Microsoft & Sears; Apple and Samsung

This week's post is some marketing-related thoughts that passed through my mind recently. Hope there are some lessons here you can apply to your small business.

Microsoft and Sears

I have written about both of these organizations in the past, and I saw a line in Forbes that did a great job of crystallizing their issues:

“A former Microsoft senior marketing manager concludes: “I see Microsoft as technology’s answer to Sears. In the 40s, 50s, and 60s, Sears had it nailed. It was top-notch, but now it’s just a barren wasteland. And that’s Microsoft. The company just isn’t cool anymore.””

How True, How True!

In fact, Microsoft isn't just not cool, it has become downright boring. The recent technological advances from Microsoft have simply been improvements to their products to match the competition. In fact, (and this gets a little geeky) Internet Explorer 8 still doesn't come close to passing the Acid Test 3, even though the standards have been around since 2007.

In fairness, there are many successful yet boring companies. Utility companies, for example. However, all boring companies have one thing in common: people are unwilling to pay them a premium for their products, and both their prices and margins suffer.

Microsoft now has extensive competition in each of its product lines. Many of those competitors offer equal or better products than GatesCo (BalmerCo?), and even the OpenSource products (as is FREE) have become very good. One prime indicator of all this boring-ness is the stock price. It now sits at exactly the same price is was 5 years ago.

It may be comforting to think of your business operations as Predictable and Dependable, but if the buying public has translated those terms into Boring, you are in trouble. Time to shake things up!

Apple vs Samsung Court Case

At the other end of the spectrum is the always non-boring Apple. They won a huge patent infringement case against Samsung last Friday, and Wired, CNET, and the other tech sites are alive with chatter as to what this really means for the cell phone industry and, specifically, Google/Android/Motorola Mobility.

I won't comment on the technical or legal implications here. Just some marketing thoughts:

• They say imitation is the highest form of flattery. Guess Apple just didn't feel the love.
  
• The power you gain from offering something unique, something different is Huge. If you can patent that uniqueness, it become Hugely Huge.
  
• We can't know what Steve Jobs would think about the new iPad Mini, but I am betting he's smiling about this ruling. Litigation had become a major thorn in this side over the last few years.

Even though Samsung lost the case, they have made boatloads of money selling phones with all of those Apple-like features that the public wants. They charged less for their phones, offered hardware choices that Apple didn't, and made a ton of money as a consequence. Maybe they will think of this $1 billion judgment as just the cost of doing business in the smartphone space.

Most small businesses aren't into manufacturing and, therefore, don't use product design as differentiation. This usually comes in the form of services.

The Good News: Patents can't be used to limit your ability to out-service your competition.

The Bad News: If you can't find a way to stand out with your service, you're probably in trouble.