Aspirational groups take responsibility for their own self-branding, Blackberry by design may promote or at least at one time would have promoted to a particular demographic, which was the young, male, city business high-flyer but now the image has changed and the Blackberry has broken down that particular imagery. Consumer research has shown that consumers choose the brand that matches their own self-concept. Owning this brand makes the consumer feel they are achieved and deserve the brand and its imagery portrayal of success or just by having it enables the consumer to have ambitions to become whatever the aspirational marketing is selling them. Should marketers have boundaries with regard to this concept?
The blackberry was specifically constructed to help with business mobility; it is a genuine tool that serves a purpose for a demographic that already exists. One should ask which came first the ambitious city go-getter? Or the Blackberry? Obviously the ambitious city businessperson already existed the Blackberry was the tool created to aid desktop mobility. So should it restrain from touching a market that already exists? The answer would be no, as that would simply be bad business. There are always going to be aspirational groups and what can be wrong in aspiring to a positive image? If the Blackberry image strives for business success, then the consumer's brand evaluation will be a strong association that the consumer favours as their own self-image. The only problem with this is denial. Yes, the brand can create positive imagery and ambition, but it cannot control the consumers’ abilities to actually achieve any success. Should the marketers be at fault for that? Maybe some concepts are just beyond marketing control.
The blackberry was specifically constructed to help with business mobility; it is a genuine tool that serves a purpose for a demographic that already exists. One should ask which came first the ambitious city go-getter? Or the Blackberry? Obviously the ambitious city businessperson already existed the Blackberry was the tool created to aid desktop mobility. So should it restrain from touching a market that already exists? The answer would be no, as that would simply be bad business. There are always going to be aspirational groups and what can be wrong in aspiring to a positive image? If the Blackberry image strives for business success, then the consumer's brand evaluation will be a strong association that the consumer favours as their own self-image. The only problem with this is denial. Yes, the brand can create positive imagery and ambition, but it cannot control the consumers’ abilities to actually achieve any success. Should the marketers be at fault for that? Maybe some concepts are just beyond marketing control.
