Upload
mark-fehrenbacher
View
438
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Executive Summary
Men’s basketball footwear brand Reebok, began in 1895 and is known for manufacturing
first-class footwear for customers throughout the world. But recently, the brand had a drastic 15.5%
decrease in share of market. The main issue(s) faced by Reebok and the purpose of our in-depth
research are to determine the reason for the decrease in share of market and to find a solution to
solve the problem.
We created a survey, sent it out to potential respondents, and collected the data to find out more
about consumers’ perception of Reebok and its main competitors like Nike and Converse. From
the results of our survey and information from our market analysis, we came up with a
recommendation: 1) A line extension product would be used to directly target the attractive
market segment comprised of 14-24 year olds. 2) The subsequent promotion will seek to
empower the young male adult to forge his own path and break from the normal. 3.) Competitive
price matching will be implemented to purvey the notion of quality, value, and exclusivity,
discounting and sales promotions will be used to stimulate sales and store traffic.
The implementation of our recommendation will cost Reebok approximately
$4,500,000.00 in production and research and development costs. We also anticipate that it will
cost roughly $4,500,000.00 to cover marketing research and advertising costs. In total, this
recommendation will initially cost Reebok approximately $9,000,000.00. After implementation,
Reebok will create more value in its products to its target consumers, encouraging them to
purchase their basketball shoes, and in turn increase sales and share of market.
2
I. THE INDUSTRY, THE MARKET, AND THE BUYER
A. Industry Analysis
Competition Analysis
In the men’s basketball shoe market there are several direct competitors that rival Reebok in
terms of market share, marketing efforts directed towards a similar target market, revenue, and
number of products available to those target markets. The following paragraphs discuss those
competitors and their place within the basketball shoe industry.
Nike. Nike is the industry leader and largest direct competitor of Reebok in the basketball shoe
market. Nike basketball shoes hold a 91% share of market of the men’s basketball shoe product
category (Lazich, R.S.) and show profits of $24,128,000 in 2012 and $20,862,000 in 2011
indicating sales growth (Thomson Financial, January 5, 2013). The target market that Nike
intends to capture are males 24-35 years in age who purchase one pair of new shoes every 12
months and pay at a price point between $50-$74 (Appendix A). Nike’s marketing strategy is to
offer a premium quality product to the market with high price points and promote these products
using highly visible and attractive endorsement deals with NBA players Kobe Bryant, Lebron
James, and Kevin Durant. Nike currently offers 35 different styles of products with 142 different
color options for the men’s basketball market (Nike.com).
And 1. The brand And1 holds a 0.0098% share of the men’s basketball market. And1 primarily
focuses its marketing strategies on a “streetball” brand image and sponsors many of those events.
Early advertising strategies, used to distinguish their products from others, included other
basketball slogans and trash talk such as "Pass. Save Yourself The Embarrassment" (Busbee, J.).
And1 currently offers 4 different styles of products with 9 color combinations (And1usa.com).
Converse. Converse holds 0.0078% of the market share and produced $ 1.1 billion dollars in
revenue in 2011 (Official corporate website, 2013). The brand Converse was a huge success in
3
the 1920s when it developed the “Chuck Taylor All Stars”, however in more recent times the
Converse brand now primarily tries to capture the music and skateboarder markets while still
offering 6 men’s basketball shoe products with 31 different color combinations (Converse.com).
Budget Competition. There are several total budget competition product categories that take up a
share of Reebok’s marketing budget. Reebok also offers men’s training, running, walking, and
crossfit shoes. As well as womens training, dance, walking, running, and crossfit shoes. The
company also offers mens’, womens’, and kids’ apparel. These items use marketing dollars that
could otherwise be used to promote the mens’ basketball line (Reebok.com).
Driving Forces.
Fashion Trends: Multipurpose use of basketball shoes. In today’s athletic world, products have
extended beyond their intended use. Athletic apparel has bridged the gap between everyday and
sport wear. According to Robert Allen from Brand Strategy, “Sport has blended into the world
of celebrity....It has been infused with street style, as sports casual has become part of everyday
clothing” (Thomas, 2013). This has driven sales in the basketball shoe market because of the
ability for products to be repurposed. Nike, the industry leader, offers a vast selection of
basketball shoe products that include the most popular line Jordan, a customizable line NikeID,
and other highly endorsed shoes by basketball superstars such as Kobe Bryant and Lebron
James. SoleLand reports that basketball shoes are being purchased primarily for fashion
purposes, “for this reason, many shoe manufacturing companies actually tailor their basketball
shoes toward today's modern fashion, rather than being the best possible basketball shoe.” The
look and style of the shoe is becoming increasingly important both on the court and off the court.
For a competitor in this industry, there is a necessity to focus on creating a product for the
fashion savvy users while remembering the intended use (SoleLand, 2012).
4
Basketball participation on the rise. US Bureau Statistics Participation in selected sport
activities in the year 2009 shows that there were 24,410 Basketball participants. Being a
participant is defined as “an individual seven years of age or older who participates in a sport
more than once a year” (US Bureau Statistics, 2009). In a short three year span, these numbers
grew to 4.1 million documented players in organized basketball leagues (Goalrilla, 2012).
According to Goalrilla, a quarter of those participants are female, leaving us with a participation
of approximately 3 million male players. Due to the growth of the basketball market, the need
for basketball apparel has also grown. According to the Wall Street Journal, basketball shoes
rose 14% in the U.S. from 2012 to 2013. This is the fastest gain recorded in the past three years.
The trend has continued into the 2013 year with 11% growth seen in January and another 6%
growth in February (Cheng, 2013).
High Visibility of Celebrity Endorsers. NBA players make millions both on the court and off the
court. These days, many players such as Kobe Bryant, Lamar Odom, and Derrick Rose make
more of their annual salaries in their endorsement deals than they do through their NBA contract.
These players are visible in all sorts of industries such as fast food, apparel, automobiles,
electronics and more, making them top of mind in consumer perceptions. The more recognizable
your endorsers are, the more often your promotional efforts will be remembered (Jones, 2012).
Key Success Factors.
Perceived High Quality. The Foot and Ankle Center of Washington states that “since, improved
traction, increased shock absorption, enhanced stability of the foot, and greater ankle support can
all help prevent foot and ankle injuries while playing basketball, a quality basketball shoe is
critical to enjoying the game while remaining injury free” (Foot and Ankle Center of
Washington, 2013). As many consumers go through their purchase decision process, they look
5
for the characteristics that will benefit them most. Although injury prevention isn’t at the top of
the list, comfort, style, image and price are. Many customers complain about shoes produced by
companies in this industry that are uncomfortable which makes them unappealing to purchase
(“Customer Reviews”, April 26, 2013). As the industry leader, Nike continually releases
products that prove to be exceptional in all of these categories. Their highest selling line, Jordan,
is an example of the higher priced products that signals to consumers the highest quality. Within
this industry, competitors must evoke confidence in their quality for consumers to believe they
are getting the best value for their money. Consumers who buy basketball shoes and repurpose
them for casual wear find quality to be an important benefit sought, which was labeled as
“durability” in our primary research survey (Appendix B). To these consumers, these products
are intended for everyday use rather than to improve performance and wear for sport use only.
This means quality needs to be high due to the increase in frequency of use.
Quality of endorsement. Nike, the industry leader, owns the rights of the biggest names in
basketball today as their endorsers. Michael Jordan alone is considered one of the most iconic
basketball players in the history of the sport and because of his name being attached to the
Jordan basketball shoe line, it owns 71% of Nike’s 91% market share in this industry. Other
established players Nike has brought into their shoe line include Lebron James, Kobe Bryant,
and Kevin Durant, three of the most decorated players in the league today. Reebok attempted to
mirror Nike’s branding and endorsement strategy, however their attempts proved to be
unsuccessful. This can be largely attributed to the fact that John Wall, Reeboks primary endorser,
had not played a single NBA game when he signed a contract. He was also not in a very
publicized market playing for the Washington Wizards, while Jordan, James, Durant, and Bryant
have all been to NBA finals or earned the honors of Most Valuable Player. This is a direct
6
example of the halo effect, if it is good enough for the best players, it is good enough for “me”.
Since entering the NBA, Wall has moved from Reebok’s failing line to their parent brand
Adidas, becoming an endorser for their basketball lines.
Brand Loyalty. As said by David Grasso, global brand marketing VP of Nike, “Nike is on a
journey, a long-term journey for the brand...As we continue to grow in size, it’s important we
stay connected. If you take away the toys and the noise, it’s about having a relationship” (Elliott,
2013). This is shown in the current efforts at Nike to stray from bad publicity they have received
recently as a result of negative press related to their endorsers, ie: Lance Armstrong. A survey
conducted by Brand Keys showed that in brand loyalty, Nike ranks “second with consumer age
45 to 65, third with consumers 25 to 44, and fifth with consumers 18 to 24”. These declines in
brand loyal statistics exemplifies the need for building a brand that is appealing to consumers
and makes them want to be associated with their product. Providing a product to help you win is
not enough anymore, building a rapport and good image is essential in maintaining brand loyal
customers.
Industry Attractiveness
Reebok is currently competing in the men’s basketball shoe industry. The Five Forces Model of
Environmental Threats is the tool of choice to gauge the level of any given industry’s
attractiveness. To gauge the level of threat in an industry and concurrently the level of industry
attractiveness, one must find the degree of threat afforded by possible entry, rivalry, suppliers,
buyers, and substitutes.
The Threat of Entry. The threat of entry by new firms into the men’s basketball shoe industry is
low because the industry is unattractive due to the high barriers to entry. The main barrier to
entry is product differentiation. This is defined as possessing brand identification and customer
7
loyalty that potential entrants do not. (Barney 2011) The men’s basketball industry is dominated
by brand loyal customers. For example, Nike has 91% of market share, but 58% of that is the Air
Jordan brand alone. (Thomaselli 2010) Current incumbent firms in the market, much less new
entrants, must absorb the costs of overcoming such differentiation advantages. Another barrier to
entry into the men’s basketball shoe industry is the combined cost advantages independent of
scale. Proprietary technology is a cost advantage for incumbent firms. For example, patents that
Reebok and Nike have gotten over the years give them a cost advantage over possible new
entrants that must develop a substitute technology to compete. Another cost advantage for
incumbent firms in the men’s basketball industry is know-how. Knowledge, skills, and
information are built up over time and even decades in the case of Reebok. The cost of
developing this know-how acts as a barrier. The men’s basketball shoe industry is unattractive to
new entrants due to high barriers to entry.
The Threat of Rivalry. The threat of rivalry in the men’s basketball shoe industry is low and
therefore the industry is attractive. Attributes indicative of an industry with a high threat of
rivalry are a large number of competing firms, same size firms with same influence, slow
industry growth, and a lack of product differentiation. (Barney 2011) These attributes do not
describe the men’s basketball shoe industry at all. There are a medium number of competing
firms in the industry, these firms are not all the same size nor do they have the same influence
indicated by Nike’s 91% market share (Thomaselli 2010), the industry is growing, and there is
plenty of differentiation as indicated by the many shoes offered and patents held. The threat of
rivalry is low.
The Threat of Substitutes. The threat of substitutes in the men’s basketball shoe industry is low
and therefore attractive. Substitutes meet customer needs approximately the same as industry
8
products but in a different way. A function of substitutes is to place a ceiling on the prices firms
can charge and connectedly how much they can earn. (Barney 2011) The basketball shoe market
has offerings at varying price points that serve the entire market. Basketball shoes are
specifically designed for the sport, and no substitute currently exists to negate the use or viability
of basketball shoes. Therefore the men’s basketball shoe industry has a low threat of substitutes.
(Nike Inc, SWOT Analysis 2013)
The Threat of Powerful Suppliers. The threat of powerful suppliers in the men’s basketball shoe
industry is low and therefore attractive. Indicators of threat of suppliers in an industry are that the
suppliers’ industry is dominated by only a few firms, suppliers have highly differentiated
products, suppliers are not threatened by substitutes, suppliers threaten forward vertical
integration, and firms are not important customers for suppliers. (Barney 2011) There are many
suppliers for the men’s basketball shoe industry and none of them have highly differentiated
products. Since there is a lack of supplier differentiation, the threat of substitutes is high for
suppliers. Due to the high barriers to entry, suppliers of the men’s basketball shoe industry are
not a high threat for forward vertical integration. Large companies like Nike, Reebok, and
Adidas are all very important customers for suppliers and could hurt suppliers if they went
elsewhere. Therefore, as a whole, the men’s basketball shoe industry has a low threat of
suppliers. (Nike Inc, SWOT Analysis 2013)
The Threat of Powerful Buyers. The threat of powerful buyers in the men’s basketball shoe
industry is low and therefore attractive. Indicators of the threat of buyers in an industry are that
the number of buyers is small, products are undifferentiated, products are a large percentage of a
buyer’s final costs, buyers are not earning economic profits, and buyers threaten backward
vertical integration. (Barney 2011) There are quite a large number of buyers in the men’s
9
basketball shoe industry ranging from department stores to sports specialty stores. Basketball
shoes are highly differentiated in design, shape, color, function, and brand. Shoes are a final
product and are therefore not a cost factor in a different product. Stores that are buying
basketball shoes are enjoying economic profits because it is a growing industry, and due to the
high barriers to entry, buyers are not actively threatening to backward vertically integrate.
In conclusion, as a whole the level of threat in the men’s basketball industry is low, and it is an
attractive industry to be in. There is a low threat of entry, rivalry, suppliers, buyers, and
substitutes. Each of the five measuring instruments for gauging industry attractiveness were
positive, and therefore no weighting system was used to empower any specific measurement.
That being said, Nike has a 91% market share and very high brand loyalty and equity. All
incumbent firms in the industry vying for market share will be subject to the costs of overcoming
these disadvantages.
B. Industry Buyer Analysis
Total Market Segmentation Analysis
Within the athletic shoe market, there exist a wide variety of people with a wide range of
attributes and characteristics. In order for companies to reach potential consumers, it is
necessary for them to segment groups accordingly. It is very important to segment these groups
by characteristics that have the potential to influence a buying decision. Also, these segments
categorize people into groups with similar needs and behaviors.
Gender. A common segment trait to use is gender. Among people that have bought basketball
shoes in the past twelve months, 70.5% of them were male and 29.5% were female (Appendix A,
figure 1). This appears to point to a more male buyer driven market. This segment demographic
10
was chosen because there exists a distinct difference between purchases of basketball shoes
among men and women.
Price. Another segment base chosen for this market is price. This segment category is a basic
insight into how much a buyer has spent on basketballs shoes within the past year. The segments
are various price ranges and according to (Appendix A) the percentages of buyers per segment
vary as well. These price ranges include: Under $50, $50-$74, $75-$149, and $150+. The
majority of buyers for this segment exist in the $50-$74 range, but close behind is the $75-$149
range. It’s fair to say that purchases of shoes over $150 is a minority of the segment. The price
segment was chosen because more often than not price is a factor when purchasing not just
basketball shoes, but any material good.
Ethnicity. Ethnicity as a segment base was chosen as different races have different needs and
opinions when it comes to footwear as a whole. The groups were segmented into white, African
American/black, and other. Various other races were seen in the database, but the sampling was
so small that it could be disregarded, but noted. From the data and the graph (Appendix A),
whites make up a little more than half of all buyers of basketball shoes.
Age. Along with past demographics, age was also chosen due to the accessibility of data. Also,
age is an important factor to gain insight into the typical industry purchaser. The segments were
each distinct, but also close to one another percentage-wise (Appendix A). The data points to the
age range of 55-64 being in the minority of buyers of basketball shoes. There doesn’t appear to
be a definitive age for purchasing basketball shoes, but there exists a distinct age range, wherein
the typical buyer of basketball shoes can be segmented. The typical age range for a buyer of
basketball shoes seems to exist within the mid to late twenties.
11
Geographic. Geographic’s came up on the database and there existed some distinct differences
in percent of buyers. This was chosen because there may exist a correlation with other popular
sports in different regions that might affect purchase of basketball shoes. For example, the
Miami Heat in the South or hockey teams in the North. The segments were North East, South,
Midwest, and West. After analyzing the database and creating a graph (Appendix A), the South
seemed to be the majority region for purchasers of basketball shoes comprising of 36.4% of all
basketball shoe purchases. The North East and West were not very distinctly different and the
Midwest was the closest to the South in terms of majority.
Household Income. The fourth category used to segment the basketball shoe industry buyer was
household income. The database offered data for income ranging from less than $20,000 all the
way to greater than $150,000. The largest segment was consumers who have a household
income of $75,000-$149,000 (Appendix A). This segment is extremely influential over buying
decisions. If a consumer does not have the funds available for purchases such as a specialized
basketball shoe, they will satisfy that need for shoes in some other alternative way. However,
the data suggests to us that the consumers in the market for basketball shoes have disposable
income and the desire to spend it on this product.
Usage. The final category used to segments purchasers of basketball shoes was the number of
pairs bought within the past year. It is recognized that purchases of shoes can at times be
repeated throughout the year. This is due to collectors of shoes (i.e. “sneakerheads”) who make
repeat purchases. Also, multiple pairs may be purchased as gifts or for children. This data was
segmented as 1 pair, 2 pairs, or 3+ pairs of shoes in a year. This data was important to segment
due to the way shoe culture is in the world. Many people buy multiple pairs of shoes to show off
or stay current. From the database and (Appendix A), this fact was not altogether supported as
12
the majority of basketball shoe buyers purchased 1 pair in a twelve month period and the
minority being 2 and 3+. In fact, buying a single pair of shoes accounted for more than half of
the purchasers of basketball shoes.
Using these segments, the industry targets its consumers in various ways. The selection of these
categories as segment bases was due to the availability of data as well as how impactful each
might be on a purchase of a pair of basketball shoes. From this data, one can draw a conclusion
and form a concise picture of the typical buyer.
Benefits Sought. In our survey, we asked consumers what they find most important in a
basketball shoe. After collecting a sizeable response, we analyzed the data and found there to be
three specific benefits that consumers look for when purchasing basketball shoes. (Appendix A).
From this data, Comfort was the most important benefit sought with 56% of respondents ranking
it first in importance followed by Price at 32% and Style at 12%.
Buyer Description
Determining the typical buyer for the basketball shoe industry is rather obvious after the market
has been appropriately segmented. The typical buyer is derived by studying the data from the
segmentation analysis and choosing the most prevalent segments among those represented. In
this case, the data points to a very distinctive typical basketball shoe consumer. This typical
consumer is a white male, age ranging from 25-34, who lives in the South region of the United
States, has a household income of $75,000.00 - $149,000.00, purchases one pair of basketball
shoes per 12 months, and spends from $50.00-$74.00 (Appendix A).
13
Quantification Statistics
According to MRI+, one of the nation’s leading databases, 9,782,000 of the 244,550,000 people
in the United States are estimated to have purchased basketball shoes in the past 12 months. This
represents 4% of the adults in the United States who are in the market for basketball shoes.
II. Strategic Marketing Analysis
A. Major Problem Defined
Reebok brand basketball shoes have had a very rough couple of years since the glory days of the
1990’s. There are several reasons for the company’s downturn in performance of this product
category; however, in this section the focus will be on the marketing issues and problems that
Reebok is currently facing.
The major problem that hinders Reebok in the men’s basketball shoe market is product
positioning. According to primary data (market survey), respondents perceive Reebok product to
be less stylish, be of lesser quality, and less comfortable than the products offered by our
competition (Appendix D). Contributing factors to the less than desired perceptual state of
Reebok’s basketball shoes are the way the company has tried to brand itself over the past several
decades. Reebok has changed its slogan 14 times since 1987 and this tends to confuse consumers
as to where Reebok products stand in the market (Chahal, 1).
As a result of this confusion several issues or “symptoms” have arisen for Reebok in this product
category. Reebok has been losing share of market (SOM) consistently to Nike over past twenty
years dropping from an 18.9% SOM in 1993 to 3.4% SOM in 2012 (SBRnet.com). This constant
loss of market share for Reebok in the mens basketball shoe industry has recently forced the
company to once again try to rebrand itself and redirect its marketing efforts towards the
“fitness” market instead of the basketball shoe product category. This move gives even less
14
marketing resources to direct further product positioning of the basketball shoe line (Baker, R.
2012, January 19).
B. Current Marketing Strategies
Product
Physical Description. Reebok offers basketball shoes that are generally safe color schemes like
red, black, gray, blue, and white. On each pair of shoes, there are generally just two colors
present, with one being the dominant color and the other playing a small part as an accent color.
Each shoe is rather conservative in its style and color (see Reebok.com). Reebok offers shoes
ranging from classic styles to more modern designs and offers one shoe that is endorsed by NBA
player John Wall.
Target Market. It was determined by our industry segmentation that the typical buyer was a
white male, ranging from 25-34, who lives in the South region of the United States, has a
household income of $75,000.00 - $149,000.00, purchases one pair of basketball shoes per 12
months, and spends from $50.00-$74.00 (See Appendix A). It appears that Reebok has a very
broad target market. The shoes are a basic design without a lot of detailing and their color
schemes are generally conservative, thus appealing to the majority of consumers. Overall,
Reebok appears to target the consumers in the men’s basketball market who are looking for a
basic shoe without a lot of fancy detailing or bright colors in a low price range.
15
Product Positioning. Reebok is currently viewed as a cheaper, lesser quality product. Customers
consider Reebok to generally always be in their price range, whether they want to spend $40 or
$140 on a pair of shoes. According to our primary research, consumers view Reebok as being
ranked highest in the category of Within My Price Range, but lowest in Style, Durability,
Provides Support, and Improving Performance compared to its two main competitors, Nike and
Jordan (Appendix D).
Product Life Cycle. We estimate Reebok to be in the Maturity stage of the Product Life Cycle.
We substantiate this claim by determining its sales, analyzing its profits, and examining the
marketing expenses for the product. Reebok’s sales have been declining slightly over the past 3
years (Financial Highlights, 1), which in turn causes a plateau and decline in their profits. When
considering their current marketing expenditures, it is extremely difficult to find a Reebok
basketball shoe promotion aside from the John Wall shoe (which will be discontinued due to his
brand switching). (Appendix E)
Packaging/Branding . According to retail experts at Foot Locker, all of Reebok’s current styles
of basketball shoes come in the same, uniform blue cardboard box with the Reebok logo on the
outside.
Their branding strategies have been in a constant state of change since 1987 with an astounding
14 different slogan changes, their current slogan is “Live with Fire” (Chahal, 1).
Perceptual Map. Two attributes, price and comfort, were determined to be the most influential
for customers in their purchase decision as determined by our primary research survey. Three
brands are represented; they are the top 3 that customers purchase according to our survey, their
circle size is representative of their respective share of market. The solid circle represents the
consumers’ ideal position. (Appendix D)
16
Promotion
Advertising/Sales Promotion. Reebok is in the process of taking a step back and reforming the
whole Reebok Brand to launch a global marketing blitz focusing on fitness pursuits in the year
2013. The campaign called “Live with Fire” enforces the position of Reebok promoting fitness
in the minds of its consumers with the release of products that allow fitness to be loved and
pursued like traditional sports are. This idea is being stretched into every line extension at
Reebok, trying to increase consistency throughout the brand and their many different product
lines (Engvall, 2013).
Reebok has also launched multiple social media tools within the past year including their Twitter
and Instagram, @ReebokHoops. Both of these tools were developed in July of 2012 but have
not been updated since November 2012. On their YouTube account, they have released a string
of short videos promoting John Wall and his basketball line with Reebok. Each video is
approximately 12 seconds, just long enough for consumers to recognize the athlete as John Wall
and view him in a “practice makes perfect” kind of light. Although Wall has recently moved
from being a Reebok spokesperson to their parent brand Adidas, Wall is still the strongest
campaign currently established within the Reebok basketball shoes lines. As Reebok forges
ahead with their focus on fitness, they have left behind the social media campaigns they began
just last year, ReebokHoops.
Advertising Budget. In 2011, Reebok spent $65 Million on ads in the U.S. and over $300 Million
globally (McClellan, 2013). We compare this to the Nike, the industry leader, who expends 2.4
billion globally on promotional campaigns (Cendrowski, 2012). .
Place
17
Reebok is part of a vast global distribution network. When Reebok was acquired by Adidas in
2005, Reebok held an impressive range of distribution deals in the US while Adidas held similar
advantageous distribution deals abroad. (Barrand, 2006) In an effort to combine these strengths
across both companies, Adidas systematically bought out Reebok’s distributors and joint venture
partners worldwide where Adidas held a strong presence. These distribution consolidations
created economies of scale that produced a cost savings of approximately $212 million over four
years. (Conti & With, 2006) Even though such consolidation efforts took place, Reebok still
produces shoes in over 30 countries. (Berthiaume, 2006)
Supply Chain. The supply chain Reebok is a part of is global and multi-layered with many
different types of business partners. (Supply Chain Structure, 2013) Reebok’s suppliers fall
under five broad categories. Main suppliers have a direct contractual relationship with Reebok
for the supply of products for the market or export. Subcontractors are factories that have been
subcontracted by suppliers to do manufacturing operations that the main suppliers are not able to
do in their own facility. Material and other service providers simply supply goods and services to
main suppliers without even involving Reebok. Licensees are independent companies which
design, produce, and distribute specific products under licence to Reebok. In 2012, the adidas
Group including Reebok worked with 49 licensees whose suppliers sourced products from 275
factories in 44 countries. (Supply Chain Structure, 2013) Lastly, agents are independent
companies that act as intermediaries to source product manufacturing, manage the manufacturing
processes, and sell finished products to the Adidas Group (Supply Chain Structure, 2013).
(Appendix F).
Distribution. Reebok follows an intensive distribution strategy in that it makes its products
available in the maximum number of outlets. Men’s basketball shoes are sold in places from
18
online to department stores. Reebok’s sales stick closely to the industry averages and therefore
over half of their sales are made at sporting good stores and specialty athletic footwear stores.
(Exp. by Outlet Type, 2013) Foot Locker is Reebok’s largest customer, and in 2008 due to
extreme discounting by Foot Locker, delivery and consequently sales were halted temporarily by
the Adidas Group. (Ernst, 2008) Aside from hardnosed tactics, further efforts to divert negative
effects of powerful buyers should be implemented. Reebok is currently on par with industry
averages for online sales. A useful website for ordering is in place and easy to use (Exp. by
Outlet Type, 2013). (Appendix F)
Price
Major Cost Factors. The production costs for making a pair of shoes for Reebok (as well as
various other companies) is relatively low when compared to how much they end up costing the
consumer. Thus, the pricing strategy is less about covering cost and more about being
competitive and positioning the product in the marketplace (developing a brand image). Also,
pricing is set to increase demand.
Historical Analysis. In an effort to reach its consumers, Reebok has both utilized retailers as an
online store with the popularity of online shopping. The pricing at these locations is dependent
on retailer and location. Reebok’s pricing has maintained a price structure of affordability for its
more price sensitive consumers as well as a pricing designed to attract those who associate price
with quality. In the retail stores Reebok is found in, it is often around the middle of the price
range.(footlocker.com)
Competitive Comparisons. As was said, Reebok can be found around the middle to upper price
range. Their price is competitive with the Converse or And1 brand shoes. They are marginally
less than that of Nike or Jordan. Through this, Reebok has potential to gain market share from
19
the more price sensitive consumers. Unfortunately, Nike’s brand image and the perception
around it is of a shoe of style, quality, and durability. For this reason, consumers are willing to
pay more for Nike as they are buying the popular, in style brand. This causes consumers to
become more insensitive about price. Jordan brand shoes by comparison are often found and
purchased for higher prices than Nike. These shoes communicate the same quality as Nike as
well as exclusivity.
Pricing Strategy. In order to attain revenue and attract consumers, Reebok follows a fairly basic
pricing strategy. Their shoes are a comparatively lower price than their main competitor, Nike.
Through this fact, Reebok attempts to increase demand and appeal to a broader, more price
sensitive market. Their shoes are also often at marked down prices. Additionally, Reebok
utilizes price penetration as well as a high-low pricing strategy. Under price penetration, Reebok
would price its shoes at a lower price on the market in order to increase demand, capture market
share, and gain market acceptance. In a high-low pricing strategy, a shoe would be released at a
certain price (high) and later when the popularity goes down, the shoe would be
discounted/marked down in price (low). Reebok shoes are also priced depending on location and
retailer, which comes from how the supply chain operates. In short, Reebok pricing strategy is
designed to attract the price sensitive consumers that Nike cannot always attain.
III. THE MARKETING RECOMMENDATION
A. Feasible Alternatives
Alternative One
One possible alternative to Reebok’s men’s basketball shoe positioning problem would be to
create and maintain a comprehensive advertising campaign in an attempt to reposition the brand
in the minds of consumers. This would include an increase in advertising overall for the men’s
20
basketball shoe category by advertising for specific basketball shoe products. This could in turn
have a synergistic outcome for Reebok, as customers view each shoe as a quality product, they
will then have a more positive view of the brand itself. Another crucial element of this
advertising campaign would be the creation of a slogan that will be designed to withstand the test
of time and lead consumers to associate the brand message every time they see the Reebok logo.
Pros. The pros of this advertising/branding campaign are numerous. They would increase
awareness of not only the brand itself, but also for the individual basketball product lines that
Reebok offers. Advertising campaigns can be fairly easy to implement and execute, especially if
an outside agency is used to leverage their expertise in the area. Reebok also stands to increase
sales from this advertising push as the shoes are accentuated and presented in an appealing way
to consumers. Currently Reebok suffers from poor perceptions concerning quality, but with this
advertising campaign, those perceptions could be corrected (Appendix D).
Cons. There are also several cons to creating and launching these advertising campaigns. First,
advertising campaigns can be extremely expensive, especially is an outside agency is used. If
the advertising does not appeal to the consumers that it is designed for, it could have an opposite
effect and compromise the brand image even further. Additionally, coming up with the right
slogan for the best possible target market will also be challenging, and changing the current
brand position could drive away Reebok’s current customers.
Alternative 2
The second feasible alternative would be creating a product line extension. This line extension
would capitalize on the features that consumers in the men’s basketball shoe industry are most
looking for: comfort, price, style, and functional aspects. This product would also be marketed
to a more specific target market in the men’s basketball shoe industry. Reebok currently seeks a
21
target market of white males aged in the range of 25 to 34 years old. In order to generate more
revenue, they should target the people who make the majority of industry purchases, this is the
segment of young men ages 14-24. It would also be sold at a slightly higher price point,
signaling an elevated level of quality to consumers.
Pros. Reebok could expand its customer base by capitalizing on this young adult male market.
Research shows that 43% of consumer basketball shoe expenditures were made by 14-24 year
old young men in 2012 (Sports Business Research Network, 3). Reebok can also further
improve product/brand perceptions through this new line extension and increase profits by
achieving a higher selling price (to signal higher quality to consumers). Yet another benefit of a
successful line extension would be the increase in market share for Reebok, potentially stealing
share from Nike in the process.
Cons. New product development is extremely expensive, Reebok stands to suffer a major loss if
they are not successful in the line extension. Further problems could be in store for Reebok if
the new product does not sell at the retail price, which would cause the shoes to be significantly
discounted, leading to a significant loss in margins for Reebok and its distributors. The timetable
for this extension could also be a downside as research and development, the rest of the new
product development process, and distribution into the marketplace takes a considerable amount
of time.
B. Our Recommendation
Define
A line extension product would be used to directly target the attractive market segment
comprised of 14-24 year olds. These young adults, although brand aware, do not have a life time
of purchasing experience to build a fierce loyalty and are therefore more palpable. Accompanied
22
by an advertising campaign directly targeting this segment, the line extension would build brand
equity and loyalty that would have multi-generational effects. Young adults emulate those that
appear stylish, cool, and that they respect. Our line extension and subsequent promotion will
seek to empower the young male adult to forge his own path and break from the normal. With
competitive price matching to purvey the notion of quality, value, and exclusivity, discounting
and sales promotions will be used to stimulate sales and store traffic.
Recommended Strategic Marketing Objectives
Product. By definition, product as an element of the marketing mix is a need satisfier. The
objective of this new product line is to offer customers a product that meets and exceeds the
needs and expectations that they have expressed to us in our primary research (conducted by an
online marketing survey). We propose achieving this by holding focus groups where various
design concepts will be shown. From feedback we will be able to pinpoint possible product
styles that can be implemented into a product line. This will include feedback on color schemes,
comfort levels, stylishness, and other product attributes that the focus groups identified to be
important. At that point a prototype can be produced and distributed to a test market that will
represent our eventual target market. This target market test would give an indication of how
consumers react to the new product line, specifically their likes, dislikes, and feelings. From
there, Reebok can move toward either modifying the product to amend the dislikes of the product
line or launching the product if it was well received.
Promotion. Once this product is developed, there must be an extensive marketing campaign
launched to raise awareness, generate interest and desire for the product, and ultimately inspire
consumers to purchase. We will capitalize on our target by focusing our promotional efforts on
23
the 14-24 year old male. Individuality, self reliance, and forging your own path would be
emphasized for this segment.
This will be accomplished by signing one to two celebrity NBA “rookies” identifiable with the
target segment. A budget of 2 million dollars is set for these deals. These endorsers will join
other Reebok endorsers to promote BOKS, a physical activity program for elementary school
kids. This campaign will tie into Reebok’s overall brand strategy to reposition themselves in the
market as a global fitness brand (Sarro, 2013). Reebok sponsorships of high school basketball
teams and college teams would further build brand equity and loyalty. These teams will be
promoted in Reebok’s print advertisements including bulletin boards, sponsorship amount, print
advertisements, and other visibility promoters with a budget of $240,000. Advertising
campaigns would feature themes such as “Greatness is mine for the taking” and “The new cool
isn’t plain old normal” which have been generated by our marketing efforts. Focus groups will
be held to identify further theme attributes and triggers with which the target segment identifies.
A budget of $760,000 is held for all media advertising. This is enough to include two 30-second
prime time TV spots that will run 30 times over a course of 4 months. There will be a strong
enforcement of keeping all marketing activities integrated to promote a strong and consistent
front for this campaign. The current social media campaigns will be brought up-to-date with
continuous flows of incoming information for consumers.
Place. Place as an element of the marketing mix is centered on possession utility for consumers,
in other words, how available and convenient a product is for them to obtain. Reebok has a vast
and well established distribution network in the US that is further complimented by the Adidas
distribution network. (Barrand, 2006) Excess demand will have to be absorbed and aptly
distributed within the current system. After a test market study is conducted and demand can be
24
somewhat gauged, further development and expansion of the distribution network to support the
excess demand will be considered and implemented. Considering the relative size and business
volume of the current system, the excess demand produced by the new product line extension
should be easily handled by supplying the new business to current supply channel members.
Reebok follows an intensive distribution strategy in that it makes its products available in the
maximum number of outlets. Men’s basketball shoes are sold in places from online to
department stores. No additional changes to this strategy would be necessary for the new product
line.
Price. Price as an element of the marketing mix is the basis for exchange, meaning that the price
for this product must appeal to our customers, while still communicating an element of quality.
From survey data, price was one of the three most important factors when determining what shoe
to purchase. It would be in Reebok’s best interest to cover the initial costs of its product
development through price skimming. The market leader Nike, a benchmark, has a high level of
brand equity that Reebok cannot currently rival. Through the initial implementation of price
skimming, Reebok will establish competitive price matching to establish this new product line as
high quality. The price would be high enough to communicate quality and cover costs, but not
so high as to drive away the target market.
Cost Analysis.
Qualitative. Reebok will need to spend a significant amount of time on research and
development, production of the line extension product, and implementing the advertising
campaign. Furthermore, cannibalization might occur between the line extension and the current
product line that Reebok offers as well as with the parent brand, Adidas.
25
Quantitative. The costs associated with our recommendation for Reebok are difficult to pinpoint,
but we estimated them to the best of our ability according to available data. We will use the table
in (Appendix G) as the basis for our costs directly related to production of the new line. These
costs will be lower, considering it is set for 400,000 units/year, which is the total of all Reebok
basketball shoes that were sold in 2012 (SBR, 9). We will estimate costs at half of the total costs
represented in the chart, requiring ~$2.5 million for production costs. We will require an
additional $2 million for research and development of this new shoe. This $1.5 million will
cover costs such as market research (focus groups, concept testing, and test marketing) and the
development of the shoe (technology and design-both aesthetic and structural). Advertising will
be crucial to the success of this line extension. We require $3 million for advertising. This cost
is adjustable, pending the signing of endorsers and the type of advertising that is researched to be
most appealing to our target market, some will be more or less expensive than our current
budgeted amount. Costs, although significant, are a necessary expenditure. If this product is not
researched and designed to the best of our ability, it will be perceived by consumers as another
sub-par Reebok product.
Benefits Analysis
Qualitative. Our recommendations will benefit Reebok with appealing to an attractive market
segment. The young adult consumer base represents over half of basketball sales in the USA. By
introducing a new product line, Reebok creates the opportunity for their basketball shoe line to
gain entry into this profitable category. Additionally, Reebok can develop a younger generation
for future brand loyalty.
26
Quantitative. This line extension’s success will boost Reebok’s sales and profits, extending to an
increase in their share of market. With the help of our advertising endeavors, we expect to sell
100,000 units in the first year. With our price point of $125, that would be about $12.5 million
in sales. This would cover our costs (~$9 million) and still achieve profit for Reebok. To break
even, 72,000 pairs of shoes must be sold. Additionally, an increase in 100,000 units in sales
(assuming cannibalization is not a huge issue because we are appealing to a new market
segment) will give Reebok about 520,000 units sold, which would increase their share of market
from 3.4% to 4.2%. This is a tiny incremental increase, but as perceptions change, we expect an
increase in all basketball shoe purchases. The effects of this would be seen over several years,
especially if the line extension is continued with even more new products. Offering more
competitive products could boost Reebok’s market share exponentially. If Reebok developed
three additional products that had the potential to sell 100,000 units/year each, they would almost
double their sales, and boost their share of market to 8%. With that increase, Reebok would be
stealing market share from Jordan and Nike, and put themselves in a much more competitive,
profit-generating position in the men’s basketball shoe market.
Expected Consequences and Results
It is expected that brand loyalty will increase exponentially. With market share hovering at
around 3%, it is extremely likely that any increase in advertising will have a positive effect. Our
particular strategy of targeting young adults will resonate among peer groups through word of
mouth advertising, and future generational support will be established if brand loyalty is firmly
established through our promotional efforts. The promotional efforts and events for the new
product will improve perception of the brand as a whole. A possible negative would be if the
27
recommendation does not produce the results we expect. This would be a crucial waste of time
and money and could further detach consumers from the Reebok brand name.
Implementation Timetable
Reebok and Adidas have a large amount of know-how and proprietary knowledge. Using
established research and development procedures, it is estimated that the research and
development process along with test marketing will take approximately 18 months. If all raised
concerns produced my test markets are addressed in a timely manner, it is well within reason to
project an official product launch after the 18th month. (Appendix H)
Procedure for review and evaluation
We understand the time it might take for the line extension to be accepted in the marketplace and
to really take off. In addition, it will be difficult to measure the effect of an increase on
advertising due to uncontrollable factors. During the market testing phase, surveys will be
distributed and focus groups will be held among the consumers within the test market. This will
be done to measure current perceptions and feelings toward the Reebok brand. From there, the
various advertising campaigns will be used on the test market and the line extension will also be
introduced. Surveys and focus groups will again be used both to measure the acceptance of the
line extension as well as the change in perceptions due to the ad campaign. This will be done
periodically following the official launch among the entire market to determine the effects the ad
campaign is having on changing consumer perception of the Reebok brand. This might also be
used to see how the target market is reacting to the line extension versus both competitors as well
as current Reebok basketball shoes. Once the line extension and ad campaigns have been
launched, sales can be compared historically with previous sales figures. This could also be
done with revenue.
28
References
AND1 STORE. (n.d.). AND1 STORE. Retrieved June 20, 2013, from http://www.and1usa.com/
Barrand, D. (2006, Sep 06). Reebok raises its voice. Marketing, , 24-25. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/214952757?accountid=14665
Barney, J. B. (2011). Gaining and sustaining competitive advantage (4. ed., internat. ed.). UpperSaddle River, NJ [u.a.: Pearson.
Basketball | Men's | FILA . (n.d.). FILA Online Store . Retrieved June 20, 2013, fromhttp://www.fila.com/basketball/sport-basketball-mens,en_US,sc.htm
Berthiaume, D. (2006). REEBOK'S SOURCING STRATEGY PLACES ETHICS FIRST. Chain Store Age, , 2-32A,33A. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/222070088?accountid=14665
Chahal, M. (2013, May 29). Consistent Branding: Don't Mess With It. ProQuest. Retrieved July 1, 2013, from http://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/1356054443/Record/13EC83C00BE681CC77C/3?accountid=14665
Cheng, A. (2013, March 26). Basketball sneakers see bigggest sales gain in three years: NPD – Behind the Storefront - MarketWatch. Stock Market Commentary - Economic Articles - Business Articles. Retrieved June 15, 2013, from http://blogs.marketwatch.com/behindthestorefront/2013/03/26/basketball-sneakers-see-bigggest-sales-gain-in-three-years-npd/
Conti, S., & With contributions from, M. K. (2006). ADIDAS MAPS STRATEGY FOR REEBOK. WWD, 191(77), 9. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/231205153?accountid=14665
Converse. (n.d.). Converse. Retrieved June 20, 2013, fromhttp://www.converse.com/#/products/collections/sportAuthentics
Engvall, Nick. (2012, January 9). Interview: Clearing the Air, the Truth about Reebok Basketball’s Future Plans. Complex Sneakers. Retrieved July 1, 2013, from http://www.complex.com/sneakers/2013/01/interview-clearing-the-air-the-truth-about-reebok-basketballs-future-plans
Ernst, J. (2008). REEBOK'S TURNAROUND MAN. Footwear News : FN, 64(3), 16-n/a. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/210425827?accountid=14665
29
Footwear-Basketball: % of Consumer Exp. by Outlet Type. (2013, February 6). Sport Business Research Network. Retrieved July 1, 2013, from http://www.sbrnet.com.echo.louisville.edu/research.asp?subRID=157#fwbsk7
Goalrilla Study Gives New Insight into U.S. Basketball Participation . (2012, March 15). PressRelease Services - News Release Distribution Services - PRWeb. Retrieved June 20, 2013, from http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/3/prweb9287535.htm
Lazich, R. S. (2013). Market Share Reporter. Farmington Hills, MI: Gale Cengage Learning.
Nike Inc, SWOT Analysis. (2013, February 25). marketline.com. Retrieved June 20, 2013, fromweb.ebscohost.com.echo.louisville.edu/ehost/detail?vid=5&sid=ecef08d9-2b68-4142-9bc0-8357db05ca90%40sessionmgr111&hid=123
NIKE, Inc. - Our Portfolio of Brands. (2013). NIKE, Inc. - The official corporate website for Nike and its affiliate brands. Retrieved June 20, 2013, from http://nikeinc.com/pages/our-portfolio-of-brands
Participation in Selected Sports Activities. (n.d.). U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved June 15, 2013, from http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1249.pdf
Quality Basketball Shoes | Foot and Ankle Center of Washington. (2013, March 28). PodiatristSeattle. Foot & Ankle Problems Clinic & Treatment Center Seattle, Washington. Retrieved June 16, 2013, from http://www.footankle.com/blog/tag/quality-basketball-shoes/#axzz2Wn4jLEXc
Reebok. (n.d.) - Official Store for Reebok Shoes, Apparel, CrossFit, Classics, and More. (n.d.).Reebok - Official Store for Reebok Shoes, Apparel, CrossFit, Classics, and More . Retrieved June 20, 2013, from http://shop.reebok.com/us/
Soleland.com Blog - The Differences Between Basketball Shoes For Style Vs. Shoes For Play-soleland. (2012, November 9). soleland.com Authentic Air Jordan ~ Adidas Reebok and Nike Shoes -soleland. Retrieved June 20, 2013, from http://www.soleland.com/blog/the-differences-between-basketball-shoes-for-style-vs.-shoes-for-play/
Supply Chain Structure. (2013, May 6). Adidas-Group.com. Retrieved July 2, 2013, from www.adidas-group.com/en/sustainability/Suppliers/Supply
Thomaselli, R. (2010, July 12). Despite its way with women, underdog Reebok fixates on Nike.AdvertisingAge, 81.27. Retrieved June 20, 2013, from http://search.proquest.com/abicomplete/docview/612781575/13EC45AB55276228A7B/5?accountid=14665#
Urbanowicz, N. (2008). REEBOK BETS ON BECKER. Footwear News : FN, 64(9), 2-n/a. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/210422739?accountid=14665
30
(January 5, 2013) Copyright 2013 Thomson Financial, All Rights Reserved. Retrieved fromhttp://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/
31
Appendix A
Segmentation Scheme
32
33
APPENDIX B
Survey
34
35
36
37
APPENDIX C
10 Randomly Selected Survey Responses
Survey Example #1
38
39
Survey Example #2
40
41
Survey Example #3
42
Survey Example #4
43
44
Survey Example #5
45
46
Survey Example #6
47
48
Survey Example #7
49
50
Survey Example #8
51
52
Survey Example #9
53
54
Survey Example #10
55
56
APPENDIX D
Perceptual Map
57
APPENDIX E
PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE CURVE ANALYSIS
Currently, Reebok’s men’s basketball shoes are in the maturity stage of the Product Life Cycle.
We say this because it is in this stage that sales growth slows down, profits may start to decline,
and the product is widely accepted in the market. Reebok has definitely experienced a slowing
of its sales, which has negatively impacted its profits. Reebok basketball shoes have been in the
market since the first product, the Pump, to the basketball market in 1989 (Bibey, 1). The shoes
have been a hit with NBA players like Yao Ming, Allen Iverson, and Shaquille O’Neal and
gained widespread acceptance in the basketball shoe market over the years. However, because
Reebok has struggled to keep up with the innovative, stylish basketball shoe industry
competition like Nike and Jordan, they have reached a stagnant maturity stage. If no action is
taken and this problem continues to persist, they will enter the decline stage, possibly ending
Reebok men’s basketball shoes life cycle forever.
58
However, if our recommendations are followed, Reebok stands to improve their situation on the
Product Life Cycle curve. Whereas currently, they are heading straight for decline and possibly
harvesting of the men’s basketball shoe product, with the implementation of our product line
extension, Reebok could turn their stagnant maturity slump into a new growth segment, as can be
seen in the image below:
59
APPENDIX F
Supply Chain/Distribution Illustration
http://www.adidas-group.com/en/sustainability/Suppliers/Supply_chain_structure/default.aspx
60
APPENDIX G
Production-Related Expense Chart
(http://www.unido.org/fileadmin/import/userfiles/timminsk/leatherpanel14schmelcosts.pdf, 6).
61
APPENDIX H
Flowchart/Implementation Table
62
Appendix I
TOP LINE REPORT OF MARKETING RESEARCHMethodOver the past month, we conducted a research study for Reebok concerning its men’s basketball
shoe line. Over this period of time, we were able to analyze the data gathered from our primary
survey that would be very insightful in the search to determine the current perceptions, their
causation for these perceptions, and what consumers specifically want and need in a basketball
shoe. Based on the information that we were able to generate in regards to Reebok men’s
basketball shoes, we designed a pilot study that would in return produce recommendations as to
how to approach Reebok’s major problem of product positioning.
We created a market survey that measured respondents’ current perceptions of our brand and
their top competitors, as well as how they compared to other competition. It also quantified
consumers perception of each brand, what attributes they look for in a basketball shoe, and more
(full survey can be found in Appendix B). The questionnaire was completed and released on
June 25, 2013 and distributed through Facebook, e-mail, and word of mouth to friends and
family. With the survey ending on July 1, 2013, 101 completed surveys were received. From
this number, we determined a usable sample size of 82 due to the answers provided on our
qualifier question. This question asked respondents to choose an answer according to why they
purchase basketball shoes. If the respondent chose “I do not purchase basketball shoes”, their
survey was deemed “unusable”. All data collected was based off a convenience sample. Due to
a time and budget constraints, the majority of respondents are associated with the University of
Louisville aged 18 to 24 years old.
Once we received answers to the survey’s questions, our next task was to analyze the data and
make information of it. This portion of the pilot study was time consuming in that we first coded
all of the raw data into usable numbers, then manipulated it with the help of pivot tables in
63
Microsoft Excel and data descriptive testing tools in SPSS software. These data tools enabled us
to present the information in a more proficient way and increase understanding when presenting
survey results. From this point, we were able to confirm our problem diagnosis of poor
perception by consumers and begin to clearly identify areas with the opportunity to improve for
our recommendation.
General Findings
According to the data found in
our primary research, Reebok
has a mean purchase intent
rating of 2.54, just above
Converse at 2.34, and below
Jordan and Nike at 3.06 and
4.21 respectively.
We asked respondents’ to determine their degree of brand loyalty when making a purchase
decision in the basketball shoe category. This
showed that 52.5% of respondents’ were
“somewhat” brand loyal, while 26.3% were “not
at all” brand loyal and only 21.3% categorized
themselves as “extremely” brand loyal. This is
a positive finding because that presents the
opportunity for the competitors other than the
market leaders to grab consumers’ attention and persuade them to purchase.
21.3%
52.5%
26.3%
How loyal are you to one brand when purchasing basketball
shoes?Extremely - I always purchase the same brand!Somewhat - I sometimes purchase the same brand, but it's not a pri-ority.Not At All - I purchase on a case by case basis, brand is not a considera-tion.
64
From survey ratings of basketball shoe attributes, we determined the benefits sought by these
respondents’. About 58% of the respondents fell into our target market age group for the new
product line extension of 18 to 24 and
59% were male. From the survey, we
found the most important benefits sought
were comfort, price, and then style.
The next question addressed price
sensitivity of our consumers. The survey
helped us determine that nearly 50% of
respondents fall into the $75 to $149 price
range when purchasing basketball shoes.
T his helped us determine the price point of
our new product line extension to be
approximately $120, pending exact cost
figures.
We also found that approximately 75% of respondents’ were either “not at all” or “not very”
influenced in their purchase decision by athlete endorsers. This shows another positive outcome
56%32%
12%
Benefits Sought
ComfortPriceStyle
6.3%
35.4%49.4%
8.9%
What is your price range when purchasing basketball shoes?
Under $50$50-$74$75-$149$150 and Up
65
for Reebok because of their lack of current celebrity endorsement deals.
3.8%
39.2%
36.7%
20.3%
How influential is professional athlete endorsement over what products you
buy?
1 - Extremely influential. I only buy products endorsed by athletes.2 - Somewhat influential. I see these products as higher quality, but do not always purchase them.3 - Not very influential. I am aware of athlete endorsements, but do not consider them when making pur-chases.4 - Not at all influential. I have no clue what professional athletes wear or endorse.
Additionally age was looked at as a factor that might affect purchase of basketball shoes. The
survey divided ages into several ranges. From the graph, the majority of respondents were 18-24
(58.2%) and the next biggest category was 25 to 34 with 21.5%. This showed that the
information gathered from the rest of the survey is usable as the majority age range is near to the
age of both the typical purchaser of basketball shoes as well as the market we recommend
Reebok target.
66
Using SPSS we found whether there were significant differences in the perception of Reebok
compared to top competitors in many different product attributes. First we ran a paired samples
t-test between the mean attributes people associate with Nike and the attributes associated with
Reebok.
From the information, we came up with a null hypothesis and an alternative hypothesis. The null
hypothesis is that there is no significant difference between x-attribute between Nike and
Reebok. The alternative is there is a significant difference between x-attribute between Nike and
Reebok. To determine this, we looked at the sig (2-tailed) values to find the confidence level.
Using this, we determined that there is nearly a 100% confidence that there is a significant
difference in the style, comfort, support, durability, and improves performance. There is no
significant difference between price. We ran the same test to compare Reebok to Jordan and
Converse as well.
67
When comparing Jordan versus Reebok, we found there to be a significant difference (nearly
100% confidence) in style, price, and improves performance. There is no significant difference
in comfort, durability, and support. For Converse versus Reebok, it was determined that there is
a significant difference (nearly 100% confidence) in style, comfort, and support. There is no
significant difference in durability, price, and improves performance. A second series of paired
samples t-tests were run to determine if there is a significant difference in consumers likelihood
68
to purchase between Reebok and the three competitors we identified.
The null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference between Reebok and x-competitor in
the likelihood to purchase. The alternative hypothesis is that there is a significant difference
between Reebok and x-competitor. By looking at the sig (2-tailed) values, we could appropriate
a confidence level for the hypotheses. It was determined that there is a significant difference
(nearly 100% confidence) between Nike and Reebok in consumer likelihood to purchase. There
is also a significant difference (about 98% confidence) in consumer likelihood to purchase
between Jordan and Reebok. Finally, there is no significant difference (just about 88%
confidence) between Converse and Reebok in likelihood to purchase.
Implications
After looking through the survey data and analyzing in using SPSS, conclusions can be drawn
and implications can be formed. One conclusion drawn is that perceptions of the attributes that
the Reebok brand has is different than perceptions of Nike. So much so that 4 of the 5 attributes
were significantly different. This is a concern area as Nike is both Reebok’s main competitor
and the dominant figure in the market. The implication is that Reebok needs to alter perceptions
of its brand. They are not perceived to be as stylish, as comfortable, or as durable. This points
69
so a product positioning problem as well as issues of perception. From the benefits sought
analysis, style, comfort, and price were determined to be the most important factors respondents
to the survey consider when they purchase a pair of basketball shoes. This shows that the
differences between people’s perceptions of Nike and Reebok in the areas of style, comfort, and
price are actually quite important. Thus, our recommendation to create a line extension product
is justified in that the new product will be of better style, comfort, and will be priced to
communicate a higher sense of quality. Due to the majority of the respondents being close to the
age range of the target market, the survey information is relevant and corresponds to beliefs and
perceptions that can be used towards our recommendation. Based on our price range analysis,
the optimum price range respondents indicated was $74-$149. Thus, we set our price point at
$125, which is within this price range. This is high enough to communicate a higher quality
Reebok product line, but also low enough to not drive away the Reebok brand loyal or the price
sensitive. Also from survey data, it was discovered that the majority of respondents feel that
professional athlete endorsements have some effect on purchase decisions, but it is not as
important as say style or price. The implication of this is towards promotions. The endorser
obviously isn’t as important as we originally thought and so our decision to instead focus on a
line extension rather than just increase advertising is more or less justifiable. Lastly, our survey
asked respondents about brand loyalty. We found the majority of respondents to be somewhat
brand loyal, but for the most part buying shoes on a case by case basis. This gives our
recommendation an advantage as if we can attract members of the target market with a style,
comfort level, and price that appeals to them, we can draw them in as our consumer.
70
Appendix J
Proposal for Project – MySpace
71
72
73
74
75
Appendix K
Proposal – Reebok
76
77
78
79
80
81
Appendix L
Industry Analysis
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91