题目内容
South Korea ______ the UK.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
人工膝关节置换的手术适应证，除外
Are brand names being pushed off the shelf According to the Wall Street Journal: "More and more shoppers are by- passing household names for the cheaper, no-name prod- ucts one shelf over. This shows that even the biggest and strongest brands in the world are vulnerable." It has been clear for some time - principally since recession began to be felt in the major economies of the world - that the strength of brands has been under fire. During the second half of the eighties, the Japanese, for example, showed themselves willing to pay a huge pre- mium to buy goods with a smart label and image to match: they were fashion victims par excellence, be it in choosing their luggage (Louis Vuitton was much favoured) or in buying their booze, where a 20-year-old version of a good malt whisky could fetch the equiv- alent of ~60 or more. Over the past year or two, that en- thusiasm to spend big money on a classy label has waned markedly. But we may be witnessing the death of the brand. First, every story that now appears about the troubles being experienced by makers of luxury goods triggers wise nods and told- you-so frowns. Two days ago, LVMH in France, which owns Moet et Chandon champagne, Louis Vuitton and the Christian Lacroix fashion house, reported lower earnings for the first half of 1993 than it did a year ago. As David Jarvis, in charge of the European operations of drinks company Hiram Walker, puts it: "A few years ago, it might have been considered smart to wear a shirt with a designer’s logo embroidered on the pocket; frankly, it now seems a bit haft." This conclusion fits with one’s instincts. In the straitened nineties, with nearly 3 million out of work and 425,000 people officially classed as homeless in England alone, conspicuous consumption now seems vulgar rather than chic. But just because flashy, up-market brands have lost some of their appeal, it does not follow that all brands have done so. Cadbury’s Dairy Milk is just as much a brand as Cartier watches. Tastes may have shifted downmarket, but that does not mean that they have shifted from flash-brand to no brand. The second strand of the brand argument is tied intimately with the effects of recession. No one yet knows to what extent the apparent lack of some brands’ appeal is merely a temporary phenomenon. It may well be that, deep down, we would still love to own a Louis Vuitton suitcase rather than one from Woolworth’s but while we are out of work or fearing that our job is at risk, we are not prepared to express that preference by actually spending the cash. Third, the example of Marlboro is an extreme one. The difference in price be- tween premium brand cigarettes and budget rivals in the US had become huge during the 1980s: a packet of Marlboro or Camel might cost 80 per cent more than a budget variety. Few brands in any area of consumer goods could hope to maintain so great a premium indefi- nitely. And fourth, in looking at the brands argument globally, it is too easy to become misled by what is happening in an individual market. In the UK as a whole, about one third of groceries are under super- markets’ own labels. In the USA the proportion is only 20 per cent. But it does seem that the gradual shift from manufacturer-branded to retailer-branded goods is worldwide. As David Jarvis of Hiram Walker says: "We believe that brands will retain their halo, but people are less inclined to pay for something just because it’s a fashion ac- cessory. They need to be re- assured that the product is intrinsically better." Reports of the death of the brand have been exag- gerated. Reports of the death of the de luxe brand may" be premature, but sound much more plausible. The consumer won’t buy branded goods unless they are ______
Are brand names being pushed off the shelf According to the Wall Street Journal: "More and more shoppers are by- passing household names for the cheaper, no-name prod- ucts one shelf over. This shows that even the biggest and strongest brands in the world are vulnerable." It has been clear for some time - principally since recession began to be felt in the major economies of the world - that the strength of brands has been under fire. During the second half of the eighties, the Japanese, for example, showed themselves willing to pay a huge pre- mium to buy goods with a smart label and image to match: they were fashion victims par excellence, be it in choosing their luggage (Louis Vuitton was much favoured) or in buying their booze, where a 20-year-old version of a good malt whisky could fetch the equiv- alent of ~60 or more. Over the past year or two, that en- thusiasm to spend big money on a classy label has waned markedly. But we may be witnessing the death of the brand. First, every story that now appears about the troubles being experienced by makers of luxury goods triggers wise nods and told- you-so frowns. Two days ago, LVMH in France, which owns Moet et Chandon champagne, Louis Vuitton and the Christian Lacroix fashion house, reported lower earnings for the first half of 1993 than it did a year ago. As David Jarvis, in charge of the European operations of drinks company Hiram Walker, puts it: "A few years ago, it might have been considered smart to wear a shirt with a designer’s logo embroidered on the pocket; frankly, it now seems a bit haft." This conclusion fits with one’s instincts. In the straitened nineties, with nearly 3 million out of work and 425,000 people officially classed as homeless in England alone, conspicuous consumption now seems vulgar rather than chic. But just because flashy, up-market brands have lost some of their appeal, it does not follow that all brands have done so. Cadbury’s Dairy Milk is just as much a brand as Cartier watches. Tastes may have shifted downmarket, but that does not mean that they have shifted from flash-brand to no brand. The second strand of the brand argument is tied intimately with the effects of recession. No one yet knows to what extent the apparent lack of some brands’ appeal is merely a temporary phenomenon. It may well be that, deep down, we would still love to own a Louis Vuitton suitcase rather than one from Woolworth’s but while we are out of work or fearing that our job is at risk, we are not prepared to express that preference by actually spending the cash. Third, the example of Marlboro is an extreme one. The difference in price be- tween premium brand cigarettes and budget rivals in the US had become huge during the 1980s: a packet of Marlboro or Camel might cost 80 per cent more than a budget variety. Few brands in any area of consumer goods could hope to maintain so great a premium indefi- nitely. And fourth, in looking at the brands argument globally, it is too easy to become misled by what is happening in an individual market. In the UK as a whole, about one third of groceries are under super- markets’ own labels. In the USA the proportion is only 20 per cent. But it does seem that the gradual shift from manufacturer-branded to retailer-branded goods is worldwide. As David Jarvis of Hiram Walker says: "We believe that brands will retain their halo, but people are less inclined to pay for something just because it’s a fashion ac- cessory. They need to be re- assured that the product is intrinsically better." Reports of the death of the brand have been exag- gerated. Reports of the death of the de luxe brand may" be premature, but sound much more plausible. In the USA proportionally ______ own-label brands are sold than in Britain.
Packaging Personal selling Point of sale advertising Public relations Publicity Sales literature Showrooms Sponsorship Telephone sales Trade fairs and exhibitions Word of mouth Your staff can call customers, or customers can call a toll-free number to request sales literature or ask for information. ______
微信支付 
支付宝支付