Comments on: Monster Energy Drinks Marketing Idea and Strategy is Flawed

By: Logo Design

Logo Design — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:49:59 +0000

Businesses must proactively protect their brand, some of course (like Apple) can be a little overzealous its all about finding the balance.

By: Allyn

Allyn — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:05:35 +0000

Hey Josh, as always, you bring a nice balanced perspective to the issue. But you know me and you know my personality is anything but balanced. I completely agree with your statements about US patent law, but my way of doing things is to go head on and put out the immediate fire, not look for the embers burning underneath.

Also, and I have not said this before, but there is a statement that the Monster Energy Guy made in direct aim at Rock Art on Facebook. The Monster brand manager sent an email explaining the patent and trademark laws, etc to a concerned blogger. I read the whole thing and I was very understanding at that point of what Monster had to do and why… but then, just at the end of the email, the extremely arrogant Monster brand manager decided to say this:

"All this from a Company who has ripped-off a sacred Hopi Indian symbol as the principal logo of their brand, go figure?

Sincerely,

Monster Mark"

Here is the link if you want to read it yourself:
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=17189490280...

so what we have here is an arrogant president of a huge company proving that outside of "the rule of law" he IS out to hurt the little guy. His comment quoted above is what set me off. I feel like dropping an F-bomb right now just thinking about it.

And, BTW– I think 95% of big company CEOs think exactly like this. They look at regular folks as idiots and simpletons… Monster Mark proves my point.

PS–steve, great intro man, you rock brudda

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:37:00 +0000

@jtrigsby, yup I know Steve does a lot with video/audio and whatnot. Not sure if he does exactly that for a living. I agree that taking the time in the beginning to contact the "little" guys and opening a dialog with them would be by far the best option. I see that they have reached some sort of an agreement with Rock Art and hope it works out well for the both of them.

@Mimami, The market and competition is pretty competitive I can see the need for protecting what you have.

By: Steve Sherron

Steve Sherron — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:44:37 +0000

Josh, I have no idea what your video was about. I couldn't get past the intro. I kept playing it over and over, rewinding until I tore up my mouse. Intro was Bad-ass! Maybe I'll come back later and actually watch the video, I'm sure it's good. lol!

By: jtrigsby

jtrigsby — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 04:17:26 +0000

Hey Josh,

First, yes… I was thinking during the whole intro, “This is AWESOME!” I need one of those. Does Steve do them for a living? It rocks!

Now, on to the Monster issue. I wrote a post about this a couple of days ago. I completely agree with you. Monster has to protect their trademark. BUT, they can assert their trademark without scuttling the small guys. My point is instead of trying to beat them down.

Now the cleanup is going to be a much bigger pain and cost them much more than if they’d just reached out a helping hand.

Thanks for keeping this in front of everyone!

Talk soon,

jtrigsby

By: Miami

Miami — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:53:34 +0000

With so many drinks out there in the market, the competetion is high. Aside from protecting your brand, your product has to be unique from all the competetion to be on top of them all. I see your point from the disagreement, each company has to settle their differences face to face and not hitting you at the back.