• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Samsung spends $14 billion in marketing this year

Status
Not open for further replies.
Damn, what if Microsoft paid that much for the Xbox brand?

Source: http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/11/28/samsung-marketing-idINDEE9AQ0EC20131128

Samsung's marketing splurge doesn't always bring bang-for-buck

(Reuters) - Samsung Electronics Co(005930.KS) is expected to spend around $14 billion - more than Iceland's GDP - on advertising and marketing this year, but it doesn't always get value for money.

The outlay buys the South Korean technology giant publicity in TV and cinema ads, on billboards, and at sports and arts events from the Sydney Opera House to New York's Radio City Music Hall. Google Inc (GOOG.O) spent less on buying Motorola's handset business.

And Samsung, which has a market value of $227 billion, has made no secret of keeping up its aggressive marketing and promotion splurge as it seeks to make its brand as aspirational as Apple Inc's (AAPL.O). But the money it's spending doesn't always bring the desired result.

Last month, a Samsung-sponsored short-film contest finale at the Sydney Opera House received poor reviews for blatant product placement in a series of 'behind the scenes' videos. In Britain, viewers panned a product placement deal with ITV's popular X-Factor talent show. "Is this a singing competition or an extended Samsung advert?" asked Twitter user Ryan Browne.

Earlier this year, Samsung's New York launch of its latest top-of-the-range Galaxy smartphone came under fire for being sexist, portraying giggling women chatting about jewelery and nail polish while the men discussed the new phone, and the company's new fridge and washing machine launch in South Africa drew similar complaints as it featured swim-suit dancers.

"Samsung's marketing is too much focused on projecting an image they aspire to: being innovative and ahead of the pack," said Oh Jung-suk, associate professor at the business school of Seoul National University. "They are failing to efficiently bridge the gap between the aspiration and how consumers actually respond to the campaign. It's got to be more aligned."

Samsung spends a bigger chunk of its annual revenue on advertising and promotion than any other of the world's top-20 companies by sales - 5.4 percent, according to Thomson Reuters data. Apple spends just 0.6 percent, and General Motors (GM.N) 3.5 percent.

"When your brand doesn't have a clear identity, as is the case with Samsung, to keep spending is probably the best strategy," said Moon Ji-hun, head of brand consultant Interbrand's Korean operation. "But maintaining marketing spend at that level in the longer term wouldn't bring much more benefit. No one can beat Samsung in terms of (ad) presence, and I doubt whether keeping investing at this level is effective."

In a statement to Reuters, Samsung said it will "continue to leverage our brand power to maintain growth momentum, while focusing on optimizing the efficiency of our marketing activities," reiterating recent comments by its co-CEO.

"Our product innovation and marketing strategy have made Samsung the world's most preferred smartphone brand," J.K. Shin, who also heads the group's mobile business, told investors recently. "Now we'll move from the most preferred brand to become one of the world's leading aspirational brands."

INNOVATING, NOT FOLLOWING

Samsung's 'Next Big Thing,' and 'It's Time to Change' marketing campaigns stress that its products are cutting-edge, and even trumpet its technology 'world firsts' before they're ready for prime time, such as curved smartphones, available only in South Korea, and curved TVs that cost nearly $10,000.

For a company long seen as a follower, this is now a big sell on it being an innovator.

But, while Samsung has become the world's biggest advertiser, spending $4.3 billion on ads alone last year, its global brand value of $39.6 billion is less than half that of Apple, which spent only $1 billion on advertising, according to Interbrand and ad researcher Ad Age.

To be sure, Samsung has a more diverse range of mobile products, which along with its chips and household appliance businesses need more marketing across different target audiences. But the heavy marketing spend suggests a need to convince consumers that it belongs at the top. Apple can afford to spend less as it already has that brand recognition, and cachet.

"The stronger, more differentiated the product, the less it needs to be propped up by advertising," said Horace Dediu, founder of independent research firm Asymco and a former Nokia business development manager, referring to Apple's ad spend.

Defending its marketing budget, Samsung can point to its lead in the global smartphone market - it sells one in every three smartphones and has more than double Apple's market share. The Korean group's savvy adverts mocking Apple devotees, and heavy investment in distribution channels have strengthened its Galaxy mobile brand.

"The Galaxy brand has established itself, and the Samsung brand is now much stronger than Android or any of the other OEM brands, except Apple," said Benedict Evans, an independent technology and media consultant in London. "The underlying problem is that Samsung has established itself as a dependable quality brand, not a differentiated or premium quality product, so it does best where it's not competing directly with Apple."

Samsung works with a number of advertising agencies, including Publicis Groupe (PUBP.PA), Interpublic Group (IPG.N), and MDC Partners (MDZa.TO) (MDCA.O).

IN LOW GEAR

Samsung's latest marketing splash has been on its Galaxy Gear smartwatch, which has been almost universally panned by reviewers. The device has been aggressively marketed through adverts and collaboration with fashion shows - yet only 800,000 Gears have been shipped since its launch two months ago. Compare that to the more than 5 million Note 3 smartphones that have been shipped since its late-September launch, and it suggests fewer than a fifth of the Note buyers are also buying the accessory device.

Undeterred, Samsung has vowed more Gear promotions for the crucial year-end holiday season as it seeks to lead the wearable computer market and prove its innovation credentials.

"Probably Samsung knows better than anyone that Gear will not become a mainstream product. Still, they are trying to convey the message that 'we are first with such technology,' which they hope will help build their brand as an advanced technology firm," said Interbrand's Moon.

A deep-pocketed Samsung - it earned operating profit of $9.6 billion in the third quarter alone - is still pushing the envelope to win over consumers.

This month, the big-spending official sponsor of the past eight Winter and Summer Olympics launched a fantasy-inspired soccer marketing campaign ahead of the mid-2014 World Cup in Brazil - selecting 11 of the world's top players, including Argentine striker Lionel Messi, for a virtual match to save Earth from aliens - with the help of Galaxy devices.
 

Ninja Dom

Member
In the UK we see Samsung adverts everywhere.

And the product placement with the X Factor show is pretty ridiculous.

Weekend television will have copious Samsung adverts. Televisions, fridges, cameras and their Galaxy range of phones & tablets. My family who see all of these Samsung adverts for these different products just see Samsung as a Jack of all Trades and a Master of None.
 

Fun Factor

Formerly FTWer
They pretty much have to, if they want to overtake Apple.
Apple has a loyal & maybe blind following based off years & years of heavy, almost relentless advertising.
That's how they got where they are now.
 

LeleSocho

Banned
That's why they have the most popular android phones while being perfectly on par or sometimes worse than the competition.
They spend like 2-3 times more than Apple in ads to remain competitive against them.
 

Ninja Dom

Member
They pretty much have to, if they want to overtake Apple.
Apple has a loyal & maybe blind following based off years & years of heavy, almost relentless advertising.
That's how they got where they are now.

Apple are only competing in the tablet and high end smartphone area. Samsung still hit you massively with their camera's, fridges and televisions.
 

GraveRobberX

Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
half of it to LeBron

Yet with all that money, motherfucker still going bald with that receding hair line

I don't think they make a sweat band that wide Lebron, next thing you know skull-caps will be the rage in the NBA

Iverson up in this bitch redux!
 

Bitmap Frogs

Mr. Community
They pretty much have to, if they want to overtake Apple.
Apple has a loyal & maybe blind following based off years & years of heavy, almost relentless advertising.
That's how they got where they are now.

Obviously because everyone who uses Samsung products does it because they are making rational choices and everyone who uses Apple products is an indoctrinated sheep.

But in the meanwhile, please keep parroting Samsung's marketing lines, will you?
 
I hate this about modern products, too much of the money you pay for them goes into marketing rather than worker wages, materials, R&D and QA

I don't like buying things anymore , makes me feel dirty every time.
 

diffusionx

Gold Member
They pretty much have to, if they want to overtake Apple.
Apple has a loyal & maybe blind following based off years & years of heavy, almost relentless advertising.
That's how they got where they are now.

This type of post is hilarious. So what is Samsung's "following" now that they are spending way more than Apple ever would or even could on advertising? A bunch of steely-eyed rational agents?
 

injurai

Banned
I'm not talking about iPhones. Samsung could learn a thing or two from the HTC One, or even Sony phones.

I think they enjoy their profit margins too much. Sony and HTC have much more precarious position in the way they sell and market their devices.
 

Somnid

Member
They sell a lot of electronics. I'd say it actually works because despite the fact that they have been slipping people will pay for a lot of their crap even when there's much better and cheaper out there. I think they succeeded in hitting that oblivious part of the population.
 

Tabris

Member
Remember the Olympics. I swear the GS3 advertisements during the Olympics are what really shot the product's sales forward.
 
They pretty much have to, if they want to overtake Apple.
Apple has a loyal & maybe blind following based off years & years of heavy, almost relentless advertising.
That's how they got where they are now.

Apple actually has never spent a lot on advertising. Just that their ads have always been good and gotten a lot of attention, go viral, talked about on TV shows, etc.

Samsung's problem is that they're a knock off company, down to their very core. I would bet you that part of their problem is their company culture. They can hire all the "innovative" people hey want, but if the company culture has historically been about copying others and selling it for less, it won't matter worth a damn. Even today, despite the hoopla about curved phones and smartwatches. All that comes across as desperation to most folk at worst or a "why should I give a shit about this" at best.

Basically their "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" approach might work for them financially, but it's damaging as hell to their brand image.
 

TCRS

Banned
lol they're spending so much that people are getting annoyed by it. ever heard of saturation? $14bn... ridiculous.
 

Water

Member
I'm not talking about iPhones. Samsung could learn a thing or two from the HTC One, or even Sony phones.

If Samsung could learn from Samsung, that would be enough.

To my taste, the Samsung Galaxy Nexus was the best-looking phone of its time. The Galaxy S2 and Note were decent too. The new style they embarked on starting from S3 is is hardly repulsive, but I don't find anything to like about it either. The lines are ambiguous and there's always some superfluous detail that makes the phones look cheap and feel worse in the hand. It's the same with their software.

Probably the saddest thing about their lineup is that they make so many devices and there's still so little variety. For instance, why don't they make an an affordable but clean phone like the Moto G? Why don't they make a small high-end phone like the iPhone?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom