The nature of competition

[Scot]

I must confess I do not come on to this forum too much primarily due to other commitments in my life. However on occasion, where I have followed a thread I have usually been surprised by the degree of realism and pragmatism that is applied to various answers.

So thought I would share this with you and poll you all for your viewpoint as I will be genuinely intrigued by your response.

Before I get to the heart of my issue if we assume the premise that for any business sector there are only so many consumers and as a consumer where a choice exists a customer will often choose one over the other.

So as an analogy if a consumer shops in Tescos on a Saturday he/she is less likely to go to Safeways as there is probably not the need. Now irrespective of whether Safeways or Tescos is better, probably little in it, Tescos is competing with Safeways. However for certain consumers they may well go to both. In fairness to both stores, both actively participate in marketing to attract new customers. Thus the decision to shop in one store or the other is a matter of personal preference and as such is the nature of competition. However the point stands that for a limited market where both stores exist the chances of people going to both lessens. The same is true of the jive world where more than one event exists people will often make the choice to go to one or the other some will of course go to both.

Now if we stick with the Store analogy, a relatively new player appears on the scene who decides that the best form of marketing is not to try and attract new customers as this is expensive and less prone to success but instead directly targets the existing stores for their customer base, while at the same time assuring the exiting stores that they will not carry out any direct canvassing.

Now one day the store manager of Tescos or Safeways comes out to find that the new player is standing at his exit handing out promotional material for their store despite previous assurances that they would not do this.

My questions are this

A. Does the Store Manager have the right to be annoyed or is he just being petty.
B. If he has the right to be annoyed should he do something about it? If so what and how far should he go? Assurances have already been given but now broken so mutual respect seems not to be an option.

What would you do …

[ChrisA]

Originally posted by Scot
My questions are this

A. Does the Store Manager have the right to be annoyed or is he just being petty.
B. If he has the right to be annoyed should he do something about it? If so what and how far should he go? Assurances have already been given but now broken so mutual respect seems not to be an option.

Interesting topic.

The analogy is clear, I think, so I'll bring it back to dance if you don't mind..

I'm not a dance venue organiser, just a dancer, so personally I'd be pleased to get information about another venue.

If it's a different night, great - as an obsessive, the more the better.

If it's the same night, then all other things being equal (travel time for instance) I might give it a go, and compare the experiences. In London some of the good venues are too packed for dancing to be as fun as it can be, so I'd be happy to have more choice.

From the organiser's POV, I can understand them being miffed.

But at the end of the day, secrecy achieves nothing. Word will get around, and the overriding factor will be which night is better.

Better teaching, music, better floor and ambience, more space, better dancers will win eventually.

To return briefly to the supermarket analogy, Asda touts itself as cheap, Tesco and Sainsbury have been head to head for a long time, with Tesco pulling ahead - IMHO for getting service and the supply chain more sorted - but there is only a finite market for groceries.

Whereas MJ is growing AFAICT, and there is tremendous scope for good venues to pull in keen dancers. My guess, and that's all it is, is that the success or failure of a venue will not be predicated on whether or how another one is publicised - all that the publicity affects is the speed at which the eventual equilbrium is reached. The position of the equilibrium is dependent on the other factors.

Chris

[Aleks]

Solely MHO.......If Tesco are providing the best possible product they can for the best possible reasons whether Safeway advertise right outside their door I don't believe that there would be much impact on their business. Customers are discerning in their choices - they are able to make their own judgement of whether it is "morally" correct for Safeway to advertise in this way and will make their choice of where to shop accordingly. If we know we're giving of our best for the best possible reasons we have nothing to fear from the behaviour of others.

[Chris]

Okay, my posts are long and boring, but I thought this was a sincere question that deserved a sincere answer.

The question is an interesting one and there’s no real hard and fast answer as far as I see.
The Asda example isn’t a perfect analogy (IMHO) but let’s go with it . . .

If the store giving out leaflets out leaflets is a smaller store or has some other local connection, it may get local sympathy (but have little chance of success). If it is a chain of similar proportions (eg a Safeway) then both are clearly big financial concerns (from the consumer’s viewpoint), irrespective of any marketing such as ‘caring for the consumer’, organic produce and so on. The law will probably be the best guide. When someone has done something once, apart from copyright etc, the principle exists that copying it is fair game in a market economy. There might be limits – eg giving out leaflets on the store’s premises, unreasonable behaviour (hard to define – have to fit it into some definite category) but lots of things that are legal are nevertheless unpleasant. Lots of things that are legal are also unethical, but with a lack of clear guidelines the law may give little weight to them. The store may have a right to get annoyed, but to do so may be unwise from a business point of view.

One flaw with the supermarket example is that it assumes that customers will get all of what they want (or so much that they will not mind the rest) from one store, and that they will travel to that store specifically (otherwise they wouldn’t see the leaflets outside would they?) This probably works for supermarkets, but the opposite occurs in many smaller shops. There are many towns where you will find rows of many shops of almost all the same kind. It seems to work for some reason. Perhaps the consumer thinks, I’ll go to such-and-such a street for hardware – if one shop doesn’t have it another will – so all benefit more than if they were wide apart because the area gets a reputation for excellence in that sort of shops. (In Broughton there seem to be an excess of hairdressers – I’ve no idea how it works for them but it must do – lack of queues if one is busy??)

In practical terms, what Asda can not afford to do is complain about it too much unless they have a legal option – they will lose customer respect if they do that. Legal force is unemotional and customers won’t be upset by it; but whereas ongoing battles disadvantage both players.

What does work seems to be expanding on success. Stores that are full can have bigger carparks and more checkouts, or introduce premium/discount lines to attract loyalty. The successful stores also have more experience when it comes to effective publicity – mailshots, e-mailshots, loyalty points schemes. Most businesses get better from competition not because they have it easy before competition – with competition they have to start ‘being the best’ again. It is nice to think we can set up a business and that much of the initial hard work is an investment, that one day we won’t have to slug away so hard, but for many businesses the opposite is true. It may come down to re-defining one’s USP (Unique Selling Positions) and focussing more on those, both in terms of future planning and in terms of present marketing.

What other options are there? If there were a list of possibles it would be much easier for a poll?

[Gus]

Originally posted by Scot
B. If he has the right to be annoyed should he do something about it? If so what and how far should he go? Assurances have already been given but now broken so mutual respect seems not to be an option.

What would you do …

I know one franchisee who was 'annoyed' and ended up kick sh*t out of the annoying person ... given the circumstances I have a great deal of sympathy for this direct approach.

The unwritten rule has always been ... you DO NOT flyer competition events ... anyone breaking that rule is a cad and a bounder ... but what are you going to do?

If you ban them, then they play the 'wronged party' line and unfortunately a lot of the punters do not understand the situation.


So response ... issue a balanced statement (similar to that you’ve posted) laying out what had happened, why its wrong and why the SOB has been banned. Mind you I'm biased ... I spent nearly £1,000 promoting my original clubs only for a certain toad to start sliming into my venues handing out flyers for his venues .... was not happy ... still ain't.:reallymad

[JamesGeary]

When you have a big player and a small player, there is a big advantage in the small player pursuing an aggressive marketing strategy, particularly when the products are very similar.

The argument can be made that it is simply freedom of information, and people have a right to be informed, after which they will then make their own minds up. The actions of attempting to restrict information could be compared to the actions seen with a dictator in a small country, and for the same reasons. And in the dance world, people often quit for a lack of variety. Its a very justifiable position.

Typically, aggressive marketing continues until the small player is of a size that it becomes worthwhile for the big player to respond in kind. The small player now has lots of students, many of who don't know about the big player. Now both sides are pursuing aggressive marketing. At this point both player are investing significant time in an activity that adds no value to the overall market/business.

The used to be small player has a remarkable turn about regarding their ideas on pamphlet bombardment when they have grown enough that they can be and actually are a target. Suddenly they change their mind, and pamphlet bombardment is a morally bad thing. At that point a ceasefire is usually negotiated as they are both wasting time, and both players can devote their time to more value-added activities. From Gus's comments this sounds like the position Blitz and Ceroc are in.

Legally a person can't solicit at a place of business, and I suspect the entrance and exit to the business would be included too. Carparks nearby are often bombared with pamphlets, I know hammersmith used to employ someone to clear all the nearby cars of pamphlets twice a night.

Anyone has a right to be damn ****ed off if they have been lied to. But you have to look to the future. You could burn bridges with this person, but they could be around for a long time, and there is nothing as unpleasant as having your main hobby/interest/ side business being spoilt by an ongoing fight. Your own customers will start avoiding mentioning any times when they go to the competitions venues, and it gets awkward for everyone.

I think the best strategy is to focus on your own business, and making that the best experience that you can for your students. You may want to temporarily employ a bouncer to escort him off your doorstep, as they do at nightclubs (to the extent that he is breaking the law, I don't know what it is) and to clear the carparks of pamphlets, just because its the economic thing to do.

If you can get mutual respect (not likely by the sounds of it) you can have business owners happily visiting each others venues and dancing there, and not soliciting or talking business, which happens. Or better yet, advertising each others events and functions, which is less common, but also happens. But that isn't economic all around unless the businesses are of similar size.

Be glad he's on your doorstep. I've heard of people hiding in toilets handing out pamphlets!! The desperation.....

[azande]

Obviously you are referring to other dance/MJ nights in Edinburgh and I think the store analogy is wrong in this case.
Very rarely (if ever) your "competition" organizes nights that coincide with the Ceroc ones, therefore I don't see that as direct competition. People who dance will go to as many dance nights as possible and if "the competition" can attract new people, in the end you could benefit from it as well, since they might start coming to your events as well.

I think you would be right in being annoyed if the leaflets/publicity was for a night that coincides with one of yours but since that is not the case I don't think you are justified.

And why not ask the other people to have leaflets for your events at theirs?

[Chicklet]

OK I'll go first...I'm going to make a big assumption that we are using the stores as standins for dance organisations???!!???

I will add I do NOT know exactly what might have prompted the (perfectly fair and sensible) question so am not secretly putting up someone elses view

Not IMHO a suitable analogy in the way set out here, reason being, supermarkets are used for necessities, requirement for which will be a fairly finite amount per person. So shopping at one store, as suggested, means less shopping at another store.

But, IMHO, dancing in Scotland is not a staple product but a luxury product so purchasing from one vendor does not preclude one from purchasing from another vendor AS WELL. Particularly if the products are slightly different and offer different experiences.

Hope this is slightly clear.

[Chris]

Why's there s*d all happening in Edinburgh this weekend? Even the nightclubs get busy early on a Saturday
[belligerent mode off]

[TheTramp]

Originally posted by Chris
Why's there s*d all happening in Edinburgh this weekend? Even the nightclubs get busy early on a Saturday
[belligerent mode off]

Edinburgh?? Try 'anywhere in Scotland' instead

Definitely a market for someone to do something on the 4th Saturday of months with 5 Saturdays in!!

I suppose that some people might like a weekend off. The strange ones....

Steve

[Paul F]

Tricky one this.

I must confess that a large part of me goes with the physical option ensuring they dont hand out flyers again.

However

I suppose this is not a very intelligent solution

I think people are more knowledgeable than advertisers make out. If I was at a venue and I walked out of the door only to be confronted by someone giving out flyers for another venue I would immediately think ......Desperation !!!!

For someone to do that is not only immoral (IMO) but its increadibly cheap and desperate. It certainly wouldnt make me go to their night. If they have to sponge off an established venue so dramatically they cant be offering anything particularly good.

(they might be but this isnt the impression i would get)

I wouldnt worry too much. At the end of the day the same thing may end up happening at both venues

Someone mentioned this used to happen in the SE ?? If memory serves.

[Scot]

Originally posted by Paul F
I think people are more knowledgeable than advertisers make out. If I was at a venue and I walked out of the door only to be confronted by someone giving out flyers for another venue I would immediately think ......Desperation !!!!

I have nothing bad to say about the competition to an extent they provide a service that I am unable to or want to and i respect that. However a verbal agreement did exist and I do consider this to be a fairly unsavoury method of advertising. Perhaps just me

To those who have responded indifferently or feel I have no right to be miffed. I would ask that, if it were you, would you really not be bothered. I wonder.

Anyway thanks for your responses it would appear from your respective advice the best course of action would be to do nothing or compete directly.

Many Thanks

[DavidB]

I won't bother with any analogy. I will go to whatever event I think is likely to have good music, a good floor, and (for local events) my friends an aquaintances. If I don't know what to expect, I'll go for the cheapest option.

I understand that all venues have to be run as a business, and I'm very grateful for all the organisers who put in the time and effort to run them. But anything that is run as a business has to expect to be treated like a business. I wouldn't expect an organiser to keep an unprofitable venue going just because it's my favourite venue. In return the organiser can't expect me to keep going to the same venue just because I always have. I worked hard for my money - the organiser has to work hard to get it off me!

I do not have any loyalty to any business organisation or venue (other than those that have shown me favours in the past.) If I go to a free venue or party, I don't expect anything. But as soon as any venue starts charging, it has to offer value for money if it wants to keep my business.

Fulham last night cost £7. But they ran an advanced class, extended the time until 11:00, and I had loads of dances. It was a lot better than it used to be, and I'll definitely go back.

Monday at Clapham offered very little reason for me to go back, so I almost certainly wont. But Havana in Fulham was free, and had the bonus of some amazing dancers to watch. Even though I can't do Lambada, and don't really like the music, it was far better value.

As a consumer I like competition, because it gives me choice, and tends to improve value for money - either by things getting cheaper, or getting better. I expect an organiser to entice me to go to his event, not prevent me from going to another event.

Scot - if you are happy that your venues offer the best possible option in Edinburgh, you have nothing to worry about. I've only ever been to Ceroc Edinburgh once, and I had a great time. You are in a far better position to keep your dancers than your competition is in trying to lure them away. But be pro-active, not reactive. Ask people what they want before they try the other venue, and see if you can do anything about it. You won't be able to please everyone, but the thought does go a long way. (In 18 years of doing Ceroc, I've only ever been asked by one teacher what I thought of the evening and the class.)

David

[Dreadful Scathe]

Originally posted by DavidB
Scot - if you are happy that your venues offer the best possible option in Edinburgh, you have nothing to worry about. I've only ever been to Ceroc Edinburgh once, and I had a great time. You are in a far better position to keep your dancers than your competition is in trying to lure them away. But be pro-active, not reactive. Ask people what they want before they try the other venue, and see if you can do anything about it. You won't be able to please everyone, but the thought does go a long way. (In 18 years of doing Ceroc, I've only ever been asked by one teacher what I thought of the evening and the class.)

Ceroc in scotland is very well organised and to be honest Scot is a great teacher and his choice in music is generally great (i actually like boogie woogie bugle boy ). In fact Scottish Ceroc in general is of a good enough standard that there are enough people coming through the ranks to intermediate level that can than support other venues and other dance styles. i.e. They are 'turned on' to dance because of Ceroc OR as has happened another alternative venue turns them onto dance and they find Ceroc more than satisfies there need. A good example is Route66 - slightly different music but they do get a fair few newcomers - but Route66 does not happen very often, so where are they going to go for regular quality nights...Ceroc.

The supermarket idea is fine as an anology but i think the advertising flyers thing is not the important point - the customers are important and they wont forget that what they receive in a particular place is excellent. If they do briefly forget then they'll remember as soon as they get an inferior service - thats what its all about, the service provided - no one has a divine right to customers no matter how much they may have spent on building up their business. In Scotland there are different events and venues to go to but Ive never felt they 'compete' with Ceroc - they compliment modern jive in general and give us all a choice.

[Gus]

Originally posted by Dreadful Scathe
The supermarket idea is fine as an analogy but i think the advertising flyers thing is not the important point

I agree but for different reasons. Dancer can only have it either one of two ways. MJ is either a Business or a Social Thing, you cant have it both ways. Why? Well, if I see A competitor and I want to beat them in the business world there are some pretty aggressive techniques I can use and they would be regarded as legitimate. HOWEVER, if I used the same techniques in my dance business people would call foul.

For example ... I compete against Ceroc Nantwich (among others) ... if I was not bound by the rules of etiquette I would;

• poach his teachers, crew and DJ
• make a counter offer for his venue
• flyers all his dancers
• on his dance nights, run mine at discounted prices or free ( )
• start point out the poor points of his club
• start a campaign against the Franchisee personally
• etc etc etc

And ... like it or not, it would work.

Now ... how would you prefer things to continue ... everyone acting as gentlemen or dragging the whole game into a fierce competitive business ... YOU CHOOSE.

[Andy McGregor]

We have been a battle ground in the Brighton area for the last 5-6 years. I'm not sure what you should do but whatever it is, please don't do what our dance teachers did

The new boy at the time (Jeff Jasper) hung around outside venues, popping out of doorways to give you leaflets. His leaflets appreared under windscreens, he slipped them to people inside venues rolled up or folded up to be passed unnoticed.

So what happenned?

The nearest and most established organiser banned Jeff and ignored the leafleting and touting outside his venues. But eventually it got to him and he touted outside one of Jeff's dances. The following week the organiser got a letter from the council saying that they'd received complaints from members of the public about being intimidated entering a venue. They threatened to ban the organiser from all council controlled venues if it ever happenned again - funny how no complaints were received when Jeff was touting

This nearest organiser had been established for many years and had successful venues. But he seemed to become obsessed with his new competitors activities and took his eye of the ball as far as keeping his cusomers happy. The result was that numbers dropped to far, far less than half their previous level.

One venue organiser dragged Jeff out to his car park and threatened him with violence if he didn't take the leaflets out from under the windscreens - that worked

Another organiser paid the council's legal expenses for a successful prosecution against a company putting leaflets under windscreen wipers. This is a refuse/waste offence like fly-tipping. The offender got a hefty fine and a criminal record!

Nowadays all of the organisers in our area are paranoid. They're constantly watching out for competitor activity and accuse people of being organisers even if they're not. To illustrate this I've pasted below an email I received only this week. This was sent after I'd had a party in my village hall for my friends from dancing and announced that I would be putting on a party next month for my wife Sue's birthday.



Subject: Agenda

Hello Andy

As you have now become an Operator (an Organiser of regular dance events), all be it of the complimentary variety (for how long?), I would like to know your agenda for the future.

My agenda is there for all to see. What's yours?

I'd like to hear it first hand from you. As I didn't receive an invitation myself; while at the same time you were indiscriminately dishing out invites at my dance classes, I have to assume you don't want me there. Am I banned or simply unwelcome?

As you all too well understand, Operator's may attend other's venues with prior agreement. A policy that the majority of Operators adhere to. At the very least, I think I'm owed an explanation as to your plans prior to you next attending any of my events.

Regards

Name Deleted

All I did was have a party in my village hall and give out some personal invitiations to my friends when I bumped into them. I didn't give an invitation to this particular organiser because he's not in my circle of friends - although I am quite friendly with him and have busked and taxied for him in the past. All of the stuff he's talking about happened in his imagination and once he'd imagined those things the other bits came from that. I just 'phoned him and sorted it, he's fine now - but I could have got quite shirty as I'd been taken completely the wrong way and had been asked to explain why I'd had a party (as if I needed a reason to party!) and to justify my guest list - on the 'phone I was even told it was suspicious that Nigel and Nina were there!

The above example shows how paraniod things have got down here on the South Coast. Don't let that happen to you. Talk to these other organisers and offer a leaflet exchange or something.

If you want to know what it's like when organisers fall out, bear in mind that I spend at least 6 hours a week just travelling to and from venues because, with one exception, there's nowhere worth going to locally!!!

p.s. I put in the 'one exception' bit so each one of the local organisers can think it's them

[Andy McGregor]

Originally posted by Gus
For example ... I compete against Ceroc Nantwich (among others) ... if I was not bound by the rules of etiquette I would;

• poach his teachers, crew and DJ
• make a counter offer for his venue
• flyers all his dancers
• on his dance nights, run mine at discounted prices or free ( )
• start point out the poor points of his club
• start a campaign against the Franchisee personally
• etc etc etc

And ... like it or not, it would work.

All of the above have been done in our area. They all worked, particularly the free nights.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Originally posted by Gus
Now ... how would you prefer things to continue ... everyone acting as gentlemen or dragging the whole game into a fierce competitive business ... YOU CHOOSE.

Good points. As you say, theres much more of a social aspect to your business which you have to take into account, and i would expect the socially aware businessman to 'win' in this situation. I have always believed that giving out flyers without asking is just rude - but thats for a venue that is NOT directly competing. If people are actively trying to get dancers to switch venue I agree thats not on at all. Other businesses - especially 'contract win' based businesses survive by being extremely cutthroat and predatory and it probably WOULD work in the dance world, but how many customers would enjoy going to such a companies venue? A few flyers will not cause your loyal punters to up and leave. Anything more than that is stepping over the line but - you quote...

HOWEVER, if I used the same techniques in my dance business people would call foul.


...indeed they would, and if the other guy trys it, let him - the dancers will cry foul.