Apple's Services penetration isn't high despite years of growth



  • Reply 21 of 21
    designrdesignr Posts: 817member
    designr said:
    designr said:

    To consumers, CIRP believes they "think of Apple primarily as a hardware manufacturer."

    Apple would likely have been better off doing something like this:
    I read all the words but fail to understand why they'd likely be better off doing all that. AirPods by...Beats by Dr. Dre? Why? Just because it's different doesn't make it better.
    First, the AirPods by Beats was admitted as the weakest argument I I didn't really make that one. (NOTE: It still might be a reasonable argument to have leveraged the Beats branding positioning as an audio + music brand, but I digress...)

    As for the rest, the argument is basically about positioning. A brand's/product's position in the customer's mind is vital. Many companies have screwed up by not recognizing this. Apple does not mean "music" to most people. It does not mean "TV/movies" to most people. It does not mean "gaming" to most people. It does not mean "fitness" to most people. There are other brands that already occupy a position in the customer's mind in each of these areas. Apple is quite likely diluting its brand position in customers' minds.

    I realize that among Apple loyalists this seems unlikely, even impossible. But there's a world beyond Apple. And Apple has the challenge to grow...a LOT. By attempting to unify everything under the Apple name/brand they have two profound risks: a) diluting what Apple means and has meant, b) not achieving gains in the other areas because they don't "own" those positions in people's minds.

    There was a better strategy for them to play.

    The Apple branding of everything was, frankly, an ego-centric vanity play. I think Apple is greatly over-estimating its "brand juju" here. Apple means iPhone, iPad, Watch, Mac in 99% of minds. It does not mean music, TV/movie streaming, etc.

    TL;DR: This is about positioning in the mind of customers. This is important. It affects g—in fact determines—rowth, profitability, and success in each of these markets.

    Hope that helps.

    P.S. Don't make the mistake of assuming that the billion or so people that own iPhones are mentally and emotionally part of the "Apple loyalty" group. They're loyal to iPhone but still might not view Apple as a lot more than that. Some do, sure. But not likely even a simple majority.

    The Beats thing wasn't your weakest argument, you didn't make any arguments. An argument is a conclusion drawn from premises that support the conclusion. What you are offering is opinion which are self contradictory at times and detached from reality* at points. Someone disagreed with your opinions and rather than offer actual arguments and then tossed in a personal attack not related to what you were saying. 

    * Example of detached from reality. You said, "Apple does not mean 'music' to most people." You really think that? You think Apple hasn't built a strong connection with music in people's minds? I'm pretty Apple has a pretty solid track record when it comes to associating itself with music. iTunes Music Store, iPod, GarageBand, Logic are all examples. Hell, Apple used to host a yearly music festival. 
    I offered an opinion. Fair enough. I'm curious: Where do you think I was "self-contradictory"?

    In terms of the streaming services for Music, yeah, I do think that. I think Spotify holds a stronger position in consumers' minds. You are correct about the other ways in which many consumers might hold Apple in that position, though I'd argue it is really centered around Apple's hardware (iPod, later iPhone w/iTunes Music Store as an "accessory" of sorts to iPod) more than anything. Garage Band? Eh. Logic? Sure...for professionals. The music festival? LOL. Okay.

    P.S. I'm not sure if I'm reading your response correctly. Are you suggesting that I "tossed in a personal attack not related to what you were saying"? If so, where? Thanks.
    edited January 17
Sign In or Register to comment.