in the consumer in their strategy. As the video explains, the bottling partners, which are the wholesalers, retailers, etc. where they make and distribute the product to the vendors and sellers. They sell to both independent and owned bottling partners the rights to make their product for distribution which gives them more money from their investments in those partners based off their success which Coke is largely in control of; therefore, they are always in charge of their own success, marketing, distribution. Basically, they are investing n themselves and making money off themselves in the process. Coke-a-cola is happy, the manufacturers are happy, the multiple regions they make Coke in are happy due to the revenue and spending in those local markets which makes the sellers to consumers and consumers happy as well. Despite having a mix of a distribution and selling system, it is very fluid and well thought out as they have been refining this system of theirs for decades always making bank while doing so showing the positive results. That is how I think they limit potential channel conflicts.
Sincerely,
Kory Fortin
Resources:
YENROSE DISCUSSION REPLIES:
DISCUSSION 1:
James English
Mar 11, 2024, 6:06 AM
Unread
Kids growing up will be spoiled and think they are entitled to things in adulthood if they are not punished correctly. The former punishment I believe is most effective it is not grounding your kids that taken away their cell phones or Xboxes or stuff like that. Have to spank your kids. That’s the only way they’re going to learn and the reason for that is because if you take away their cell phone or Xbox or something like that they’re going to do it again because in their mind they’re going to be like oh mom and dad is going to take my cell phone away big deal . If you spank your kids learn don’t want to endure that anymore so they’re not going to do that type of stuff. Barney Greenspan, PhD from 5xychologist.com that wrote the article good and harm of spanking your kids please that this is a suitable method of punishment your kids and they will do really no harm if you do it correctly.
Ivann Guevara
Mar 11, 2024, 7:44 AM
Unread
Good Morning,
Based on the interview with mothers who shared their insight on the question, “mothers who offered compromises was the most effective tactic in terms of immediate behavior responses from their child” (APA, 2015). According to this APA article, punishment can be an effective tool for teaching a child to behave only if done so in the necessary cases. There are probably more moments where a parent can compromise with their child to keep them from misbehaving rather than punish them. Though I wouldn’t say punishment should be ignored completely, there are also times when a child may act out to the extent that they may need a punishment, and the great thing about punishment is that it can be as small as taking away video game time. In the same article, “The mothers that offered compromises with their children too frequently for the children that were hitting or acting defiant found that their children would only act worse (APA, 2015). In these cases, when the child refuses to communicate and learn from their bad behavior and continues to act out, punishment may be an option to consider if all else fails—in situations where punishment can be an effective method of helping a child behave, “punishments, such as timeouts or taking away something from the child, proved more effective than reasoning when dealing with a toddler who was acting defiant or hitting” (APA 2015). Additionally, children need discipline to learn from their negative behavior. Still, parents don’t need to rely on punishments to keep their children behaving well, although it is always a considerable method.
American Psychological Association. (2015).
Punishing a child is effective if done correctly. American Psychological Association.
REPLY
·
·
JR
DUSCUSSION 2:
Kyle Champion
Mar 11, 2024, 10:28 AM
Unread
Hi class,
Prior to this, I had never heard of Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory at all. It was an enlightening read for sure. It speaks to the depths of how we learn and why. Going though grade school, I was a straight A student in elementary school. As time passed, however, my grades slipped because I found video games. Like most players, it was all I wanted to do. It was made worse in high school where I discovered World of Warcraft. Because my interest in that was peaked, nothing else was. I had a computer sciences class in high school that was one of the other classes I did really well in because it scratched my interest itch. I have said it for years, not realizing that Bandura said it before me. There has to be a level of interest to learn the subject matter. If there is no interest, my focus will be elsewhere. Alluring to my time at GCU, I have been able to retain a 4.0 because the subject matter is very interesting to me and I believe I can probe the depths of knowledge in psychology and keep going without losing interest. I believe the way forward with learning is tailoring it to a students’ interest, where they feel like they have a reason to remain engaged in the subject matter.
James English
Mar 11, 2024, 3:26 PM(edited)
Unread
Bardura learning theory can be in everybody’s lives and influenced in everybody’s. Code influence in my life is that the modeling part of his theory right according to his theory of the modeling partner is your influence by other people and what they do
So in my past I hung out with the wrong crowd so what I do ended up drinking a lot became an alcoholic whatever the case may be. Then when I grew up though I surrounded myself a good positive people and left all that bad influence behind. So modeling according to his theory played a big part in my life
