近日在中環港鐵站候車區，經常見到保險巨頭「a記」＂mind your gap"的宣傳廣告，這令我想起它的主要競爭對手「宏x」：
「宏x」的近況也不錯，保持與「a記」成競爭狀態，
但是絕少作宣傳。
「a記」是「外向」的，「宏x」是「內向」的。
「宏x」如何得以生存，並攻佔市場？
-集中火力於優勢地區： 近年「宏x」主打強積金，收到很好的成效，成功超越「a記」成為市場第二。
-品質第一：與其把資源放在廣告宣傳，「宏x」把慳來的資源用於優化產品（如較低保費，更高紅利派發）和提昇客戶服務質素。
兩間公司的定位與「m記」及「xx king」相似。
長遠來說，我睇好「集中火力，品質第一」的策略，
至於短期走勢......我毫無頭緒。
which one you think is making more money? Mcxx or Burxx? Axx or Manxx? Coca Cola or Pepsi?
回覆刪除surly quality have higher profit margin, but advertising conquer more market share. that's have been my question for a long time.
In a relatively long term scale, i think mcxx and manxx will make more money (in terms of ratio of their capital and their earnings).
回覆刪除Yes, advertising conquer more market shares, but advertise with no quality will fail sooner or later.
Another strong reason is that, keep high quality make your company unique (competitor will find it very difficult to 'copy' your high quality' in a short period of time) while moves such as advertising are (lower grade), means can be easily copied whenever necessary. Thus, mcxx and axx got no unique edge in my opinion.
Typo, should be burxx and manxx make more money in long run
回覆刪除For your info., pepsi got lower p/e ratio and a higher stock price than coca cola, for data up to today. Which probably leads to the conclusion that holding pepsi stocks beat coca cola, although very few people aware of that
回覆刪除Now we can see the effect, even for soft drinks company, which can't have much edge on 'quality'. Think about the situation of manxx ans axx......
回覆刪除Axx really need to 'mind your gap' in 10 years time scale =.="
hmmm, i have the same feeling, the stock apple will be higher than Microsoft eventually, pepsi has higher stock price than coca cola, as well as manulife higher than AIA. but bill gate still the richest guy, and Warran still invest in Coca cola even he drink pepsi himself, whats the reason behind?
回覆刪除For bill gates be the richest guy, because microsoft 'was' the first.
回覆刪除It created many 'new things' and earn money way before apple.
Still remember the 'effect of time' on long term investment?
It is ok for a low return, say 5% per year, as long as your commitment time is long, say 30 years, you srill gets something like 4x to 5x profit.
Another guy maybe better, 10% per year, but he only did this for 10 years, then he just get 1-2x return.
Bill gates wins because he conquer it sector first.
For warren choose to invest coca-cola, even for now, i think it's just inertia.
For wealthy person like him, invest in coca cola or pepsi, as long as the difference of return is not huge, he does not matter.
While for him, if suddenly start buying pepsi stocks, seems denied all his previous year of supporting coca-cola, cause some 'face problem'.
Just think of logical explanations to your two questions, see what is your opinion on my opinion?
hmmm, from my point of view high value stock whom concern about quality over market share do not make as much money as the "blood sucking" company whom rely on branding and popularity, and these company don't really care about the stock price because shareholder benefit is not their concern, making money is.
回覆刪除i think Bill Gate do make more money than apple, McDonald more than Burgerking, AIA more than Manulife, as it is very reasonable if you want to make money (get more from people's pocket), you must lower your production cost, lower your production cost will lower your quality, that's the money comes from!
i agree the different of 5% long term and 10% short term, yet what coca-cola did is 20% long term! rely on strong branding, so it is inevitable Coca cola make more money than pepsi, but pepsi is the better drink, and many people who go for coca cola and mcdonald is due to the branding effect and popularity, they can't even tell the difference. so it is very tempting to me to buy AIA stock but buy my personal insurance from Manulife.
i don't think Warran have the face problem, it is very well known he always apologise for his mistake, but i will ask him when i see him one day, haha.
want to add more, this quality or market share also affect the people who work under them, e.g. manulife has lesser agents than AIA, but each agent gets more than AIA, AIA has more soldiers, so make more money as a whole, but each solider do treat not as good as manulife's soldier.
回覆刪除same to me working in burgerking is better than mcdonald, pacific coffee better than starbucks.
this also apply to the customers as well. back to the basic is the option do you want more money or a better life.
I totally agreed what you say. Thus we have to be aware of the difference of 'profit' and 'shareholder benefit'. I always put my eye on the latter, discard the earlier.
回覆刪除And is the basic problem of 'bread or dream' for employees or bosses.
Luckily we need not consider the bread dream choice for buying stocks, because we basically buy stocks for good return, so just choose the stocks gives most (shareholder benefit) (in the long run), and you know which to choose.
And about the lower production cost, actually even apple is doing that 'think about the china factory called foxcon', so i think apple is copying microsoft for the blood sucking things. Of course, this is natural development, and i think apple will make profit as microsoft did 20 years ago, then gradually decrease its quality, and customers begin to switch to a new thing, maybe mechcalvin IT LOL
回覆刪除well, apply always sell creativity more than quality itself, still it has better quality than Microsoft even with foxcon.
回覆刪除i still havn't decided whether i want to give best quality product, or above average quality product with extremely shinny branding and advertising. the question i still havn't resolved.
1. do really the later option make more money from a personal point of view?
I think depends on what target group is
回覆刪除If you target high class, for example, you manufacture camera lens, or expensive cars, then you have to stick with quality to win.
If you intend for public, for example, you issue casual magazine, then sorry, quality can't bring you much business.
So i think you have to pick a target group, or you have to split your business to cater two such groups
hmmm, good point.
回覆刪除