After iPhone’s debut, Cook must reposition Apple brand
With Google Inc Android phones gaining momentum, Cook is likely sticking to established battle plans at this critical juncture. But longer term, he may be better off moving the company out from under Jobs’ gargantuan shadow. The Apple co-founder bequeathed a mystique and cachet to the brand that will be near-impossible to replace, cultivating a community of fans hooked on ease of use and rich content.It’s those perceptions Cook — who in two months on the job has already shown Wall Street and Silicon Valley glimpses of what an Apple without Steve Jobs might look like —- must focus on preserving rather than the inimitable aura of the co-founder who died last week at the age of 56.”There’s no question Apple is going to go through a time of transformation. There’s a lot of risk around the brand,” said Tim Calkins, a marketing professor at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management who has advised clients like Eli Lilly & Co. “A lot of pressure will fall on Tim Cook to step up. The hard part is, he’s not Steve Jobs, nor can he try to be.”Cook has the luxury of time to ponder his next step. Advanced sales of the iPhone 4S — despite disappointing fanboys and pundits hoping for more than an enhanced iPhone 4 — surpassed one million in its first 24 hours globally, smashing the 600,000 for the iPhone 4, though that model was sold in fewer countries.Sales in stores begin October 14 in Japan, Australia, France, UK, Germany, Canada and the United States.Some analysts expect fourth-quarter iPhone shipments of as much as 30 million or more, almost double from a year ago.The fifth iteration of the iconic smartphone comes with a faster processor and a better and more light-sensitive camera, but little else to separate it from its predecessor. But tech experts say the real gems lie beneath the phone’s familiar sleek casing.Influential reviewers Walt Mossberg and David Pogue raved about “Siri” — a voice-command activated assistant that understands and responds to spoken commands and questions in context, such as queries about the weather or a friend’s phone number. Pogue called it “crazy good, transformative, category-redefining speech recognition.”“Despite Siri, the iPhone 4S isn’t a dramatic game-changer. Some new features are catch-ups to competitors,” Mossberg wrote in the Wall Street Journal. “It isn’t perfect, and is labeled a beta, but it has great potential and worked pretty well for me, despite some glitches.”Both reviewers marveled at Siri’s ability to hold conversations, from basic “give me directions to …” to quirkier discourses.”When I asked it, ‘What’s the best phone,’ it said, ‘Wait … there are other phones?’” Mossberg wrote.BLAST FROM THE PASTCook now faces the monumental task of not only preserving, but also advancing Apple’s lofty status in the industry and among fickle gadget consumers. Moreover, he must do that while honoring his former boss and mentor, a master showman who time and again displayed an uncanny instinct for driving consumer tastes.”Things for the next two years are pretty much set in stone in terms of what they want to achieve, and the new kind of product focus they are putting out. After three years, the new management is going to make its mark,” said Jack Salzman, principal and founding member of Kings Point Capital Management. “If there is any pressure on the new Apple management, its probably going to be self-imposed, because of the void that was left by Steve Jobs.”The product pipeline is where Cook needs to stamp his own authority on the company. He can stick to script only so long before he risks stagnation and damaging the brand. Apple needs to find a formula divorced from Jobs’ persona, observers say.Indeed, during the iPhone 4S’ media launch last week, Cook stepped back and allowed the supporting cast — such as marketing chief Phil Schiller, software head Scott Forstall and design guru Jonathan Ive — to tout the device, something Jobs would have sought to control from start to finish.”They’ve got to find a new voice in the market. Steve Jobs was so much the face of Apple,” Calkins said. “Protect the core elements of the brand, but at the same time, move forward.”“You can’t turn Apple into a memorial for Steve Jobs,” he added. Cook shouldn’t “be afraid to make changes in the way the company communicates and reaches out to consumers.”Branding and marketing aside, ultimately Apple’s products — not their hype — need to be judged on their own merits.Apple’s meticulously scripted marketing blasts are the stuff of Silicon Valley legend. After rumor and speculation builds across the Internet, the company sends out a cryptic email invitation to tease the product. That, in turn, is typically followed by a splashy extravaganza that culminates in a global first-day sales event across the globe that often has people lining up around the block days in advance.”Past this launch, there isn’t really a killer new launch. I am sure they have got a number of products in development,” said Pat Becker, a portfolio manager at Becker Capital Management. “But once the phone is out, you will have all the price points covered, you have got the different carriers covered. To me, that’s’ a start toward reaching saturation in the phone market.”
RPT-Australia court to rule on Apple v Samsung case on Thursday
However, the Federal Court said in a statement that some
parts of the judgement might be given confidentially to the two
parties on Thursday and only released a day later, on Friday.Apple is seeking a temporary ban on sales of Samsung Galaxy
10.1 tablets, citing infringement of its touch-screen technology
patent, pending a full determination of the patent dispute.Apple says Samsung’s Galaxy line of mobile phones and
tablets “slavishly” copied its iPhone and iPad and has launched
an international legal battle which is expected to hurt growth
at one of Samsung’s fastest-growing businesses.Samsung, whose Galaxy gadgets are seen as a major threat to
Apple’s devices, rejects the claims.
US FTC weakens proposals for food ads to children
* Ads to general audiences exempted* Ads to children 2 to 11 broadly limitedWASHINGTON, Oct 11 (Reuters) - A government regulator that
is part of a working group concerned about junk food ads to
children will announce on Wednesday it is backing off of some
proposals for voluntary marketing principles.An interagency working group, made up of the Federal Trade
Commission, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food
and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, said in April companies should voluntarily end all
food advertising to children unless they were for healthy
choices, such as whole grains, fresh fruits or vegetables.Under the original proposal, salty, fatty or very sweet
foods or foods with trans fats would no longer be advertised to
children, defined as age 17 or under.But David Vladeck, head of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer
Protection, is expected to testify to a congressional committee
on Wednesday that the working group made major changes in its
proposals.First, it lowered the age of the affected children to 11 or
under.”FTC staff has determined that, with the exception of
certain in-school marketing activities, it is not necessary to
encompass adolescents ages 12 to 17 within the scope of the
covered marketing,” according to Vladeck’s written testimony.The testimony was posted on the House Energy and Commerce
Committee website.In the testimony, the FTC excluded advertising aimed at a
general audience and advertising that was part of charitable or
community events.It also said it would not recommend banning clowns and
cartoon characters — think Ronald McDonald and SpongeBob
SquarePants — used to advertise unhealthy foods.Advertisers, who had been lobbying hard on the issue, were
pleased with the changes, but said the fight was not over.”I think the best thing that they can do is to withdraw the
proposal and endorse the (industry-supported) Children’s Food
and Beverage Advertising Initiative,” said Dan Jaffe, vice
president of the Association of National Advertisers.The effort sets voluntary standards such as barring added
sugars in juices and limiting flavored milk to 24 grams of
sugar. It includes companies such as McDonalds Inc’s ,
General Mills Inc and PepsiCo Inc .”We believe that the food, beverage, restaurant and
advertising community has done far more, unfortunately, than
any other segment of society in regard to obesity problems,” he
said. “We don’t see why the government really needs to step
into this area.”Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center
for Science in the Public Interest, said she was concerned
Congress, which has oversight over the agencies, would press
for the advertising principles to be scrapped.”The thing that worries me the most is that the congress is
not asking for little tweaks to the standards … they’re
asking the agencies to kill the whole thing,” she said. “The
overwhelming majority of advertising to kids is for unhealthy
food, about 80 percent.”A background memo prepared for the U.S. House of
Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee indicated some
hostility to the proposed limits. Lawmakers sent a letter to
the agencies in September asking questions such as what
evidence is there that junk food advertisements are linked
obesity and what would the proposal cost, in terms of ad
revenues and jobs?The Obama administration, with its goal of containing
healthcare costs, has emphasized children’s health. First Lady
Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign has pushed children to
eat better and exercise more.Concern about obesity rates prompted the campaign. About 17
percent of U.S. children aged 2-19 are obese, according to data
on the CDC website. Nearly one in three U.S. children are
overweight.
US FTC weakens proposals for food ads to children
* Ads to general audiences exempted* Ads to children 2 to 11 broadly limitedWASHINGTON, Oct 11 (Reuters) - A government regulator that
is part of a working group concerned about junk food ads to
children will announce on Wednesday it is backing off of some
proposals for voluntary marketing principles.An interagency working group, made up of the Federal Trade
Commission, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food
and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, said in April companies should voluntarily end all
food advertising to children unless they were for healthy
choices, such as whole grains, fresh fruits or vegetables.Under the original proposal, salty, fatty or very sweet
foods or foods with trans fats would no longer be advertised to
children, defined as age 17 or under.But David Vladeck, head of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer
Protection, is expected to testify to a congressional committee
on Wednesday that the working group made major changes in its
proposals.First, it lowered the age of the affected children to 11 or
under.”FTC staff has determined that, with the exception of
certain in-school marketing activities, it is not necessary to
encompass adolescents ages 12 to 17 within the scope of the
covered marketing,” according to Vladeck’s written testimony.The testimony was posted on the House Energy and Commerce
Committee website.In the testimony, the FTC excluded advertising aimed at a
general audience and advertising that was part of charitable or
community events.It also said it would not recommend banning clowns and
cartoon characters — think Ronald McDonald and SpongeBob
SquarePants — used to advertise unhealthy foods.Advertisers, who had been lobbying hard on the issue, were
pleased with the changes, but said the fight was not over.”I think the best thing that they can do is to withdraw the
proposal and endorse the (industry-supported) Children’s Food
and Beverage Advertising Initiative,” said Dan Jaffe, vice
president of the Association of National Advertisers.The effort sets voluntary standards such as barring added
sugars in juices and limiting flavored milk to 24 grams of
sugar. It includes companies such as McDonalds Inc’s ,
General Mills Inc and PepsiCo Inc .”We believe that the food, beverage, restaurant and
advertising community has done far more, unfortunately, than
any other segment of society in regard to obesity problems,” he
said. “We don’t see why the government really needs to step
into this area.”Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center
for Science in the Public Interest, said she was concerned
Congress, which has oversight over the agencies, would press
for the advertising principles to be scrapped.”The thing that worries me the most is that the congress is
not asking for little tweaks to the standards … they’re
asking the agencies to kill the whole thing,” she said. “The
overwhelming majority of advertising to kids is for unhealthy
food, about 80 percent.”A background memo prepared for the U.S. House of
Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee indicated some
hostility to the proposed limits. Lawmakers sent a letter to
the agencies in September asking questions such as what
evidence is there that junk food advertisements are linked
obesity and what would the proposal cost, in terms of ad
revenues and jobs?The Obama administration, with its goal of containing
healthcare costs, has emphasized children’s health. First Lady
Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign has pushed children to
eat better and exercise more.Concern about obesity rates prompted the campaign. About 17
percent of U.S. children aged 2-19 are obese, according to data
on the CDC website. Nearly one in three U.S. children are
overweight.
US FTC weakens proposals for food ads to children
* Ads to general audiences exempted* Ads to children 2 to 11 broadly limitedWASHINGTON, Oct 11 (Reuters) - A government regulator that
is part of a working group concerned about junk food ads to
children will announce on Wednesday it is backing off of some
proposals for voluntary marketing principles.An interagency working group, made up of the Federal Trade
Commission, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food
and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, said in April companies should voluntarily end all
food advertising to children unless they were for healthy
choices, such as whole grains, fresh fruits or vegetables.Under the original proposal, salty, fatty or very sweet
foods or foods with trans fats would no longer be advertised to
children, defined as age 17 or under.But David Vladeck, head of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer
Protection, is expected to testify to a congressional committee
on Wednesday that the working group made major changes in its
proposals.First, it lowered the age of the affected children to 11 or
under.”FTC staff has determined that, with the exception of
certain in-school marketing activities, it is not necessary to
encompass adolescents ages 12 to 17 within the scope of the
covered marketing,” according to Vladeck’s written testimony.The testimony was posted on the House Energy and Commerce
Committee website.In the testimony, the FTC excluded advertising aimed at a
general audience and advertising that was part of charitable or
community events.It also said it would not recommend banning clowns and
cartoon characters — think Ronald McDonald and SpongeBob
SquarePants — used to advertise unhealthy foods.Advertisers, who had been lobbying hard on the issue, were
pleased with the changes, but said the fight was not over.”I think the best thing that they can do is to withdraw the
proposal and endorse the (industry-supported) Children’s Food
and Beverage Advertising Initiative,” said Dan Jaffe, vice
president of the Association of National Advertisers.The effort sets voluntary standards such as barring added
sugars in juices and limiting flavored milk to 24 grams of
sugar. It includes companies such as McDonalds Inc’s ,
General Mills Inc and PepsiCo Inc .”We believe that the food, beverage, restaurant and
advertising community has done far more, unfortunately, than
any other segment of society in regard to obesity problems,” he
said. “We don’t see why the government really needs to step
into this area.”Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center
for Science in the Public Interest, said she was concerned
Congress, which has oversight over the agencies, would press
for the advertising principles to be scrapped.”The thing that worries me the most is that the congress is
not asking for little tweaks to the standards … they’re
asking the agencies to kill the whole thing,” she said. “The
overwhelming majority of advertising to kids is for unhealthy
food, about 80 percent.”A background memo prepared for the U.S. House of
Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee indicated some
hostility to the proposed limits. Lawmakers sent a letter to
the agencies in September asking questions such as what
evidence is there that junk food advertisements are linked
obesity and what would the proposal cost, in terms of ad
revenues and jobs?The Obama administration, with its goal of containing
healthcare costs, has emphasized children’s health. First Lady
Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” campaign has pushed children to
eat better and exercise more.Concern about obesity rates prompted the campaign. About 17
percent of U.S. children aged 2-19 are obese, according to data
on the CDC website. Nearly one in three U.S. children are
overweight.
Stores see no relief as Britons cut back on food
“I don’t think I’ve ever seen consumers squeezed so much,”
Peter Marks, chief executive of the Co-Operative Group, told the
annual conference of grocery industry group IGD.”Normally food sales are pretty robust. For the first time
that I’ve witnessed we’re actually seeing … the consumer
spending less on food because they can’t afford to spend what
they normally do,” he said.Household incomes in Britain are under pressure from rising
prices, muted wages growth and government austerity measures.”The government is running out of economic levers to pull,”
Marks said, noting that interest rates were already at record
lows and the country needed to reduce its deficit.”We are going to have to grit our teeth and I think all
businesses are going to have to get used to this as pretty much
the norm for the next few years,” he added.Market researchers Kantar Worldpanel said on Tuesday grocery
sales in Britain rose 5.1 percent year-on-year in the 12 weeks
to Oct. 2. But with grocery prices rising 5.7 percent, that
suggests shoppers are cutting back.”The gap between inflation and growth has become a major
feature of the grocery market as shoppers trade down to cheaper
products and retailers strive to convince consumers they are
combating inflation,” Kantar Worldpanel said, pointing to
soaring sales at hard discounters Aldi and Lidl.Tesco , Britain’s biggest retailer, said last month
it was investing 500 million pounds ($784 million) in cutting
prices of staple products like milk and carrots in a bid to
kickstart demand and stem market share losses.Last week, it warned that would lead to flat profits in
Britain in the second half of its fiscal year.”Sometimes you have to put aside just the pursuit of profit
in the market in order to get back in tune with the nation,”
Tesco chief executive Phil Clarke told the conference, adding UK
retail conditions were the toughest for decades.Dalton Philips, chief executive of Wm Morrison Supermarkets
, said there was a new professionalism in the way
consumers were shopping, as they compare prices online and swap
money-saving tips on social networks.”It used to be time is money. Now it’s time saves you
money,” he said.Philips said retailers needed to work harder to capture the
interest of shoppers, and highlighted the launch of Morrisons
new “M Kitchen” range of own-brand ready meals which he hopes
will tap a trend among shoppers to treat themselves at home as
they cut back on restaurant meals.But delegates at the conference underscored the challenges
of innovating at a time when their businesses are struggling.A majority of respondents in an audience poll said they had
cut back spending on research and development.
