HTC admits that marketing NOT products are the reason for sales slump

[JeffDTD]

Years ago, many blamed much of sprint's growth challenges on poor marketing. That was always part of the story but never the only reason. Better marketing did not neutralize the other flaws. For HTC's sake, I hope Wang's public statement about this is not what she truly believes in total.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 4

 

 

[V12]

Being successful in the worldwide smartphone marketplace is complicated. But guess what Samsung figured it out. HTCs demise has also been complicated, but also assisted by Samsung. The fundamentals of HTCs earlier successes, as Jeff and others have noted above proved to be detrimental after Samsung so astutely changed the game for all Android OEMs.

 

Not going back too far, but HTC had the Hero variants, as an alternative for those on carriers, which at the time was really everyone else besides At&t, without the iPhone. They really made hay when they introduced the Evo on Sprint. This was essentially the start of the spec race, as HTC started the trend of using quality screens and components. HTC then subsequently released variants on other carriers. They key word here is variants, let's hold that thought for a moment.

 

Meanwhile Samsung was having moderate successes as well. However the were plagued by quality issues and a reputation of having too many handsets and not supporting them. I remember when Samsung was the whipping boy on every Android site. However Samsung had the right people in place to get then on track, realising that by mimicking Apple's tactics, and in some cases taking them even further, they could become very successful. Starting with the S2 they were able to get basically the same handset on every carrier, worldwide with a few exceptions. The S3 proved to be a watershed moment, as the were now an Android OEM with Apple clout, as Samsung pulled of basically a worldwide launch of the same handset with virtually no carrier changes.

 

Now let's merge these scenarios. As HTC continued down the road of carrier exclusives, some successful some not. They were not able to get a single handset to become a worldwide hit. Samsung was able to turn around thier image and success by utilizing focused marketing and support of defined flagship handsets. I believe HTC missed and opportunity with the Evo lte and the One X. Many would argue as I would that the Evo was a better specced variant, that was exclusive to Sprint. I would also argue as some here have pointed out that the Evo lte issues were magnified and related to Sprints launch of its unique lte network. (With the latest update my Evo which is now handed down, works pretty good.) Even here on this board there are varying assessments of performance. Just imagine if the Evo variant would have launched worldwide as the One X on more standard networks. I believe there may have been a much lower % of reported issues and HTC could have achieved S3 success. Even the S3 had some issues.

 

Lastly, now that Samsung has changed the Android game and has more clout than any other OEM besides Apple, they are able to manipulate and influence the supply chain. IIRC the ONE was to be 5" initially. Also IIRC there were reports that Samsung was changing display tech for the S4. Looks to me that Samsung tied up the market limiting HTC and making a 5" S4 more attractive to some than a

4.7" ONE. I also recall news reports that HTC had problems sourcing many parts, delaying the launch of the ONE by many weeks. Samsung is vicsous. Now that Samsung is the undisputed leader in high end, they are free to flood the low end now squeezing OEMs.

 

At this point I'm not sure what HTC can do to regain a foothold in the market, besides eliminating carrier exclusives and building on the next iteration of the ONE, marketing the hell out of it. SD cards and removable batteries don't matter at this point, it's all about changing perceptions. I'm pulling for HTC because its good for competition and I'd hate to see a market continued to be dominated by Samsung.

 

I apologize for the length, I've been thinking about this for a while and had to get it out.

[Nickel]

Years ago, many blamed much of sprint's growth challenges on poor marketing. That was always part of the story but never the only reason. Better marketing did not neutralize the other flaws. For HTC's sake, I hope Wang's public statement about this is not what she truly believes in total.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 4

Like I said earlier in the thread, a big reason they're slipping is the whole company depends on Smartphones sales while all it's competitors don't.

[themuffinman]

Like I said earlier in the thread, a big reason they're slipping is the whole company depends on Smartphones sales while all it's competitors don't.

Yep, they just don't have the working capital to grow like their competitors.

[Fraydog]

I wouldn't put it past Samsung to pull dirty tactics to put hurt on HTC at the supply chain level.

[V12]

Like I said earlier in the thread, a big reason they're slipping is the whole company depends on Smartphones sales while all it's competitors don't.

That's true. Even more for Lg and Samsung it's about having some control and expertise in the development and sourcing of parts. When you can develop and buy screens and chips from yourself, especially if you're in the business of selling them, that can only help improve profitability.

 

Additionally, back to clout and having the same flagship worldwide. When Samsung/Lg and HTC go to source a part, guess who's getting priority and better pricing.

 

There's no substitute for the competitive advantage of economies of scale.

 

I can't help but to also wonder what would the impact have been to the overall success of the One if Verizon was onboard at launch. What's the real back story to that? Does that also speak to clout with the carriers, how does Verizon call that One. (Pun intended)

[mikejeep]

Im going to agree with Ms. Wang: HTC's marketing campaign has done it no favors. Its unimagineable to me that they would pay the $$ to get Robert Downey Jr. and the best they can come up with are the trainwreck commercials that I have seen, which tell us next to nothing about devices and are crowded with distraction.

Heh, at least you have seen them.. I'm in the Boston area, and have yet to see a single one of these alleged commercials. I've seen plenty of iPhone, Samsung, and LG commercials lately though.

 

I personally don't choose my cellphone based on TV commercials or other marketing.. and if you're on S4GRU, you probably don't either. Unfortunately for HTC, most people do..

 

-Mike

[Dkoellerwx]

Heh, at least you have seen them.. I'm in the Boston area, and have yet to see a single one of these alleged commercials. I've seen plenty of iPhone, Samsung, and LG commercials lately though.

 

I personally don't choose my cellphone based on TV commercials or other marketing.. and if you're on S4GRU, you probably don't either. Unfortunately for HTC, most people do..

 

-Mike

 

While I was in Europe, HTC was putting the HTC ONE everywhere. They were a huge soccer sponsor, their ads played in every tv break. 

 

Here I haven't seen ads quite as much, but I have seen them. Mainly during prime time, sporting programs. But also on channels like TBS, TNT and USA. But definitely no where as much marketing as Samsung and Apple have. 

[JeffDTD]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVE1OcfB1E4

 

Bits of this have been used as commercials. 

[WiWavelength]

While I was in Europe, HTC was putting the HTC ONE everywhere.

 

Indeed, I keep my HTC One in my European carry all.  I am a fancy boy.  But it is not a purse!

 

 

AJ