Менеджеры и менеджмент (Executives and Management). Коломейцева Е.М - 53 стр.

UptoLike

ВУЗ: 

ТГТУ | Тамбов

Составители: 

Рубрика: 

227
ion victims par excellence, be it in choosing their luggage (Louis Vuitton was much favoured) or in buying their booze,
where a 20-year-old version of a good malt whisky could fetch the equivalent of $60 or more. Over the past year or two,
that enthusiasm to spend big money on a classy label has waned markedly.
But we may be witnessing the death of the brand.
First, every story that now appears about the troubles being experienced by makers of luxury goods triggers wise
nods and told-you-so frowns.
Two days ago, LVMH in France, which owns Moet et Chandon champagne, Louis Vuitton and the Christian Lacroix
fashion house, reported lower earnings for the first half of 1993 than it did a year ago. As David Jarvis, in charge of the
European operations of drinks company Hiram Walker, puts it: "A few years ago, it might have been considered smart to
wear a shirt with a designer's logo embroidered on the pocket; frankly, it now seems a bit naff."
This conclusion fits with one's instincts. In the straitened nineties, with nearly 3 million out of work and 425,000 people
officially classed as homeless in England alone, conspicuous consumption now seems vulgar rather than chic.
But just because flashy, up-market brands have lost some of their appeal,
it does not follow that all brands have done so. Cadbury's Dairy Milk is just as
much a brand as Cartier watches. Tastes may have shifted downmarket, but that
does not mean that they have shifted from flash-brand to no brand.
The second strand of the brand argument is tied intimately with the effects of
recession. No one yet knows to what extent the apparent lack of some brands' appeal is
merely a temporary phenomenon. It may well be that, deep down, we would still love to
own a' Louis Vuitton suitcase rather than one from Woolworth's but while we are out of
work or fearing that our job is at risk, we are not prepared to express that preference by
actually spending the cash.
Third, the example of Marlboro is an extreme one. The difference in price between premium brand cigarettes and
budget rivals in the US had become huge during the 1980s: a packet of Marlboro or Camel might cost 80 per cent more
than a budget variety. Few brands in any area of consumer goods could hope to maintain so great a premium indefi-
nitely.
And fourth, in looking at the brands argument globally, it is too easy to become misled by what is happening in an
individual market. In the UK as a whole, about one third of groceries are under super-markets' own labels. In the USA
the proportion is only 20 per cent. But it does seem that the gradual shift from manufacturer-branded to retailer-branded
goods is worldwide.
As David Jarvis of Hiram Walker says: "We believe that brands will retain their halo, but people are less inclined
to pay for something just because it's a fashion accessory. They need to be re-assured that the product is intrinsically
better."
Reports of the death of the brand have been exaggerated. Reports of the
death of the de luxe brand may be premature, but sound much more plausible.
Fill each gap with one word.
1. Consumers often prefer to buy … unbranded products rather than more … branded goods. The reason for this
seems to be the worldwide … in major economies.
2. In Japan consumers are less likely to buy goods with a fashionable … .
3. In the present economic climate it seems … to spend money on expensive designer products.
4. … brands are less popular, but … brands are still important.
5. Maybe, when the recession is over, designer brands will regain their … .
6. In the 80s, famous-brand cigarettes cost … per cent more than cheap brands. This difference is no longer so …
.
7. In the USA proportionally … own-label brands are sold than in Britain.
8. The consumer won't buy branded goods unless they are … .
T a s k 8. Fill the gaps in these sentences with a suitable phrase from the list below:
share with, specialize in, submit to, subscribe to, superior to, take into consideration, take over from, valid for, waste on,
withdraw from
1. Does anyone in the department subscribe to The Economist?
2. There's no point in ... money ... radio commercials.
3. One of the factors that we should ... is the size of the market.
4. You should ... a copy of the report ... head office.
5. I think we should try to ... our contract.
6. We believe that our product is ... theirs.
7. Can I ... some of this work ... you?
8. Their agency ... public relations.

Страницы