TribalWorks

The Nissan Cube launch in Canada was supposed to leverage social media extensively.   The cornerstone of the promotion was a contest where 50 people  would get a set of keys to a brand new Nissan Cube.  The contestants had to demonstrate their creativity and blog and write about the Cube.  Unfortunately, the hundreds that did not win were disappointed, many of them started to investigate ties between the judging panel and the contestants.  Resulting in some deeming the contest to be unfair.  You can read the in-depth story here.

However, one quote in the article by Tony Chapman, CEO of Capital C stuck out for me.

“I want non-conformists. I don’t want dad pulling the groceries out of the car in Markham,” Chapman told the Financial Post in an interview that appeared June 5. “[The Cube] is a quirky, function-follows-form kind of car. It is not for everybody, [and] it is not meant to be. The person getting out of there will have dreadlocks and a courier bag, or they will have their modeling portfolio under their arm; they are not giving in. They are pursuing their creative dreams.”

According to Chapman, these comments were intended to address questions about who would find the Cube appealing. Both he and Nissan deny that they were meant to influence the judges. In fact, they point out that judging had already taken place when the articles in question were published.

(Bold added by me - you’ll see why below)

So I’ve decided to hold our own contest.  For anyone describing, or showing a creative way to pay for a Nissan Cube, we will post your story, picture or video on our blog (please keep it tasteful and respectful)

Here is my way:

Walk into a dealership in a caffeinated state.  Open up an over-sized courier bag and spread a large quantity of old coins on the dealer’s desk.  Then emphatically try to convince the value of the coins is equal to the ~$16,988 -$18,288 you’ll need for a base model.

After all, they want non-conformists

According to Leon’s (The Canadian home furniture store), the company was able to increase its market share despite a decrease in sales.

Leon’s Furniture Ltd. said its profit last quarter was 26% lower than the same time last year as the Toronto-based retailer and its franchise affiliates felt the impact of the economic slowdown.

Leon’s net income was $8.62 million in the second quarter or 12 cents per share, down from $11.6 million of 16 cents per share in the same period of 2008, the company announced Tuesday.

Total sales including franchise stores fell to $209.9 million from $224.7 million, a decline of $14.7 million. Franchise sales fell to $44.7 million, down 6.8% or $3.3 million compared to the second quarter of 2008.

“In order to help offset declining consumer confidence, we continued running a very active marketing campaign to coincide with the company’s 100th anniversary. Although same-store corporate sales were down 6.5% compared to the prior year, based upon a competitive analysis of the marketplace, we feel confident that we did increase market share,” Leon’s said.

This case illustrates the problem with analyzing multi-variable problems.  It is difficult to ascertain why Leon’s sales dropped at a slower rate than its competitors.

• Was it because of the reported 13% increase in advertising spending in the quarter?
• Was it because Leon’s has successfully ingrained the positioning (over many decades) that they have the lowest prices?
• Did shoppers who were looking at buying furniture naturally migrate to the large format stores and by-passed the local boutiques in order to save money?