Marketing Uses the Language of War.

Marketing is war.

It is a constant battle for market share. In most categories, to capture a 1% market share means millions of dollars. Especially in a market the size of the U.S. I remember doing work for the wine industry, where we determined that if their core target would buy just one more bottle per year - just one more over the course of an entire year - their revenue would jump by almost 30%. A phenomenal gain. So strategies are developed to battle for small wins. There is no doubt, marketing is a game of inches.

It's a constant battle for share of voice. Who dominates the category? Who is buying the most media more efficiently than the competition? Who is finding the most unique ways of connecting with their target market? Whose campaigns are being mentioned most often in surveys? Which brand is using the best online tactics and media blitzes? Who is employing the smartest guerrilla marketing?

It's a constant battle for share of heart. This is the most prized hill of all to conquer. To connect emotionally. If an emotional bond is made, then they have achieved brand loyalty. It's a very elusive thing these days, as people have so many choices, and are just as happy to be philanderers when it comes to consuming. In years gone by, brand loyalty was a huge factor. For decades, my father was an Oldsmobile man. But somewhere along the line, Oldsmobile lost their hold on my father. He now drives a Honda.

You may have noticed that I used the language of war above. Words like target, tactic, campaign, strategy, guerrilla, battle and blitz. But this is also the language of marketing. There is a very specific reason for this: Most of the men on Madison Avenue, in the booming 1950s, had returned from WWll and the Korean War, and they brought with them the language of war.

It stuck. To this day.

Because marketing is war.

Just ask Coke or Pepsi.

Microsoft or Apple.

GM or Toyota.