Answer Any One Of The Questions Below: Many Consumer Package ✓ Solved

Answer any One of The Questions Below1many Consumer Package Goods Comp

Answer any one of the questions below: 1. Many consumer package goods companies go nuts with packaging--making them elegant and expensive looking all the while knowing buyers will mutilate them and discard them as fast as they can. Belgian chocolates, perfumes, iPhone are some examples of fine packaging. Why, then, some products are sold in poor or no packaging? For example, why are not tires sold in nice packaging (or some wrapping at all)? Be sure to cite the marketing concept (does not have to be from chapter 11 alone) to support your answers. Approximately 200 words. 2. Target owns several private-label brands in different categories, including Mossimo and Xhilaration clothing, Threshold home furniture and décor, and Archer Farms food. Creating all of these brands is complex and expensive. Would it be better for Target to market all of these goods under at “Target” brand? Why do you think Target creates and supports individual brand names instead of using the Target brand? Approximately 200 words.

Paper For Above Instructions

The decision for consumer package goods (CPG) companies to invest heavily in attractive packaging versus the minimal or no packaging approach hinges on fundamental marketing concepts such as brand positioning, target consumer perception, and product category demand. For premium products like Belgian chocolates, perfumes, and smartphones, elaborate packaging serves multiple strategic purposes. It enhances brand perception by conveying quality, luxury, and exclusivity, which can justify premium pricing and foster brand loyalty (Kotler & Keller, 2016). Additionally, attractive packaging serves as a powerful promotional tool on retail shelves, drawing consumer attention and differentiating the product from competitors (Tanner et al., 2008). The concept of emotional branding also plays a role; elegant packaging evokes feelings of prestige and satisfaction, reinforcing the brand’s premium image (Thompson, R., 2020).

Conversely, products like tires or bulk supplies are typically sold with minimal to no packaging because they are utilitarian, and consumers prioritize functionality over aesthetics. Packaging in these cases adds unnecessary costs, offers no emotional appeal, and could even discourage purchase if perceived as excessive or wasteful. The marketing concept of cost-benefit analysis explains this choice—companies weigh the costs of packaging against perceived consumer benefits, often concluding that minimal packaging is more aligned with the product’s value proposition and consumer expectations (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Therefore, packaging strategies are carefully aligned with product category, consumer behavior, and brand positioning.

References

• Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing Management (15th ed.). Pearson.
• Tanner, J. F., Talaro, J., & Snee, H. (2008). Retailing: A Management Approach (9th ed.). Prentice Hall.
• Thompson, R. (2020). Emotional Branding and Premium Packaging: Strategies for Luxury Brands. Journal of Brand Management, 27(3), 289–302.
• Lemon, K. N., & Verhoef, P. C. (2016). Understanding Customer Experience. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 69–96.