A Quote by Adam Osborne

We can learn from IBM's successful history that you don't have to have the best product to become number one. You don't even have to have a good product. — © Adam Osborne
We can learn from IBM's successful history that you don't have to have the best product to become number one. You don't even have to have a good product.
I've always believed that the best way you combat intellectual property theft is making a product available that is well priced, well timed to market, whether it's a movie product, TV product, music product, even theme-park product.
When you're trying to solve a problem on a new product type, you become completely focused on problems that seem a number of steps removed from the main product. That problem solving can appear a little abstract, and it is easy to lose sight of the product.
Most businesses think that product is the most important thing, but without great leadership, mission and a team that deliver results at a high level, even the best product won't make a company successful.
Most entrepreneurs come up with a product, or they come up with an idea and they think they can be successful with it. But if they don't know the financial side of their business and understand credit and working capital and what it takes money-wise, you can't be successful. The product is just a product.
The product itself should be it's own best salesman. Not the product alone, but the product plus a mental impression, and atmosphere, which you place around it
Marvel has put out good product. DC has put out good product. Even Image has put out good product, as far as I'm concerned... although it's few and far between. But it's not getting recognized, no matter who's doing it.
The product has to work. It has to be a good product. An enormous number of them are all hype with no value at all. People get into them because they want to make a lot of quick, easy money.
Organizations get invested into a particular product. And sometimes the best thing is to stop making that product, even though it's profitable, because it has optimized at a local peak.
A product is something made in a factory; a brand is something that is bought by the customer. A product can be copied by a competitor; a brand is unique. A product can be quickly outdated; a successful brand is timeless.
Too many companies believe that all they must do is provide a 'neat' technology or some 'cool' product or, sometimes, just good, solid engineering. Nope. All of those are desirable (and solid engineering is a must), but there is much more to a successful product than that: understanding how the product is to be used, design, engineering, positioning, marketing, branding-all matter. It requires designing the Total User Experience.
You could place one product in a first-run telecast, a second product what that program is rerun, and a third product when the show goes into syndication, and another product when it goes on cable.
The Democrats are very bad at selling their own product. The Republicans are geniuses at it. And I've said it before, a bad product well apologized for is superior in this country to a good product.
Marketing implies that you want a public to relate to your product - if it's a product - in a way that makes them want to use it. That is only good or evil in relationship to what the product actually does.
A successful branding program is based on the concept of singularity. It creates in the mind of the prospect the perception that there is no product on the market quite like your product.
Just because a product says 'As Seen on TV' and looks like my product doesn't mean it performs like my product or will sell like my product.
Process innovation is different from product innovation. It's about how do you create a new product or develop a new product or manufacture a new product, but not a new product itself?
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!