Report on Slanket case
1.
For those aware of both brands, the association made for each of them as to be quite
different, given their strategies and ways these were implemented.
For Slanket, the brand association is of a warm and comfortable blanket with sleeves,
which makes it possible for people to be covered by a blanket and be able to do things
easily (for example changing channel, having a drink, talking on the cell phone or texting).
The strategy of Slanket was to focus on a niche market and provide a high quality product
and costumer experience, which would be associated with a small, family firm, with no big
desire for accumulation of wealth, and with social responsibility. This focus on product
quality and costumer experience was visible on the customer’s product rating at QVC;
Slanket had an average of five stars.
The brand associations for Snuggie’s sleeved blankets were quite different, as it was of a
low-end brand, with low quality and bad customer service. The brand was solely profit
oriented (as it belonged to a big firm) with no quality concern or customer orientation. It
was seen as a joke and was given away mostly as a playful gift, given its low price and
ironic association (it was pretty much seen as a product for couch potatoes and lonely
people). The strategy was to have a fast and very high market integration, with a product
that despite being “low cost” was able to deliver its purpose (low price strategy). The
disregard for the product’s quality is evident through the ratings of the product on
Amazon.com, where the product was averaged only one or two stars.
2.
Slanket relied heavily on the product and, as a result, priced it high at $64.95 to signal
quality to the consumer. This pricing decision may be a skimming pricing strategy, as
prices were lowered ($38 in 2008) and could be purchased at a much lower price through
different channels. In the beginning the only sales point was at the brand’s website, but in
2007 two other channels were selling the product: QVC and Skymall. Also, Slanket’s
marketing budget was of $0, as they relied on word of mouth marketing and marketing that
was paid per purchase rather than display. This shows that they were not focusing on
awareness but rather on engaging potential customers that are actually interested in buying
such a product. The trust the Cleggs put into their product is also evident through their
