[GTALUG] brands matter; Lenovo's brands

[Evan Leibovitch]

Disclaimer: I have an MBA in marketing. I studied this stuff at length.

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 12:01 PM D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk <
talk at gtalug.org> wrote:


> Brands matter.


More to the point: SOME brands matter. And they matter to varying degrees.

Search for anything on Aliexpress and you'll find hundreds of brands, most
of which will be totally irrelevant to your choice.
A memorable brand requires LOTS of investment. And different companies
treat their brands with diverse strategy;
Compare Nestlé (which has its name on top of every product in its family)
with Mondeléz (whose ownership of most of its brands is buried in the small
print).

They are meant to telegraph certain things to the customer.  Of course the
> brand's meaning can be changed: it isn't a contract.
>

Sometimes that change is unintentional. 🙂

The perception of a brand in the potential customer base takes a long time to
> develop.  It is cultivated by marketing, but not just marketing.


Companies will go to great lengths to define their various brands; what
they are supposed to mean, who is their target audience, etc. When was the
last time a beer or car ad actually talked about the product?
The next step is actually executing that strategy based on quality, price,
distribution (who can sell it) and promotion.

Think of how Loblaws, over the last 40 years, has elevated the house
brand "President's
> Choice" to actually have a premium connotation.
>

More successfully, it has established its other house brand, the
black-and-yellow "no name", as its lower-cost option (sometimes with the
same contents as President's Choice 🙂).
It's even segmented its many store brands (No Frills, Loblaws, Zehrs,
Fortinos, Superstore) by audience and local economy.

In the computer field, IBM's and then Lenovo's Think* brands have commanded
> tremendous loyalty, only occasionally misplaced.


Brands are assets with value that can be bought and sold. IBM, which
established the "Think{}" brand, sold it along with its whole PC business
to Lenovo in 2005. Lenovo simply acquired that which IBM had built up over
decades.

A large part of that is that the Think* devices have mostly lived up to
> their implicit promise.
>

Some have.

Traditionally models beginning with T were IBM's powerhouse Thinkpads, X
were the ultralights, i were multimedia, and all were made in Japan. Then
Lenovo started coming out with cheaper lines to be able to compete with
low-end units while maintaining the brand identity, and manufactured in
Indian Mexico and China. Before the Lenovo purchase the only lower-cost
models were in the R line.

Lenovo's Think* brands are mostly solid conservative business machines.


That's the brand IBM built, and that Lenovo maintained for some models. For
others, they "diluted the brand", something that happens far too often. But
hey, their marketing worked on you.

Most Think* systems that support Windows also support Linux.  (There are Think*
> things that don't: non-computers and Android or ChromeOS computers.)  The
> markups are high and the discounts can be large.


IIRC IBM (and later Lenovo) have had generally two separate lines, for
business and consumer models. The former were more expensive (but generally
higher build quality and specs) and the latter aggressively priced to
compete with HP, Dell and others.

  + part of that is that thin and light is something a majority of
> customers want but it has to come at the cost of serviceability. ThinkPads
> were known to be rugged as tanks but tanks are heavy
>

Some. The X series I had was an ultralight.

  + part of that is users don't like change.


That's not universal, especially in the field of tech where things can
change so fast (like whether a laptop needs a built-in CD/DVD player).
Sometimes the users demand change, and conservative approaches don't
survive.


>   + some features (wired ethernet port, serial port, VGA port) are really
> niche now but those who want them really want them
>

I'm quite certain that Lenovo does market research to tell them what
features are needed in new models, and sales figures to tell them what
features are no longer desirable.

- the ThinkBook line really seems to be exploiting the brand without
> matching the values
>

Different brand. Different audience. Different expectations. There are
indirect ties (the use of Think, the black color and styling), but it's not
a Thinkpad, it's something else.


> - ThinkPad displays are often mediocre.  Not bright enough (nits), not
> great colour gamut.  Inexcusable in an expensive notebook.
>

"Thinkpad" now includes a massive diversity of quality, cost, features,
tradeoffs and target audience. Not sure that such a sweeping statement can
be useful anymore.

- the ThinkPad Android Tablet was a disaster that I got fooled by.
>

There have been in the past x86-based Thinkpad tablets that have been well
regarded. The current Yoga line works nicely for some.

Lenovo Android devices are mostly produced for the Chinese domestic
audience and only unoficially get sold internationally. By and large Lenovo
uses its Motorola brand for internationally-sold Android devices.
Apparently this year they're looking to come out with a "Thinkphone" to
capitalize on the brand. I'll withhold judgment until I see the reviews.

Lenovo's Legend brand, as I understand it, is aimed at gamers.  It is intended
> to compete on price and performance.  It isn't aimed at you or me.  I've
> never bought one.
>

Over the years a LOT of Thinkpad models have not been aimed at you or me.

I'm not sure I'm getting the point here.

Apple has a great brand too.  Sometimes it seems like a cult.
>

Apple knows its audience well and gives that audience what it wants
(notwithstanding that every brand has its clunker from time to time).

Dell branding confuses me.  Ditto Acer.
>

You're being way too kind to Lenovo. They're all producing a wide range of
models for all needs from student to developer to gamer to frequent flyer
to commodities broker. Most have high-end models, low-end models, etc.
Lenovo may be better at naming its models but they're all competing in a
very tight market with mostly the same component parts. I find that going
online to Lenovo, Dell and HP enables you to indicate what you need and
they point you to relevant offerings. In my own experience I can't get
caught up in sub-brands and model numbers. I'll look at specs and I'll read
reviews. Personally I buy my PCs in a store, where non-spec issues like
balance, build quality, screen readability and keyboard feel can be tried
out. FWIW my desktops have all been custom-assembled and my laptops have
been Asus and Acer. They have served me well so I will look at them first
if I need something new, but there is not much to separate the brands and
loyalty is pointless unless you're a high-volume buyer.

Don't get caught up in branding. These days PCs are nearly a commodity and
there's very little to separate the makers except for after-sale issues
such as warranty and ease of repair. The only distinctive brand here is
Apple and you either buy into their world or you don't.

- Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20230916/4d9cc845/attachment.html>