Why I Bought a No-Name Computer From a Components Firm

I was told by the computer doctor that my wife's desktop computer had all but died at the hands of a virus and, in addition, it had been obsolete for years. A new replacement was needed. My mind immediately went to a two-brand consideration class — Dell (most of my computers had been Dell) and HP (I have HP printers and have always like the "HP Way"). But minutes later, I decided to buy an ASUS computer even though I had never heard of it. Why? Three factors were convincing.

1. The recommendation. The computer doctor said that he had just bought and installed for another client an ASUS computer and liked the price, specs, and firm and the fact that it was available at a local electronics store that stood behind its product with service and assistance.

2. The story. He told me that ASUS has been the motherboard supplier for most of the leading computer brands. This was critical because performance and reliability is much more important to me than price.

3. The confirmation. Suspicious that an "off-brand" computer would be reliable I called my son-in-law, our in-house computer expert, who confirmed that ASUS was the motherboard firm of choice, that the motherboard is the heart of the computer, and that it would be a good choice.

Only after the purchase did I learn more about ASUS. A Google search revealed that ASUS was a Taiwan firm started in 1989 that now owns nearly 40% of the motherboard market and is a supplier to both Dell and HP. According to Interbrand, the ASUS brand is the third most valuable Taiwan brand in 2011 valued at 1.6 billion dollars. And it was a successful, major player in notebooks and tablet computers.

Several observations.

First, the power of influencers was crucial. It is reminiscent of the ideas so long ago of Regis McKenna, who helped Apple get off the ground with the concept that PR to influentials should lead the way.

Second, a story is a powerful device to deliver the brand message.

Third, having distribution, being in the right place and the right time was critical. The computer doctor might not have tried the brand if it had not been featured in an aisle display in the local store.

Fourth, there was no funnel experience, I passed by awareness, comprehension, and preference and skipped directly to purchase. Makes me wonder about the logic of many marketing programs as well as accompanying analytical efforts to measure results.

Why don't more components firms create branded final products and, like ASUS, leverage their experience and reputation? A components company has several advantages. It is going to be ahead in innovation within its area. Samsung became a leader in cell phones because of its advances in semiconductors, the key component. A components firm can control quality and production, indispensable parts of the brand experience. And it has a story that provides credibility, which is half of the relevance challenge (the other being visibility). Further, it has protection if the component business drifts toward a commodity status.

There are problems. A components manufacturer will be competing with customers, which is awkward. So, as when you launch an insurrection against a king or dictator, you better win. Further, to serve as an ongoing component supplier, you really have to have be an indispensable innovation machine with ongoing "must have" advances. You also need to deliver unquestioned quality and reliability; the market will not be forgiving if you are a competitor. Finally, you need to develop the skills and assets, especially the brand assets, to compete in the downstream business area, not a trivial challenge.

There are good reasons why components manufacturers stick to their knitting. However, the ASUS case and others show that there is potential to look beyond components to the land of great margins and more control. Andy Grove once sat in my office and suggested that Intel would have been better off if it had gone into computers. Maybe or maybe not but it might have been worth raising as a strategic option.

This post originally appeared on Harvard Business Review's blog. For more of my HBR blog posts, click here

Posted January 5, 2012 / Permalink / Subscribe (e-mail) / Subscribe (RSS)

Share


Comments

Not a very original thought. Ref. The automotive industri.. On the other hand: Samsung is a big component supplier to Apple. Not without conflict..

David,

Great post on your personal experience giving a components manufacturer a try.

Asus is indeed a well-known brand with folks who are 'in the know' about computers. Their Eee PC is widely credited with helping smaller, cheaper netbooks rise to prominence 3 years ago and they're a player in tablets and smartphones as well.

Other great case studies of companies that parlayed their expertise in component manufacture into a strong global brand are Giant Bicycles and Acer Computer. Giant is a particularly strong example and may have been the blueprint for a lot of firms in Taiwan that have made the leap.

Bill, thanks for bringing up Giant and Acer. May not be a coincidence that they are all from Taiwan.

I bought the same brand of notebook for the same reasons a year ago.

I too was influenced by WOM. seems that brands should fuel WOMs simply by creating more and more (convincing & communicable) words to be said about them. for ASUS it was said that they have had the least reported breakdown rate compared to all big brands.

Of course the DVD-ROM and battery of my notebook both brokedown after a short while!! (no need to panic David, its my bad luck!)

All in all, I believe that WOM is king when it comes to high tech B2C.

This is a case where the ingredient brand gets promoted to be the product brand and capture a larger business pie.

Unfortunately, not all cases turn out to be a winner. Rolls royce make good engines and good cars. But sad to say, the car business did not sustain very well.....despite being a superior engine brand for cars, buses, aeroplanes, etc. It will be interesting to perform more detail research as to why some ingredient brand succeed at the product level and why some don't.

I bought the same brand of notebook for the same reasons a year ago.

I too was influenced by WOM. seems that brands should fuel WOMs simply by creating more and more (convincing & communicable) words to be said about them. for ASUS it was said that they have had the least reported breakdown rate compared to all big brands.

Of course the DVD-ROM and battery of my notebook both brokedown after a short while!! (no need to panic David, its my bad luck!)

All in all, I believe that WOM is king when it comes to high tech B2C.

Dr. Cheen, the evlevation of a components brand has to be the exception. It would be worthwhile to do a study with a sample of those that made it and those that did not and see the learnings.

Mehdi, Regis McKenna popularized the power of influencers in hi tech marketing working with Apple decades ago. His ideas are more appropriate now than then.

Dr. Cheen, see the latest news from Rolls Royce. Their merger with BMW is doing well and they just announced record sales.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16440548

Could be an interesting case study given the clear differences between how RR operated as a component company compared to how BMW has positioned the brand.


(required)
(required, but will not be shown)
type the word INSPIRE below

remember your name, e-mail, and website

receive notifications of comments posted after yours


Sign up for e-mail updates

This blog post from Aaker on Brands was published on January 5, 2012. To see more posts, visit the blog home page.

Next: Great CEOs are Born, not Made

Previous: My Top 6 Aaker on Brands Blog Posts


Share