JF-17 Thunder Multirole Fighter [Thread 6]

[Gandhi follower]

Hi,

You have brought out some very important points----.

The biggest flaw in the presentation of JF 17 to the world was as if the PAF wanted to present this aircraft to PAF and what PAF needed and what it desired.

Paf lacked understanding what the needs and desires of perspective buying nations would be----would the plane be purchased for what a nation's air force needs or a pane would be purchased to show off the strength of the nation---. Was the nation looking to strut around in their new procurement----or were they satisfied with the ' STILETTO " like approach of the aircraft rather than a smasher thumper type image.

In product sales 101-----you find their needs and desires first----you just don't shove your product in front of them just like that---here it is----. So---as you find their needs and desires---so then you plan you display---you strengthen up the likeable and compliment it with all the other extras that are available.

basically---you need to find the HOT BUTTON of the customer---what turns him on----what is he going to do with the aircraft---and then you show him exactly what your aircraft will do for him as he wants it done-----.

And after you have hit on the hot points---you can then share other items of power projection that are a standard part of the package.

The thing is that there is a very fine line between a sale and a no sale----sometimes you oversell your product so much---that the customer gets confused and sometimes you undersell it so much that the customer is left wanting----.

So---it is better to have people whose job is to sell than to have those whose job is to fight----. Warriors are terrible sales people.

You sound like selling a toy than a strategic weapon. Selling of strategic weapon has nothing to do with marketing it is about capacity and capabilities, threat perception and ofcourse cost and supply chain.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

You sound like selling a toy than a strategic weapon. Selling of strategic weapon has nothing to do with marketing it is about capacity and capabilities, threat perception and ofcourse cost and supply chain.

perhaps you didnt follow the Indian MMRCA program enough. defence procurement is a very pains taking and intensive undertaking. a country's fate depends on it and a sale is only possible when the demands of the buyer meet what the seller is offering.

the principles remain the same like a commercial/ civilian purchase, the checks and negotiations and trials are done in detail to match the needs with what is on offer. please correct your self

 

[abdulbarijan]

You sound like selling a toy than a strategic weapon. Selling of strategic weapon has nothing to do with marketing it is about capacity and capabilities, threat perception and ofcourse cost and supply chain.

First off marketing isn't simply an advertising/selling/promotion campaign -- just use google and search for 4P's of marketing (Product, price, place, Promotion) -- You'll come to know that promotion is ONLY 1 of 4 major parts of marketing when it comes to tangible products ...

While there are many differences between selling to an individual consumer, and a big organization / gov -- the concept is the same -- you have to sell an "idea" to generate a sale .. and the usual idea goes like this " you have this problem ... here is the best solution" -- that is essentially "IT" ...now while there maybe several models that marketing pro's are taught from consumer buying models to buying center (acquisition teams of big businesses) models -- the basics remain the same ..

so you go from identification of your problem (need/desire etc. that you need fulfilled as MK quite correctly pointed out), to information search to classifying different alternatives based on the characteristics you prefer towards a decision and then you have the stage of post purchase behavior...


So just to conclude, even with the complexities involved in a weapons transaction -- marketing has ALOT to do with it ...

Hi,

You have brought out some very important points----.

The biggest flaw in the presentation of JF 17 to the world was as if the PAF wanted to present this aircraft to PAF and what PAF needed and what it desired.

Paf lacked understanding what the needs and desires of perspective buying nations would be----would the plane be purchased for what a nation's air force needs or a pane would be purchased to show off the strength of the nation---. Was the nation looking to strut around in their new procurement----or were they satisfied with the ' STILETTO " like approach of the aircraft rather than a smasher thumper type image.

In product sales 101-----you find their needs and desires first----you just don't shove your product in front of them just like that---here it is----. So---as you find their needs and desires---so then you plan you display---you strengthen up the likeable and compliment it with all the other extras that are available.

basically---you need to find the HOT BUTTON of the customer---what turns him on----what is he going to do with the aircraft---and then you show him exactly what your aircraft will do for him as he wants it done-----.

And after you have hit on the hot points---you can then share other items of power projection that are a standard part of the package.

The thing is that there is a very fine line between a sale and a no sale----sometimes you oversell your product so much---that the customer gets confused and sometimes you undersell it so much that the customer is left wanting----.

So---it is better to have people whose job is to sell than to have those whose job is to fight----. Warriors are terrible sales people.

I think what went wrong with the export was the approach of the project -- where we were like --

"Okay here is a middle tier cost effective fighter --- we'll use it and see how it goes ... and IF it goes good, we"ll ALSO be able to export it ... "

What the marketing teams should focus on as well, is the adaptability of the product, so that the potential customer knows that this product will work for their org as it can adapt to as you pointed out "needs/wants/desires" ...

Cost effectiveness is indeed a great and inviting selling point, but what good does cost effectiveness do if the product isn't even able to fulfill an Org's requirements ... hence it is of the utmost importance to use adaptability as a selling point as much as cost effectiveness -- and deliver on these promises (of cost effectiveness and adaptability) ....

 

[Gandhi follower]

perhaps you didnt follow the Indian MMRCA program enough. defence procurement is a very pains taking and intensive undertaking. a country's fate depends on it and a sale is only possible when the demands of the buyer meet what the seller is offering.

the principles remain the same like a commercial/ civilian purchase, the checks and negotiations and trials are done in detail to match the needs with what is on offer. please correct your self

I may have not followed it but what i stated is the basic principle for purchase of strategic weapons which will serve you for another 30-40 years. Customer will do his/ her own assessment on the basis of his or her requirement. Marketing has a very very limited role to play in it. This is not a retail sale it about b2b marketing. You have to customize the product.

 

[Gandhi follower]

First off marketing isn't simply an advertising/selling/promotion campaign -- just use google and search for 4P's of marketing (Product, price, place, Promotion) -- You'll come to know that promotion is ONLY 1 of 4 major parts of marketing when it comes to tangible products ...

While there are many differences between selling to an individual consumer, and a big organization / gov -- the concept is the same -- you have to sell an "idea" to generate a sale .. and the usual idea goes like this " you have this problem ... here is the best solution" -- that is essentially "IT" ...now while there maybe several models that marketing pro's are taught from consumer buying models to buying center (acquisition teams of big businesses) models -- the basics remain the same ..

so you go from identification of your problem (need/desire etc. that you need fulfilled as MK quite correctly pointed out), to information search to classifying different alternatives based on the characteristics you prefer towards a decision and then you have the stage of post purchase behavior...


So just to conclude, even with the complexities involved in a weapons transaction -- marketing has ALOT to do with it ...




I think what went wrong with the export was the approach of the project -- where we were like --

"Okay here is a middle tier cost effective fighter --- we'll use it and see how it goes ... and IF it goes good, we"ll ALSO be able to export it ... "

What the marketing teams should focus on as well, is the adaptability of the product, so that the potential customer knows that this product will work for their org as it can adapt to as you pointed out "needs/wants/desires" ...

Cost effectiveness is indeed a great and inviting selling point, but what good does cost effectiveness do if the product isn't even able to fulfill an Org's requirements ... hence it is of the utmost importance to use adaptability as a selling point as much as cost effectiveness -- and deliver on these promises (of cost effectiveness and adaptability) ....

Agreed, that is what i was saying. Just read the first line of my post.

 

[MuZammiL Dr. s[1]n]

Hi,

The J 10 B is basically the same thing as an F 16. Having J 10 B's is like securing your position----like covering your flank in case some issues pop up with the F 16's---it is like an INSURANCE policy to cover your assets in times of duress.

Why there is a cost excuse from P.a.f. every time especially when they have to acquire some new jet to make some balance with the already huge iaf equpped with more quality & quantity ...

suppose , if somehow our airforce suffers heavy losses or our f-16s (which our airforce so blindly relies on) gets compromised i.e. shot down during war with india then who will take the criminal responsibiity of their strategic blunder ... ?!

ur views ??

 

[MastanKhan]

Why there is a cost excuse from P.a.f. every time especially when they have to acquire some new jet to make some balance with the already huge iaf equpped with more quality & quantity ...

suppose , if somehow our airforce suffers heavy losses or our f-16s (which our airforce so blindly relies on) gets compromised i.e. shot down during war with india then who will take the criminal responsibiity of their strategic blunder ... ?!

ur views ??

Hi,
It is not a cost excuse---. It is just the mindset----. The problem is that the defense minister is an illiterate person----who does not know any better.

You sound like selling a toy than a strategic weapon. Selling of strategic weapon has nothing to do with marketing it is about capacity and capabilities, threat perception and ofcourse cost and supply chain.

Pappy,

Do you know the difference between men and boys

It is the price of their toys

If you don't understand the concept does not mean it does not happen---. Strategic weapons are toys----that are manufactured for big boys----. There are 10 different countries producing them----why they need to buy what you have---it is like a game----like fishing---entice them---get them hooked on you---reel them in.

 

[Gandhi follower]

Hi,
It is not a cost excuse---. It is just the mindset----. The problem is that the defense minister is an illiterate person----who does not know any better.



Pappy,

Do you know the difference between men and boys

It is the price of their toys

If you don't understand the concept does not mean it does not happen---. Strategic weapons are toys----that are manufactured for big boys----. There are 10 different countries producing them----why they need to buy what you have---it is like a game----like fishing---entice them---get them hooked on you---reel them in.

Do you have work in sales department.. Don't mind .. Just try to understand from where this mentality is coming in. The marketing concepts that you are talking about may work for 10 members but not for a institution or nation.

 

[fatman17]

Mods Pl start a block 2 thread

 

[abdulbarijan]

Do you have work in sales department.. Don't mind .. Just try to understand from where this mentality is coming in. The marketing concepts that you are talking about may work for 10 members but not for a institution or nation.

Unfortunately, the acquisition teams (the key guys and gals that decide that this is the product we should go for ) are essentially more or less 10-15 people... so in other words --- if I want to sale an item to an organization, I only have to convince their acquisition team usually termed as the "buying center" .....

and your frame of mind is a common misconception where the person goes " Org's don't make decisions like individual people do since they have alot more on stake" -- true but only to an extent --- org's do have alot on stake -- the reason why there is a high level of scrutiny in the purchase process ...


However, acquisition teams are composed of ........ People i.e Human beings .... and human beings are prone to image building/promotion marketing tactics ... they are prone to having preferences .... to simply put it, even with the added scrutiny the basic unit of an acquisition team i.e a person, is as vulnerable to marketing/image building tactics as any Tom, Dick or Harry out there ....

 

[MastanKhan]

Do you have work in sales department.. Don't mind .. Just try to understand from where this mentality is coming in. The marketing concepts that you are talking about may work for 10 members but not for a institution or nation.

Hi,

Absolutely---almost 25 + years now---. If you don't know about it---then its good to learn by asking question---so---plz---don't assume----you know what happens----you make an *** out of u and me.

Institutions or nations don't buy things---. Individuals do----in a 10---15 member team---1 person has the power to decide---the rest are just looking to make sure everything is set and working as promised.

Actually---most of the times---the decisions are already made---you just have to fill in the blanks to see if the product has what you need.

Not every nations goes out on a 5 years mmrca hunt and ends up with nothing----.

Nations like argentina and Pakistan have already decided thru their research what they want---it is just about connecting the dots---.

When Pakistan goes out shopping---it already has its priority set---it knows what it wants---it looks at the tiers---if it is the only thing available in its tier---that is what the goal would be to procure----if the dots can be connected---deal is done.

If there are multiple items on the same tiers---then it is about the deal---. But the decision had already been made which way they will go.

The Argentinians were also in the same position---their tier one was JF 17---their tier 2 was Kfir---the deal did not work out for JF 17---they simply did not have the funds---they went for Kfir.

Same with Egypt---when Sisi came into power---the U S put sanctions on the 24 F 16's that Egypt was getting---. The Egyptian president got up and called the French premier---told him he wanted 24 Rafales on the run---make a deal---the French did and the Egyptians already have 2 of them.

The americans came back crawling with their 18 F 16's as well.

My American colleagues used to have a very hard time with Indians negotiating for pennies on 30--40 50 dollars of car purchases---. I had to explain t to them that these people are used to bargain of a small bundle of celery and mint leaves and a lb of potatoes or a lb of cauliflower---it is out of habbit.

 

[black-hawk_101]

Burma is buying JF-17s?

 

[Donatello]

Hi,

Absolutely---almost 25 + years now---. If you don't know about it---then its good to learn by asking question---so---plz---don't assume----you know what happens----you make an *** out of u and me.

Institutions or nations don't buy things---. Individuals do----in a 10---15 member team---1 person has the power to decide---the rest are just looking to make sure everything is set and working as promised.

Actually---most of the times---the decisions are already made---you just have to fill in the blanks to see if the product has what you need.

Not every nations goes out on a 5 years mmrca hunt and ends up with nothing----.

Nations like argentina and Pakistan have already decided thru their research what they want---it is just about connecting the dots---.

When Pakistan goes out shopping---it already has its priority set---it knows what it wants---it looks at the tiers---if it is the only thing available in its tier---that is what the goal would be to procure----if the dots can be connected---deal is done.

If there are multiple items on the same tiers---then it is about the deal---. But the decision had already been made which way they will go.

The Argentinians were also in the same position---their tier one was JF 17---their tier 2 was Kfir---the deal did not work out for JF 17---they simply did not have the funds---they went for Kfir.

Same with Egypt---when Sisi came into power---the U S put sanctions on the 24 F 16's that Egypt was getting---. The Egyptian president got up and called the French premier---told him he wanted 24 Rafales on the run---make a deal---the French did and the Egyptians already have 2 of them.

The americans came back crawling with their 18 F 16's as well.

My American colleagues used to have a very hard time with Indians negotiating for pennies on 30--40 50 dollars of car purchases---. I had to explain t to them that these people are used to bargain of a small bundle of celery and mint leaves and a lb of potatoes or a lb of cauliflower---it is out of habbit.

Hah! What was the toughest buyer you faced? and the most annoying?

 

[Gandhi follower]

Unfortunately, the acquisition teams (the key guys and gals that decide that this is the product we should go for ) are essentially more or less 10-15 people... so in other words --- if I want to sale an item to an organization, I only have to convince their acquisition team usually termed as the "buying center" .....

and your frame of mind is a common misconception where the person goes " Org's don't make decisions like individual people do since they have alot more on stake" -- true but only to an extent --- org's do have alot on stake -- the reason why there is a high level of scrutiny in the purchase process ...


However, acquisition teams are composed of ........ People i.e Human beings .... and human beings are prone to image building/promotion marketing tactics ... they are prone to having preferences .... to simply put it, even with the added scrutiny the basic unit of an acquisition team i.e a person, is as vulnerable to marketing/image building tactics as any Tom, Dick or Harry out there ....

Bhai sahab and mastan bhaiji,

You forget about the evaluation step. This 10-15 guys will not do the evaluation. Evaluation will be done by the ultimate customer. In case of strategic weapons it is armed forces. As far connecting the dots are concerned . The specific requirements are mentioned in RFP. Now if seller is marketing that he meets the criteria and then it is evaluated to customer satisfaction. And then cost negotiations.

No offence mastan ji, I believe you have worked in retail like cars for example. You don't have experience in b2b sale.

 

[My-Analogous]

Bhai sahab and mastan bhaiji,

You forget about the evaluation step. This 10-15 guys will not do the evaluation. Evaluation will be done by the ultimate customer. In case of strategic weapons it is armed forces. As far connecting the dots are concerned . The specific requirements are mentioned in RFP. Now if seller is marketing that he meets the criteria and then it is evaluated to customer satisfaction. And then cost negotiations.

No offence mastan ji, I believe you have worked in retail like cars for example. You don't have experience in b2b sale.

Kid please come up with logic. Especially when you are talking with Mastan bhai