I reckon Learning Pool and Abercrombie and Fitch might have something in common.
How so, I hear you cry.
It’s not the fact that both brands have the beautiful people clamouring to be part of their respective scenes.
Rather, it’s that both brands are fussy about who uses their products.
- general demarketing – when an organisation wishes to reduce the level of total demand
- selective demarketing – where demand from certain market segments is discourage (what Learning Pool and Abercrombie & Fitch does)
- ostensible demarketing – where marketing gives the appearance of wishing a reduction in demand as a result of scarcity, which in turn stimulates greater demand for the desired and increasingly scarce product
Not content with low lighting and loud music in their stores to disuade those with less than sharp eyesite and hearing, A&F has reportedly offered money to Michael “The Situation” Sorrentino from US reality TV show, Jersey Shore, not to wear their clothes. Such is their desire to remain exclusive and appealing to their target audience (cool, 20 somethings).
Learning Pool, on the other hand, has created an exclusive club for public sector training people. It doesn’t let private sector organisations join because they don’t have the same corporate objectives. They don’t share.
On a related note can demarketing be used in relation to destination marketing, I wonder? Comments in a previous post by Leanne on this blog illustrate how emotive the subject is and how fine the balance between economy and environment is.
Maybe Failte Ireland and County Donegal should be actively targeting visitors interested in eco tourism and preserving the scenary whilst discouraging the coach loads of American tourists, leaving them with the Cliffs of Moher.
Or maybe not. What do you think?