Of Fish and Ponds

One question that has possibly dogged marketers for many years possibly is the one that talks about fish and ponds and the relative size of each. Do we want our product to be a small fish in a large pond or a big fish in a small pond? On the face of it the answer seems obvious for specific products and brands, while for others it is like the proverbial chicken and egg. In an ideal world, every brand would like to start out as the biggest fish in the pond and as the size of the pond increases, so does the size of the fish. But then, the ideal world is utopian.

This is a discussion I had yesterday with a friend of mine. Not a marketer, not by a long shot, but a person who believes he knows it all. His contention was that we should always offer a product that the market wants. That is when he lost me in the fish versus pond story. Personally, I do not believe in research or that obnoxious word called benchmarking. No new concept will pass research. And that is because of benchmarking. When we test a new concept or a new product, the respondents will always respond basis their experience with other products in the category. The product will score well in the research if it is perceived to be better (functionally emotionally, rationally) to what the respondents are used to. The better mousetrap phenomenon. And is because they benchmark your proposition with their existing width and depth of knowledge. When you benchmark, you are by definition #2 in the ladder. You are trying to be a better product that may or may not succeed in the marketplace for a host of reasons.

In my discussion yesterday, I went back to the early 1990s, when mobile phones were launched in India. I asked him whether the market demanded a service where one had to pay Rs 16 to receive a call, when life was happily trotting along at Rs 0.50 for outgoing calls on a rotary dial instrument? He responded that this answered a communications need. He lost me there.

I remember when bottled mineral water was launched in India. The common refrain among the desis was that it was meant for the foreign tourist who never tired of complaining of the famous Delhi Belly. They would actually pay to buy drinking water, Indians were not that stupid or gullible. It is impossible to find a person today who does not rely entirely on mineral water, Indian or foreigner. Did the market demand mineral water or was there something else going on?

When the computer was being developed, someone famously said that there would be a demand of maybe four computers in the entire world. Was the market ready for another brand of computer when Steve Jobs exposed his brilliance on the store shelves? In a world that was saturated with smart phones, what was Blackberry doing launching their product? They should have stuck to what the market wanted ... and joined the crowded market where everyone was vying for a share of the pie, growing as it was. Blackberry and Apple refused to be satisfied with a small share of an existing pie and went ahead to bake a pie all for themselves. The rest, as they say, is history.

Apple was the only fish in what was a very small pond. Let us go back to the early days of the Macintosh and put it through research. What do you think would have happened? Respondents would have looked at the mouse as an unnecessary and extra appendage, word processing was what was the need of the day, not pagination and colour correction. Who really wanted variable type width when people were still used to the word printed on the trusted Remington typewriter? But this fellow Jobs was a consumer to himself. He liked what he had created and his gut told him that people should like it too. For the next decades he continued to beat the market by launching products that had no current benchmark. A computer needs to have its processing unit, that big bulky thing that sits next to the monitor. And every computer manufacturer was busy building bigger and faster CPUs. Our friend Jobs went ahead and not only made the CPU smaller, but integrated it into the monitor itself. The iMac was born.

So, my question is, should one consciously try and be a big fish in what could be a very small pond or stay with the tried and tested, become a small fish in a large pond and wait for the trickle down effect? Would you rather be a Tesla or a bigger car with better mileage and plusher interiors? Talking of cars, my friend said that a car is a car is a car, meant for transportation. With more money to spend we go ahead and buy bigger cars. Today a second hand Maruti 800, tomorrow a Scorpio, a few years later, if all goes well, a Beamer. Cars manufacturers in India today are all vying for a piece of the same action. Sure, the pie is growing with increasing disposable income among prospects and easier loans to come by. But what of the day when saturation happens? Even today, the consumer is fickle minded. It does not take much for him or her to decided for or against a particular offering. “I don’t know, I just don’t like it” is reason enough for years of R&D and zillions of money to go down the drain. Any product is an extension of ourselves. It is a calling card. We like to enhance our individual personalities by surrounding ourselves with things that make us look and feel good. The watch I wear, the car I drive, the house I live in, the shirt on my back, the booze I drink, the cigarette I smoke, are all mirroring who I want to be. I can bet that almost 100% people will fail a blind test for almost any product. Whether it be something they can actually taste like liquor or cigarettes or something that they can feel, like a car. Blindfold a person and put him in two cars – one he loves and one he hates. I doubt if he will be able to tell the difference.

There are grave risks in being a proud of the crowd. Unless you are numero uno in your category, or at least a close second, you are wasting your time. You have to spend thousands of dollars to get a share of the consumer’s mind through advertising. And then wait for him to walk in through the door and invest in your product. And that probably because your proposition is cheaper than the one he really wants. It is easier for a larger brand to match your discount and actually discount you out of the market. His staying power is more and he can afford to take a hit for some time to see you fold.

But is being a big fish in a pond that you create a better alternative? Is it without risk? Hardly so. It is tremendously risky, at least in the initial stages. People have not heard of you, they do not want you and if they have to invest in you, they have to divert their money from something they actually want to something that seems like a bit of a gamble. Your bet is hedged on the mavericks and the early adopters, and you hope that the numbers are sufficient to make sense. Being largely a concept sell, the gestation period is longer. But the advantage is that once it catches on, it catches on like a house on fire. People queue up for days to get the latest model of the iPhone. They tell their friends and social media is abuzz with the impending launch and the reactions of the lucky early few who have managed to get one. Apple has not spent a dime to ensure this buzz in the market, it is free advertising for them and the brand continues to grow bigger. I have hardly ever seen any advertising from Apple, particularly for their computers, while all the other brands spends millions to get the customer to the showroom. To reach this stage is the tricky part.

What is the answer, therefore? Be a small fish in a large pond or a big fish in a small pond. India is largely a community of traders. The mentality is about demand fulfillment, as an entrepreneur and as a consumer. The herd mentality is strong as well. For a new concept to become successful in India, it needs to be successful across the world first. Does India or do Indians lack the necessary talent to launch a breakthrough product? No. How many global brands have come out of India? I can’t think of any brand outside of Mahindra. Even the much touted IT sector is about demand fulfillment, not innovation. Which is why India is at the forefront of the BPO industry. This while a majority of the employees at Microsoft or Apple or other international IT companies comprise Indians.

As far as I am concerned, I would rather create a niche for a product that I wish to offer, rather than become a part of the faceless multitude of products. This is a double whammy for conducting business in India. One, the product is a concept sell. Two, the consumers are not mavericks willing to gamble.

I am constantly told to start an adventure business guiding people on treks and hikes and such like and to forget trying to tell people the importance of learning survival skills. But I am a little thick headed and know that I would rather stand for what I am than bask in the reflected glory of the category I represent.

Who knows what the future has in store, only time will tell. Meanwhile, as the only fish in a very small pond, I am still looking for some company.