Marketing Mix (4Ps) Analysis of Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost

About 4Ps Model

The 4p model of marketing comprises elements of the product, price, promotion, and place (Chernev, 2018; Kucuk, 2017). The model is commonly referred to as the marketing mix. The marketing mix of the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost allows and facilitates it in achieving its marketing objectives as well as in positively influencing the target audience (Baines, Fill, & Rosengren, 2017). The elements identified in the marketing mix are typically used by the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost for marketing its product and service, and for brand development and building activities. These elements are critically fundamental for the development and creation of marketing plans and marketing strategies by the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost – especially for developing and sustaining competitive advantage (Chernev, 2018; Stead & Hastings, 2018; Grewal & Levy, 2021). Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost ensures that the elements identified for the marketing mix model work together cohesively, and complement each other in all its marketing strategies and plans (Abratt & Bendixen, 2018; Deepak & Jeyakumar, 2019).

Product

The product refers to the actual good or service that is being marketed to the consumers by Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost, and which will be consumed by the target audience of the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost (Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015). The product or the service being offered by Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost largely aims to fulfill a market need and demand, as well as works to create demand by providing a unique and fulfilling customer experience (Stead & Hastings, 2018; Sahaf, 2019).

Quality

Product quality for Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost largely refers to how well the company is able to satisfy the customers’ needs and demands through its product and service offerings (Baines, Fill, & Rosengren, 2017; Deepak & Jeyakumar, 2019). In addition to this, the product quality for Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost further includes the adherence of the company and its product and service offerings to industry standards and benchmarks as well as the ability of the same to serve its meaning and purpose comprehensively (Iacobucci, 2021; Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015; Chernev, 2018).

Customer demand fulfillment

The ability of the product and service to fulfill customer demands as well as its purpose, and to work efficiently and effectively are important facets of product quality for Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost (Iacobucci, 2021; Deepak & Jeyakumar, 2019). Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost ensures that its products are available for customers at affordable prices by controlling internal costs (Wu & Li, 2018).

Warranty

The warranty extended by Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost includes the guarantee that the company to its customers regarding the functioning and the quality of the purchased food and service (Abratt & Bendixen, 2018). In addition, Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost’s warranty also includes any compensation that the company has promised to give the customers in case the product and service fall short of the marketed benefits and functionalities (Išoraitė, 2016; Grewal & Levy, 2021; Kucuk, 2017).

Packaging

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost focuses thoroughly on the packaging and makes sure it includes the process of designing, evaluating, and developing a container for the products and services being manufactured and marketed (Deepak & Jeyakumar, 2019; Baines, Fill, & Rosengren, 2017). The packaging of the product and the service allows Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to highlight the product's purpose, as well as provides ease in transportation, gives room for more prolonged shelf life, and creates a unique and delightful customer experience (Kareh, 2018; Park, 2020).

Brand

The Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost invests in developing brands out of its products and service offerings. This means that the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost engages in brand-building activities for its offerings i.e. associating specific designs and communications with its products to ensure differentiation, and easier communication with the target audience (Gillespie & Swan, 2021).

Building the brand

The branding-building activities undertaken by the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost ensure that its target audience is better able to relate to the offerings (Abratt & Bendixen, 2018). Through this, the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost ensures higher loyalty and repeat purchases, as well as positive perception creation for its offerings (Khan, 2014; Kareh, 2018).

Features

Product features or characteristics refer to the product traits and attributes present in the offerings of Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost that allow the company to successfully deliver unique value to customers through the products and services manufactured and offered (Varadarajan, 2015; Kotler & Keller, 2021). The product traits and features also allow Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to create points of differentiation from the competition for its offering (Kotler & Keller, 2021; Park, 2020).

Product style

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost makes sure to focus on the design and the look of the product, and the ability of the same to meet the expectations and lifestyle of the target audience (Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015). The Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost ensures that the product style and design complement its features and purpose.

Functionality

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost makes sure that the product manufactured fulfills its purpose, and meets customer expectations (Abratt & Bendixen, 2018). Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost focuses on the product design, and how well it is able to fulfill the demands of the customers, as well as fill in the market gap (Baines, Fill, & Rosengren, 2017)

Experience

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost products provide the customers with an exceptional and unique experience upon consumption (Kotler & Keller, 2021). This experience includes interaction with the products that leads to different unique and positive customer feelings and helps the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost maintain differentiation from the competition (Varadarajan, 2015; Kotabe & Helsen, 2020).

Availability

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost ensures that its product and service offerings are available for its target consumers at various retail setups. The easy availability ensures that consumers are able to purchase the offerings of Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost from various locations, allowing the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to create an advantage over competing players (Kotler & Keller, 2021; Chernev, 2018).

Convenience

One point of focus for Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost in its product offering is convenience. The Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost ensures that its products and service are easy and convenient to use. The factor of convenience allows Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to enjoy a higher consumption rate, as well as increased sales and trials (Kotabe & Helsen, 2020; Kucuk, 2017).

After-sales service

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost caters to after-sales queries and demands of customers, which also includes processes of returns as well as exchanges. The after-sales service of company Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost is detrimental and critical in determining customer satisfaction with its offerings (Iacobucci, 2021; Chernev, 2018).

Sizes

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost has different SKUs in the product available. Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost has its products available in various SKU sizes which helps the company boost its sales, as different customer groups have different demands for the product quantity – depending on their usage, income as well as lifestyle (Grewal & Levy, 2021; Deepak & Jeyakumar, 2019).

Price

The element of price in the marketing mix refers to the value that customers pay for the service or the product offered by Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost. The pricing strategy and the price of the offerings are critical because it determines three success for Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost by directly influencing the profit levels and revenue for the company (Kotabe & Helsen, 2020; Kotler & Keller, 2021; Deepak & Jeyakumar, 2019).

Discounts

One of the ways through which the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost influences its pricing strategies is through offering discounts on its product and service offerings. Discounted pricing for the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost means that Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost decreases the price of the product and service in order to generate interest, or even unload excessive inventory and stock; as well as for boosting sales (Baines, Fill, & Rosengren, 2017).

Margins

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost makes room for margins through the additional value charged in price over the cost – which allows the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to build profit for its offerings (Kucuk, 2017). The margins available to the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost largely depend on the offering and its quality itself, in addition to the brand equity and brand value of the company.

Payment method

A significant factor of the pricing element of the marketing mix for the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost includes the payment methods that the company offers (Kotler & Keller, 2021; Abratt & Bendixen, 2018). Since the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost largely operates distribution to retail via agents and retailers, it ensures the inclusion of different payment methods. This includes digital payment, cash payment, as well as credit allowances (Grewal & Levy, 2021; Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015).

Pricing strategy

Penetrative pricing strategy

For Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost, the penetrative pricing strategy is adopted as it allows the company higher trial generation of its products and services in the desired target market, as well as allows the building of a broader reach for its product offerings by ensuring easier affordability (Baines, Fill, & Rosengren, 2017).

Introductory pricing strategy

For new products that the company launches, Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost ensures to adopt an introductory pricing strategy. This means that the company prices its products and service offerings at relatively lower prices than the competition. This introductory pricing strategy allows the company to increase trial generation, achieve higher penetration, as well as lead to the generation of increased brand awareness and recall (Kucuk, 2017).

Aggressive/competitive pricing strategy

For existing products, Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost uses a competitive and aggressive pricing strategy. This ensures that the products are available readily at competitive prices. Aggressive and competitive pricing strategies allow the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to experience high rates of growth and experience by allowing the buildup of consumer loyalty and following based largely on product attributes and quality instead of price– leading to the generation of higher brand equity and value for Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost (Deepak & Jeyakumar, 2019).

Place

The element of place within the 4Ps model of the marketing mix largely refers to the locations where company Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost stocks its product and service offerings for consumers' accessibility and purchase. Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost ensures to include all possible placements which are easily accessible to and available for the company's target audience (Iacobucci, 2021; Išoraitė, 2016). With the advancement of technology, Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost has expanded the placement of its products beyond the traditional brick-and-mortar retail spaces, to include modern Omni channel retail platforms as well (Iacobucci, 2021).

Physical stores/retail

The physical retail and stores i.e. the traditional brick and mortar spaces continue to be the prioritized locations for product placement by Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost (Iacobucci, 2021; Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015; Abratt & Bendixen, 2018).

Retail types

These include hypermarkets, upper markets, and smaller grocery stores - all of which allow increased accessibility and availability of Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost’s products and services to its target audience. Physical retail has a higher footfall and allows direct interaction of the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost brand and its product offerings with the consumers (Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015; Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015; Chernev, 2018).

E-commerce

E-tailers

The Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost also stocks its products on e-commerce retail shops – such as amazon. This allows the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost higher access and penetration in other markets, as well as in secondary consumer groups. Moreover, e-commerce retailing is more cost-effective for the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost (Wu & Li, 2018; Chernev, 2018; Baines, Fill, & Rosengren, 2017).

Company-owned website

In addition to stocking products with other e-trailers, the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost also manages orders through its own website, where consumers can place orders for Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost’s products directly. This allows the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost greater control over stock and inventory management, as well as distribution networks – allowing the buildup of stronger relations with consumers.

Lastly, the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost also takes limited orders through social media pages and platforms (Wu & Li, 2018; Baines, Fill, & Rosengren, 2017).

Aggregators

Another way through which Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost uses e-commerce is by stocking its offerings with aggregators (Kucuk, 2017). This allows the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to maximize its reach and increase penetration. At the same time, it also allows increased trial generation and repeats purchases for the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost product offerings (Išoraitė, 2016; Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015).

Specialty stores

Interestingly, the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost also stocks its products with specialty stores (Grewal & Levy, 2021). This gives the company direct exposure to its target market and audience and allows the consumers to directly interact with the brand and its offerings- without too much clutter (Kotler & Keller, 2021; Gillespie & Swan, 2021). The specialty stores are located in prime locations, and allow Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost higher penetration and reach, leading to increased brand awareness for its product offerings (Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015; Išoraitė, 2016).

Direct sales

The Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost also has a trained sales team for making direct sales (Kotler & Keller, 2021). Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost targets not only B2C consumers but also B2-B consumers (Chernev, 2018; Grewal & Levy, 2021). Both these categories, also make use of direct marketing whereby the sales agents and teams visit the target audience and business directly and detail the product features and benefits (Kotler & Keller, 2021; Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015).

B2B and direct sales

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost’s team makes sales instantly during field visits for the company (Sahaf, 2019; Stead & Hastings, 2018). The target audience is carefully profiled and selected by the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost so that the sales representatives are able to filter out the clutter (Gillespie & Swan, 2021; Išoraitė, 2016). Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost is able to easily contact and communicate with the desired business groups only (Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015; Abratt & Bendixen, 2018).

Inventory management

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost effectively manages its inventory and fulfills the retailer's demand in time to ensure that it manages customer relations efficiently – and does not lose any customers. Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost has also introduced automation in inventory management which allows it to improve efficiency and speed, and reduce error rates (Park, 2020; Gillespie & Swan, 2021; Kucuk, 2017).

Transportation

For Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost, this includes choosing cos effective transportation means for inventory handling, as well as order deliveries to customers, as well as retailers. The company uses third-party transportation, as well as manages its own in-house transportation networks for ensuring on-time order deliveries (Abratt & Bendixen, 2018; Chernev, 2018; Grewal & Levy, 2021).

Promotion

The element of promotion in the marketing mix for Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost largely refers to the tactics and activities of communication that the company has adopted for promoting its products and services – including the brand, and its offerings, as well as other product features, characteristics, and activities (Varadarajan, 2015; Gillespie & Swan, 2021). The communication is largely targeted toward the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost's target audience and is aimed to increase brand awareness, brand loyalty as well as sales of the company (Wu & Li, 2018; Grewal & Levy, 2021).

Direct marketing

For its more specific products and offerings, Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost uses direct marketing. Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost directly emails potential customers- especially its B2B consumers for detailing its product offerings and features. Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost uses personalized messages and captures new clients and customers for the business. In addition to direct emailing, the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost also makes use of telemarketing and direct mail for targeting audiences through direct marketing (Chernev, 2018; Sahaf, 2019).

In-store promotion

Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost also focuses on in-store promotions for appealing to the customers, and boosting sales as well as raising brand awareness and profile of its offerings (Baines, Fill, & Rosengren, 2017). For Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost, the in-store promotions include offering price discounts, loyalty points, and flash sales for its products. In addition, the company also invests in building up the POS within the store locations (Stead & Hastings, 2018; Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015).

Social media marketing

One of the more contemporary forms of marketing and promotion for Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost includes social media marketing. The company has an official presence and profiles on social media platforms such as Facebook and Instagram, and regularly uses these platforms to promote its offerings, and product features and characteristics (Stead & Hastings, 2018). In addition, these platforms are also used by Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to inform consumers about using sales and discounts to increase in-store footfall.

Traditional advertising

The Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost continues to use traditional marketing tactics and promotional platforms as well – largely for mass marketing purposes. The company especially focuses on TV advertisements, ad print media advertising for this purpose (Išoraitė, 2016; Iacobucci, 2021).

TV

TV advertisements are generally placed in prime time for higher visibility and reach by Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost. The TV advertisements use functional as well as emotional appeals to communicate the message of the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to the audiences (Iacobucci, 2021; Stead & Hastings, 2018).

Print

Print media and advertisements are published in newspapers and magazines – both of which are generally consumed in high proportion by the broader target audience of the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost (Chernev, 2018; Iacobucci, 2021; Stead & Hastings, 2018).

Radio

The Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost also places advertisements on the radio to appeal to a segment of the target population. The radio communications by the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost are usually shorter and focus on functional appeal only (Park, 2020; Išoraitė, 2016; Groucutt & Hopkins, 2015).

Integrated marketing communications

The advertisement and promotional messages by Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost for all mediums and channels however are built on an integrated plan, and ensure that they reflect messages and communication that is similar to the overall campaign to void confusion and discrepancies (Gillespie & Swan, 2021; Kotler & Keller, 2021). The use of integrated marketing and integrated media has allowed the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost to build strong relations with the consumers through prompting conversations and discussions directly with them (Deepak & Jeyakumar, 2019; Sahaf, 2019; Stead & Hastings, 2018).

Conclusion

The 4p model or the marketing mix is an important aspect of brand building and development for the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost and significantly guides the company in the chalking out of its strategic marketing goals and plans. The marketing mix model or the 4P model has helped the Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost in increasing its products’ and services’ reach and penetration and witness high levels of expansion and growth. The model has also led Askew s Foods versus Wal-Mart Sustainable versus Low-Cost towards a better understanding of its target audience and consumers. This understanding, in turn, has fostered strong emotional relations and increased loyalty on part of consumers towards the company – leading to an overall increase in the brand value and brand equity, as well as higher levels of brand affiliation, brand awareness, and brand recall. Together, the marketing mix has helped the company boost its sales and revenue by aligning its offerings with the needs and demands of the consumers, and the market more effectively and efficiently.

References

Abratt, R., & Bendixen, M. (2018). Strategic marketing: Concepts and cases. New York, United States: Routledge.

Baines, P., Fill, C., & Rosengren, S. (2017). Marketing. New York, United States: Oxford University Press.

Chernev, A. (2018). Strategic marketing management. Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Cerebellum Press.

Deepak, R., & Jeyakumar, S. (2019). Marketing management. New Delhi, India: Educreation Publishing.

Gillespie, K., & Swan, K. (2021). Global marketing. New York, United States: Routledge.

Grewal, D., & Levy, M. (2021). M: marketing. New York, United States: McGraw-Hill Education.

Groucutt, J., & Hopkins, C. (2015). Marketing. London: Macmillan International Higher Education.

Iacobucci, D. (2021). Marketing management. Boston, Massachusetts, United States: Cengage Learning.

Išoraitė, M. (2016). Marketing mix theoretical aspects. International Journal of Research-Granthaalayah, 4(6), 25-37.

Kareh, A. (2018). Evolution of the four Ps: Revisiting the marketing mix. Retrieved June 2022, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2018/01/03/evolution-of-the-four-ps-revisiting-the-marketing-mix/

Khan, M. (2014). The concept of ‘marketing mix’and its elements. International journal of information, business and management, 6(2), 95-107.

Kotabe, M., & Helsen, K. (2020). Global marketing management. Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons.

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. (2021). Marketing Management (15th global edition). London, United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited.

Kucuk, S. (2017). Marketing and Marketing Mix. In Visualizing Marketing (pp. 3-7). London, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.

Park, S. (2020). Marketing management (Vol. 3). Retrieved June 2022, from https://books.google.com.pk/books/about/Marketing_Management.html?id=p6v7DwAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y

Sahaf, A. (2019). Strategic marketing: Making decisions for strategic advantage. New Delhi, India: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.

Stead, M., & Hastings, G. (2018). Advertising in the social marketing mix: getting the balance right. In Social Marketing (pp. 29-43). London, England: Psychology Press.

Varadarajan, R. (2015). Strategic marketing, marketing strategy and market strategy. AMS review , 5(3), 78-90.

Wu, Y., & Li, E. (2018). Marketing mix, customer value, and customer loyalty in social commerce: A stimulus-organism-response perspective. Internet Research., 28(1), 74-104.