Yet another reason to avoid Heathrow

[Mark in CA]

Samsung's marketing juggernaut is reaching new heights today with the announcement that Heathrow's Terminal 5 will be rebranded for two weeks to promote the company's flagship Galaxy S5 Android phone. Starting on Monday, every area of the terminal will feature the "Terminal Samsung Galaxy S5" moniker, with all the signage and digital screens promoting the handset and projecting images of it.

Samsung rebranding Heathrow's busiest hub to 'Terminal Samsung Galaxy S5' | The Verge (http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/16/5722962/terminal-samsung-galaxy-s5-at-heathrow)

[PAXboy]

It would be fascinating to know how much they're paying Heathrow Airport Holdings for that ... HAH must be laughing all the way to the bank. But it's a poor dilution of their prime directive.

Heathrow Airport spokesperson. "Samsung want to call it Terminal Samsung Galaxy S5 and we are relaxed about that."I'll bet they are. :hmm:

Dear Samsung,
In our road, we live at Number 5, let's do a deal.

[GrahamO]

Maybe we all ought to start calling it the iPhone 5 Terminal and see how the idiots who paid for such a vapid 'rebranding' campaign last when their bosses find out how much money they wasted.

Its marketing :mad: par excellence.

PS I still eat Marathon bars and the marketeers can stuff this Snickers nonsense.

[PAXboy]

Regrettably, companies have to do more unusual things these days - in order to get media attention. They will get more for their money by the unpaid attention in media/web etc. than it will cost them to pay off HAH.

Regrettably, it's very hard to prove that advertising works or does not, so the person who thought this up will get told they did a good job. it's in everyone's interest to say that it was a good idea.

My guess is that the new phone would have lots of fans buying it, just as old fans will buy the new apple phone when it comes out. But advertising people have to justify their existance. As long as they all pay their taxes (corporate and personal) I can ignore every bit of advertsing. And I do.

[Mark in CA]

Apparently, Samsung has caused some problems for Heathrow, which is now trying to "clarify" things.

Heathrow says Terminal 5 signage and branding haven't changed, Samsung being 'tongue-in-cheek' | iMore (http://www.imore.com/heathrow-says-signage-branding-havent-changed-terminal-samsung-galaxy-s5-tongue-cheek)

[Davef68]

PS I still eat Marathon bars and the marketeers can stuff this Snickers nonsense.

Less marketing and more advertising and production - having to produce packaging and adverts just for the UK was a cost saving that could be made by one simple action - change the name! See also Opal Fruits, Jif/Cif etc

[PAXboy]

Mark in CA
Apparently, Samsung has caused some problems for Heathrow, which is now trying to "clarify" things.And so, even with the clarification - they gain more free media coverage. Win Win for the kiddies in marketing.

[Mark in CA]

Perhaps it's true that there's no such thing as bad publicity.

[G-ARZG]

At T5 today.
Anyone 'avoiding Heathrow' because of a few extra
Sam---g signs needs to get out more (or maybe less)
IMHO !

[Laarbruch72]

I can ignore every bit of advertsing. And I do.


I'm not sure that you do, at least at the concious level. You merely have the perception that you do.

I'd bet that you own certain appliances or gadgets, the purchase of which were based on reputation and brand standing. Reputation and standing are enhanced by constant advertising, particularly when a brand aligns itself with particular other premium brands and / or images.

You're affected by advertising whether you like it or not, there's a very good reason why companies spend billions on it.

[ExXB]

Laarbrunch.

I agree that ads affect us a lot more than we think. But I also think it works both ways. I don't like Samsung having had a bad experience a few years back.

So hearing that they believe that spending a lot of money, and trying to create a correlation with something that has little to do with their products, makes me question their intelligence.

Do they really think that this will help change the views of people like me? It may be appealing to their current customers, but for the rest of us ...

[Phileas Fogg]

I love Samsung, their model GT-E1200T was advertised at PHP690 (GBP9.38 at today's exchange rates) so I suckered to the shelf price commercial advertising and bought 4 of them.

And next time back in the shop I'll buy some more of them also :)

[PAXboy]

Laarbruch72 Sure, understood but I find, the older I get, the easier it is to ignore advertising. If, say, a domestic appliance were to fail today, even if I was satisfied with the item's length of service etc. - I would research the replacement. Further, so much advertising of today actively irritates me that I would deliberately not buy their product!

[cockney steve]

Advertising certainly influences me! I conciously avoid anything that is regularly advertised, on the basis that a large portion of the purchase-price is used for promotion.
I bought up my kids to understand that ,above an economic price-point, dictated by manufacturing-cost, any higher price was likely to be due to marketing, appealing to their vanity or insecurities, than product-value....
£120 trainers, with a famous logo? or £30 trainers, similar quality and enough change to buy a coat as well.
Similarly, it was established there was no magic money-bush in the back yard...you want it ? -you earn it!
Now have 3 shrewd adult offspring who question the validity of all advertising.

[Phileas Fogg]

Why is one going to Heathrow Airport.?

Is one going there to check-in for their flight to have a beverage or few before flying, perhaps even buy a newspaper in the process, or is one going there to buy the latest mobile gadget?

I recall when the missus and myself were our shopping for bedding, curtains etc. for our 10 guest rooms and equipments for our restaurant and kitchen, some twits were standing there demonstrating one of these tsunami mops trying to flog us a mop and bucket.

"Anytime we need a mop and bucket we'll let you know, until then bogger off"

It's very easy to disregard commercial advertising despite it being shoved in one's face.

[Laarbruch72]

I can accept that some individuals here are adamant that they aren't influenced by advertising or brand positioning etc, but it's entirely missing the point. The fact remains that masses of people can be (and are) influenced by strong or bold marketing and positioning. Very simply put, it's more than worthwhile for Samsung to do this because it brings in more money than it costs.

And I have to say I'm also surprised that it's causing so much upset, it doesn't bother me one bit if an airport terminal is called Samsung, or a football stadium is called Etihad. Admittedly it always sounds a bit odd to start with but it's usually familiar soon after.

[Phileas Fogg]

The Heineken Cup ... I can't stand the stuff, tastes like gnats pee, it ain't going to influence me :)

[ExXB]

Agree, but it is as popular as it is because they have some of the best marketing. I've never understood it's appeal but I think it's all about the cachet of being seen with the distinctive green bottle in your hand.

Mind you, not all of their beer is knat's piss. They bought a Swiss brewery in Chur which produces and distributes the KP for the Swiss market. Said brewery's original product Calanda is a very good lager.

But what irks me is that Heineken will sign exclusive deals with restaurants and bistros where the proprietor gets special prices if they agree only to sell the KP. They can't even carry Calanda if they sign these deals. Bar-stewards, literally.

[Phileas Fogg]

And without cheating who remembers which Formula 1 team advertised which brand of cigarettes?

[Espada III]

McLaren - I used my brain rather than Google

[Phileas Fogg]

Jordan advertised Benson & Hedges

[PAXboy]

Laarbruch72. Agreed. If I had children, I would be teaching them about advertising and how clever it is. It's age that helps me identify the risks. I have no doubt that some of my purchases are based on the drip-drip of advertising over the years.

ExXB
But what irks me is that Heineken will sign exclusive deals with restaurants and bistros where the proprietor gets special prices if they agree only to sell the KP.
'Twas ever thus. You may recall (I see you are based in .ch) that British pubs became very bland in the 1970s as this problem spread. All the breweries locked down their own chains. Then folks rebelled but I'd guess that the problem is still widespread.

The manufacturers of both main 'Cola' products have usually done the same and actively prevent the shop/bar/restaurant selling their competitors product. Nothing like restraint of trade for the bottom line.

[ExXB]

PAXboy,
The Heineken brewery in Chur produces their original Calanda brands AND their owner's Heineken brand.

But the locked in suppliers will only sell Heineken, but not Calanda!

It's the same frigging company !!!!

[Evanelpus]

Lotus - John Player Specials

[Laarbruch72]

Also Benetton F1 were sponsored by Mild Seven, and one of Villeneuve Jr's teams (Williams?) was sponsored by Winfield. These images do stick, although I was probably a dream stooge as I was a smoker at the time. I even bought Winfield for a few months as they were on a ridiculously cheap introductory price.

[crewmeal]

Well if you get bored looking at all the advertising in T5 perhaps you might like to settle down in the departure area with your iPad and paint a picture.

Painting Heathrow?s planes with an iPad (http://your.heathrow.com/painting-heathrows-planes-with-an-ipad/)