Brand Failures
Brand Failures Brand Failures
244 Brand failures Lessons from Dell’s Web PC It’s not about the product, it’s about the brand. The Web PC was not a bad product, as the plethora of positive reviews testifies. However, it did not fit well with the Dell brand. A low-cost product needs to be perceived as such. Although the Web PC was good value, because the price covered a complete package, it appeared too expensive. Imitating the competition was a mistake. When computer manufacturers saw the success of the iMac, they inevitably wanted a bite of the apple. This proved to be a misguided strategy for Dell, a company normally associated with ‘beige and boxy’ computers.
Internet and new technology failures 245 86 Intel’s Pentium chip Problem What problem In 1997, a professor of mathematics found a glitch in Intel’s Pentium chip. He discovered that the mathematical functions for the chip’s complicated formula were not consistently accurate. The professor decided to send an article about his findings to a small academic newsgroup. Word spread through the university community and the editor of a trade title caught hold of the story. The general press then reported the professor’s findings and sought Intel’s response. Intel denied any major problem, declaring it would only affect a ‘tiny percentage’ of customers. They failed to take responsibility or replace the affected chips. The issue grew online, as it became a key topic in an increasing number of online discussion groups, which kept on feeding the offline media. Intel’s share value dropped by over 20 points. It was only when IBM’s declaration that it would not use Intel chips in its computers made the front page of the New York Times that Intel went back on its previous position and agreed to replace the chips. Even today, evidence can be found of how Intel’s poor response to online criticism has affected its reputation on the Net. The ‘Intel Secrets’ site at www.x86.org, which was set up at the time of the media’s damning coverage of Intel’s unhealthy chip, still emphasizes the faults to be found in various Intel products.
- Page 201 and 202: People failures 193 was out, Planet
- Page 203 and 204: People failures 195 is wrong to lea
- Page 205 and 206: People failures 197 had lost the su
- Page 207: People failures 199 tortilla brand
- Page 211 and 212: Brands, like people, have a fear of
- Page 213 and 214: Rebranding failures 205 73 Consigni
- Page 215 and 216: Rebranding failures 207 of the name
- Page 217 and 218: Rebranding failures 209 74 Tommy Hi
- Page 219 and 220: Rebranding failures 211 style that
- Page 221 and 222: Rebranding failures 213 in the Repu
- Page 223 and 224: Rebranding failures 215 former secr
- Page 225 and 226: Rebranding failures 217 Lessons fro
- Page 227 and 228: Rebranding failures 219 neighbours
- Page 229 and 230: 79 British Airways When British Air
- Page 231: CHAPTER 9 Internet and new technolo
- Page 234 and 235: 226 Brand failures now believe bran
- Page 237 and 238: 81 Pets.com In the mid-1990s, when
- Page 239 and 240: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 241 and 242: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 243 and 244: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 245 and 246: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 247 and 248: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 249 and 250: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 251: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 255 and 256: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 257 and 258: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 259 and 260: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 261 and 262: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 263: Internet and new technology failure
- Page 267: All brands will eventually fail. Th
- Page 270 and 271: 262 Brand failures The $600-million
- Page 272 and 273: 264 Brand failures Lessons from Old
- Page 274 and 275: 266 Brand failures interview. ‘An
- Page 276 and 277: 268 Brand failures 91 Ovaltine When
- Page 278 and 279: 270 Brand failures 92 Kodak Failing
- Page 280 and 281: 272 Brand failures tive strategy if
- Page 282 and 283: 274 Brand failures 93 Polaroid Live
- Page 284 and 285: 276 Brand failures launch of its SX
- Page 286 and 287: 278 Brand failures ‘was that they
- Page 288 and 289: 280 Brand failures 94 Rover A dog o
- Page 290 and 291: 282 Brand failures 95 Moulinex Goin
- Page 292 and 293: 284 Brand failures 96 Nova magazine
- Page 294 and 295: 286 Brand failures The cycle of lau
- Page 296 and 297: 288 Brand failures As with most bra
- Page 298 and 299: 290 Brand failures For the Levi’s
- Page 300 and 301: 292 Brand failures to the stores in
Internet and new technology failures 245<br />
86 Intel’s Pentium chip<br />
Problem What problem<br />
In 1997, a professor of mathematics found a glitch in Intel’s Pentium chip.<br />
He discovered that the mathematical functions for the chip’s complicated<br />
formula were not consistently accurate. The professor decided to send an<br />
article about his findings to a small academic newsgroup. Word spread<br />
through the university community and the editor of a trade title caught hold<br />
of the story. The general press then reported the professor’s findings and<br />
sought Intel’s response. Intel denied any major problem, declaring it would<br />
only affect a ‘tiny percentage’ of customers. They failed to take responsibility<br />
or replace the affected chips.<br />
The issue grew online, as it became a key topic in an increasing number of<br />
online discussion groups, which kept on feeding the offline media. Intel’s<br />
share value dropped by over 20 points. It was only when IBM’s declaration<br />
that it would not use Intel chips in its computers made the front page of the<br />
New York Times that Intel went back on its previous position and agreed to<br />
replace the chips. Even today, evidence can be found of how Intel’s poor<br />
response to online criticism has affected its reputation on the Net. The ‘Intel<br />
Secrets’ site at www.x86.org, which was set up at the time of the media’s<br />
damning coverage of Intel’s unhealthy chip, still emphasizes the faults to be<br />
found in various Intel products.