Top Consumer Credit Cards

I came across an interesting article regarding the top consumer credit cards by Jennifer Waters at MarketWatch. She notes that Capital One's Card Lab was ranked No. 1 according to IndexCreditCards.com.

Capital One's Card Lab allows consumers to pick and choose their own features such as interest rates and rewards or introductory rates on new purchases or balance transfers. This seems somewhat similar to the Chase Freedom "Dynamic" rewards card. The Chase Freedom Card got a fresh rewards program this year that helped put it in the top three. The program automatically gives cardholders higher rebates for their three top monthly purchases, which tend to be gas, groceries and dining out.

Consumers like cash rewards, but not every bank can offer 5% cash back on every purchase. Personally, I feel flexible rewards cards may be the wave of the future when it comes to credit card rewards. Consumers will be able to receive higher cash back percentages from businesses and services they frequent more often versus other businesses. I see this as a win-win for both banks and consumers. Banks can still offer reasonable cash back rewards while consumers receives high cash back rewards on things they purchase most often.

Additionally, the article reviews three "green" cards for environmentally focused consumers which include the Bank of America Brighter Planet Visa, the GE Money Earth Rewards Card and the GreenPay MasterCard. The cards offer rewards points that help fund environmental projects such as tree planting.

Pepsi Introduces New Bottle

Pepsi has partnered with the New York City-based packaging design firm 4sight inc. to come up with a new 20 oz. bottle for the US market. The new design incorporates structural elements meant to appeal to the all-important youth demographic.

The new packaging is part of a larger branding program called "Choreography," which Pepsi launched early in 2007 for all 14 US trademarked Pepsi and Diet Pepsi beverages. This is according to an article at
BEVERAGEWORLD.

Personally, I like Pepsi's new design. At first glance, it seems like the colors are brighter than previous Pepsi labels. Additionally, I spoke to my wife about her opinions regarding Pepsi's new 20-oz. bottles. She feels the packaging makes the bottle appear taller than before, but is the only real difference she notices. Overall, she feels they look very much the same as previous 20 oz. bottles. However, she does like Pepsi's new design on its 12 oz. cans. She feels that it has a "retro" appeal comparable to bottles of the old days (i.e. pre-1960's). She does find the Pepsi cans more appealling than Pepsi bottles. Although, this may be due to the fact that we mostly buy 12 and 24-pack 12 oz. canned Pepsi products. Likewise, I do agree that Pepsi's new 12-oz. cans have sort of a "retro" feel. I hope this is an avenue Pepsi goes down in the future. You can find out more about Pepsi's new 12 oz. cans at Throwbackapepsi.com. Coke also launched its new contour "Grip" 20 oz. bottle in September 2007. There is some information available on it at Earthtimes.org.

Neither my wife or I will stop buying Pepsi products simply because one of us questions the packaging. We have had several positive experiences with Pepsi's customer service and see no point in changing brands anytime soon.


I understand that packaging may not be the most interesting subject, but I'm really surprised that hardly no one else is really taking notice or blogging about Pepsi and Coke's newly designed 20 oz. bottles. Both brands really took a hit over the summer of 2007 regarding the environmental and health and safety aspects of plastic bottles. However, both companies are really trying to move in the right direction by reducing the amount of plastic used to make plastic bottles and making them 100% recyclable.

I have seen some discussion from online commentators complaining that beverage companies should stop using plastic altogether since its hurts the environment, but this does not make any sense. Perhaps we should all stop driving vehicles since release toxins into the atmosphere. Also, this begs the question, what next? Should bottle manufacturers revert to glass containers, why? Glass and plastic are both recyclable materials. Therefore, I do not see a huge benefit in switching to back to glass. Also, glass can only be recycled back into glass while plastic can be recycled into many other products according to Passaiccountynj.org. Therefore, I am calling on all the influential environment bloggers out there to do some research and get behind companies and products supporting the environment. It is very hard for mankind to return to its old ways pre-modern society. However, we can do our part by following the 5R's - Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Reject products that are overpackaged and React and supporting companies interested in following these 5R's as well.

Do Bottled Water Containers Hurt the Environment?; Are Critics Merely "Following the Money?"

Recent Discussion About Bottled Water Mirrors Recycling

Correlations:
Bottle Water and Recycling: .93
Aquafina and "Tap Water" = .88
Dasani and "Tap Water" = .93
Aquafina and recycling = .89
Dasani and recycling = .94

There has been a huge spike in the amount of discussion about bottled water since mid-June 2007. Interestingly, discussion about bottled water correlates highly with discussion about recycling [see above]. Additionally, there is a rise in media coverage relating to this issue. For example, there was an article at CNN on Friday, July 27, 2007. Some key themes mentioned in the article which mirror consumers’ discussion about bottled water include:

1. New Aquafina labels saying that bottled water made with tap water
2. Maker Pepsi says it's reasonable to say where water comes from
3. Critics of bottled water say containers are wasteful
4. Many buyers say bottled water is more convenient

I ran a few correlations which turned out to be extremely high. Interestingly, consumers discussion about bottle water correlates rather high with recycling. This is mostly due to consumers expostulating over that fact that bottled water containers (i.e. plastic bottles) are extremely wasteful. And while I agree that water containers are wasteful, I do not feel critics arguing are looking at all the facts. Soda, milk and beer are also sold in plastic containers among others. Therefore, I ask two questions.

1. Why is all the recent hype about bottled water only?
2. Why are Pepsi (Aquafina) and Coca-Cola (Dasani) brought up most within media coverage and consumers discussion online?

Personally, I feel their are a lot of critics taking aim at Pepsi and Coca-Cola since they feel the companies are making a lot of money selling tap water. A co-worker of mine brought up a similar situation that occurred in the late 80's/early 90's which makes a lot of sense to me. The cardboard/paperboard industry started attacking plastic milk jugs as "health hazards" because they claimed that see-through milk containers (plastic) made vitamins leach out of the milk quicker than if milk came in cartons, which protected milk from sunlight/exposure by not being see-through. The first waves of PR/media coverage were about the "negative health effects of plastic containers for milk," but it wasn't until someone dug deeper that it became apparent the cardboard/paperboard industry was behind the campaign. They were trying to convince milk producers to keep using cardboard when everybody was switching to plastic. My co-worker went on to say, "Who's behind this one attacking plastic containers again? Aluminum can companies? Just a thought ("follow the money" is always a good ideas when these sorts of things hit)." And I couldn't agree more.

Consumers complaining about negative effects of plastic containers on our environment should do more to push things that better our environment such as recycling, alternative fuels and solar power. Consumers like to be motivated. Unfortunately, helping the environment is not important to a lot of people. Many consumers find it expensive and inconvenient. For example, recycling centers are few and far between where I live. I have to drive 20-30 miles out of my way to drop off recyclable goods. Additionally, it costs extra money to sign up for recycling services where I live (which I pay by the way). My point is that critics and consumers looking to improve the environment should lobby for reasons to get people excited about helping the environment (i.e. incentives, tax benefits, etc). I think we are moving in the right direction. Owners of hybrid vehicles are now able to get tax benefits. Likewise, consumers and businesses should be reward for doing other things to help the environment (i.e. installing solar power panels on a home or business instead of using electricity, volunteering in a community clean up project, ride share, etc...). And don't get me wrong, big business has a certain amount of social responsibility to help keep the environment safe and clean. However, going after businesses should not be only recourse. We should all be "thinking green" and "doing our share for cleaner air."

Up-Branding Has Become Mainstream

I came across an interesting article about "Up-Branding" at Ad Age. There article argues that Up-Branding has become a very common theme among companies and products trying to build brand equity. The articles offers several suggestions to marketers who want to "Up-Brand" their products. They are listed below.

Tips For "Up-Branding"

1. Limiting distribution channels
2. Focusing on small indulgences (i.e. Starbucks targeting consumers looking for premium coffee products).
3. Play from your brands strengths
4. Leverage design
5. Give your brand a "green" label

Personally, I feel some of these ideas are great for "Up-branding," but marketers must be careful how they incorporate them into their marketing strategy. For example, the article at Ad Age mentions playing from your brands strengths. It uses Crest Vivid White. The author, Allen Adamson, says "Crest, for example, has always been associated with a beautiful, healthy smile. Its up-branded product, Crest Vivid White, builds on this well-known brand association by adding whiteness to the beautiful, healthy equation." However, it is important to make sure a brand does not become diluted.

Starbucks is a brand that is suffering from brand dilution. You can find more information about Starbucks' brand dilution at Brand Autopsy.

Companies Focus on Being "Eco-Friendly"

Environmental discssion is on the rise as more consumers become concerned about the environment. It is important for marketers to know if consumers view them as an "Eco-friendly" company. Companies associated with environmental protection give consumers another reason to do business with them. The chart below provides a breakout showing companies mentioned most within "Eco-friendly" and sustainability discussion.



Wal-Mart comes up most frequently among corporations within sustainability discussion. Recent discussion regarding Wal-Mart and the environment relates to it announcing their plans of having their whole operations powered by energy from the sun and other renewable sources of power. Toyota and Lexus are the only Automotive brands mentioned within the Top 10, and are generally perceived as positive in this light.


















The trend chart below shows increasing discussion about Wal-Mart's initiative to use more solar power.

Home Depot Goes Green

Home Depot is putting its own environmental label, Eco Options,
than 2,500 products, from organic plant food to all-natural insect repellent. Ad Age reports that Home Depot has clearly taken the opportunity to be first to market with a label and is the first major retailer to seize on the surge in consumer concern about greenhouse-gases emissions.

The retailer plans to back the initiative with a national print push, including ads in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times and consumer and shelter publications, according to a spokeswoman at Home Depot.

It will interesting to see if this resonates within consumer discussion. Generally, Eco-friendly topics are not the most talked about issues by consumers online. Therefore, I have some tips that I'd give executives over at Home Depot if they want to increase the buzz surrounding Eco Options.

1. Create a blog or sponsor a discussion forum relating to Eco-Friendly discussion
2. Leverage its NASCAR sponsorship to help promote its new ECO Options (i.e. Have Tony Stewart make special guest appearances or set up booths at NASCAR events)
3. Make a special website and encourage consumers to visit it
4. Develop an interactive campaign by encouraging consumers to send in photos or videos of themselves updating their homes using Home Depot ECO Options products
5. Communicate offerings to individuals living a "Green" lifestyle
6. Partner with another "Green" company to help promote Eco-friendly products
7. Create infomercials or mini-videos relating to the environment
8. Expand national print push beyond the Wall Street Journal and NY Times (i.e. place ads in home building media)
9. Communicate benefits of using energy efficient products in homes
10. Reach out and get opinions from key influencers discussing "Eco-friendly" topics related to home building in the blogosphere.


Below is a Brand Association Map highlighting some of the key themes associated with "Eco-Friendly". The map is interesting because it shows the relation between home building and "Eco-friendly" product discussion. Online consumers discussing "Eco-friendly" options in regards to home building largely mention energy efficiency and panels (i.e. solar panels).


You can find out more about Home Depot's Eco Options by visiting Home Depot Eco Options.