Failed product: Amazon Fire Phone
Amazon debuted it's new handheld mobile device at a press conference in Seattle in 2014, expecting it to fair equally well among consumers with Apple and Samsung smartphones. But by October, Amazon was left with $83 million in Fire phone product. Clearly Amazon needed more research done in consumer behavior to allow it's product a better chance after launching.
Yes, it is true that cell phone consumers of today are expecting the smartphones that they purchase to be better than the last. The newest and greatest iPhones and Androids are currently pricing around $600. Motivation for these consumers relies on a need for new and flashy technology. They expect a phone that has the latest and greatest features. If the applications offered on the device don't outnumber the last, then don't expect people to be lining up by the masses for it a week in advance. Compared to the over one million apps offered on Google Play and iTunes, Amazon only offered 240,000 on its Fire Phone, a huge disappointment to consumers.
Amazon also should have accounted more for consumers' perception on relevant information. Its competition, Apple, had already introduced its original iPhone seven years prior, and the Android's phone six years prior. Amazon had tried to introduce a similar product with less flashy features, into an already well-established market. In order to pry tech-trendy loyal consumers from Apple or Samsung, they would have needed to launch a product that would outdo their competitor's ten-fold. They expected their 3-D effect on the homescreen to help assure consumers their phone was apart of the elite, but consumer knowledge was not convinced. Consumer knowledge helps to differentiate from other brands. During categorization, users were not mindfully placing the Fire Phone above the competition.
This all led to the inevitable demise of the Fire Phone campaign. Amazon tried to slash its launch price from $199, to just 99 cents only one month after its unveiling. Amazon is undoubtedly a well-known brand, but it seems it relied more on it's status name rather than understanding consumer behavior in an ever-changing and advanced technological market.
No comments:
Post a Comment