No smoking.....anywhere!

Many cities and states have smoking rules for public places. Bars, parks and restaurants are among the most commonly regulated establishments. However, according to a recent article, the city of San Rafael has rolled out a more aggressive ban on smoking. In an effort to cut down on second hand smoke, city officials have enacted the nation's strictest smoking ban prohibiting residents from smoking cigarettes in their own homes.

The ordinance applies only to multiple family housing units – ones that share a wall including apartments, duplexes and condos. While many would find this to be beneficial to the community, others may feel as though their freedom has taken a shot. Some argue that the ban is too harsh, forcing people to quit cold turkey or leave their home. Is a smoking ban in private residences justified? Does this ban on smoking infringe on the freedom of residents in San Rafael? Comment with your thoughts on the issue.

Are retailers the new Big Brother?

These days we rely heavily on our smartphone to get around. It is so easy to ask Siri where the nearest In-N-Out is and how to get there….but is this convenience at the cost of our privacy?

Google has started to expand its maps to include the inside of museums, airports and large stores in a number of countries. According to a recent article, stores have started to experiment with harnessing indoor positioning technology in order to track a customer’s movements within the store. The article says that some systems use video cameras, sound waves and magnetic fields. However, the most widely used technique is to intercept Wi-Fi signals emitted by shoppers’ smartphones, allowing their position within the store to be calculated. Stores also collect a unique identifier that allows them to build up behavioral information on return visitors. Ultimately, this technology will enable stores to push behavioral ads to shoppers’ smartphones.

Of course our movements as consumers are tracked online but indoor positioning is a new frontier of targeted advertising.  Is this an invasion of consumer privacy? Should stores be allowed to track and record movements of customers? How about using this data to push targeted ads? Could this new technology have an effect on the sales and marketing of brick and mortar stores? Comment with your opinion.

Online Reviews - True or False?

In today’s digital world, it is common for companies to be represented online. Social media and the like open the forum to consumers to start a conversation about businesses and products. Most of the time these discussion forums act as a consumer’s first impression on a company they may not be familiar with….but how much of this information is true?

A recent article discusses the increasing trend of companies writing or buying fake reviews to improve their online presence. Many popular sites such as Yelp have started policing such activities with algorithms aimed at targeting and removing fake reviews. As marketers we know how much misrepresentation can damage a product’s reputation…so why do it? Why is it attractive to companies to publish fake reviews? What are the risks companies take when publishing fake reviews? What are the potential impacts on the customer? Should the FTC ramp up regulation on online forums? Comment with your opinion.

Up in Smoke

New York’s city council voted this week to raise the legal age to buy tobacco products to 21. The reason for the change - NY Health Commissioner Thomas Farley says 80 percent of the city’s adult smokers start before age 21. Additionally, New York has set the minimum price of a pack of cigarettes at $10.50 and upped the fines for illegal and untaxed sales.  Mayor Michael Bloomberg argues that these measures will effectively decrease the use of cigarettes among 18-20 year olds.

We all know smoking causes cancer yet cigarettes are still a part of pop culture and are marketed to young people. Tobacco companies, although heavily regulated, look to appeal to a young, hip generation. Will these changes help to deter young people from smoking? What implications could this potentially cause for tobacco business? Do you think these new restrictions are fair for tobacco businesses? Will this new policy have an effect on tobacco advertising’s target market? Comment with your view on this ethical issue.

Will eating McDonald's make me able to dunk like LeBron James?

Athletes, being the epitome of health and fitness, create mixed messages when it comes to endorsing junk food. An article about athlete endorsements asks if athletes really eat the junk food they endorse. LeBron James and Serena Williams testify that they stick to a strict diet of healthy foods. They make no mention of eating the junk food they endorse. If they don’t eat it, why do they endorse it?

(http://www.entmoney.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Lebron_James_McDonalds_All_American.gif) 

And this is not a new phenomenon. Athletes like Babe Ruth endorsed tobacco products back in the day….except at that time they probably used the products too....but does that make it right? Do you think there is a difference between athletes and other celebrities endorsing junk food? Should athletes endorse foods known to be bad for you especially when they don’t use the product themselves? What impact does this have on consumers? Are consumers being tricked? Weigh in on this issue in the comments.

Return Whatever, Whenever?

Should a customer be able to return any item that he or she has purchased? And should this "right" be a "forever" right?  This is a question posed in an article about LL Bean. The store famously allows returns from customers at any point....for any reason. In their words, they have " an astonishingly lenient return policy."

Take a moment and read the linked article and then give your input as to the impact (on the business) of this type of policy. Does it benefit the company more than it harms the company? Is it only appropriate for certain types of companies (consumer packaged goods? automobile companies? clothing companies? grocery stores?)? What do you see as the upside for the company that extends this benefit to customers? What are potential downsides? How do you weigh them against each other?

If 300 is Good, 1000 Must be Better. Right?

We discussed this in the first week of class....thread count on sheets. If you have bought sheets lately (or, honestly, at any point in your life) you probably have come across a characteristic of sheets that is known as "thread count." It refers to the number of threads per square inch of fabric. And higher is better....supposedly. Traditionally speaking, higher thread counts meant a more luxurious feel to the sheets.

According to a new study by Consumer Reports, there is not necessarily a link between high thread counts and more luxurious feel.

"Thread count is the number of vertical and horizontal threads per square inch. Not long ago, sheets typically had thread counts of 120 with 60 horizontal and 60 vertical threads. In the 1960’s, a sheet with a 180 thread count was considered a luxury.  “Now you see 1,000 thread count sheets but you just can’t get that many threads on a loom,” says Pat Slaven, a textile expert at Consumer Reports.

To get that higher number, manufacturers use thinner strands of fabric twisted together as if they were one. Then they double, triple or even quadruple the thread count to make the number more attractive to the consumer. “It ups the count but doesn’t give you a better sheet,” says Slaven. “The sweet spot is 400.”"

The problem is that consumers are generally willing to pay more for higher thread counts...believing that these will be softer, more luxurious and more durable. And, if they were all of those things...perhaps they would be worth more money. But they aren't.

Also at issue is going by how sheets "feel" in the store. If you zip open the package of sheets and feel the sheets and they are soft, almost slippery to the touch....don't be fooled. Manufacturers apply "hand enhancers, silicone softeners" that wash out the first time that you do laundry.

Thoughts?