As irrational as the comparison appears to be, consider this: Both
Have super loyal followers
- Screw up once in a while without significant effect to their business
- Focus on the overall experience in their message rather than getting lost in details
- Never invented anything, but are masters of improving the existing
- Bend the truth just short of being considered liars
- Belittle their competition, if arrogance can be seen as a form of insult
Still convinced that the two cannot be compared? Suddenly, it’s not such an unreasonable proposition anymore. And think of their competition: For Apple, it’s Microsoft that is ripping it’s hairs out over Apple’s messaging and success; for Trump, it’s Bush who keeps running into a wall when challenging the real estate tycoon.
The more Microsoft and Bush are trying to challenge Apple and Trump, the less likely they seem to be able to make even the slightest dent to their respective lead. Experts have been analyzing the rather famous Apple keynotes for years and the reasons that allow Cook and allowed even more the late Steve Jobs to capture their audience with claims that aren’t terribly exciting, innovative and, occasionally, questionable in their accuracy. The truth may not be so difficult to understand if we line up our inherent laziness to not question anything a trusted entity says with the ability of that entity to communicate in sentences that a second-grader can understand without thinking too much about it. If you understand your target audience, this is the essence of mass content marketing, and Apple has perfected this art.
Trump, on the other side, may come across as being not too bright. Yet, he’s claiming followers at a pace that scares the living daylights out of Republicans and Democrats. I’d question claims that he’s not bright; quite the opposite may be the case and he may have done his homework and tailored his content and messaging to the group of voters he needs to win the Republican nomination. Like Apple, he doesn’t have a new product, or a new message. He’s repackaging what has existed for some time and he is helping his listeners understand, which builds trustworthiness to the degree that many will believe virtually anything he says. Like Apple, he is able to bend the truth. Like Microsoft, Bush is competing with a rival that can only beat itself.
In their own sense, both Apple and Trump are still underestimated. For Apple it is the notion of the “distortion field” we occasionally joke about. But consider this article: News.com reports about Apple “ushering in high-res to the mainstream”. There’s a respected publication taking Apple’s messaging and is selling it as the truth when it is clear that high-res video has been around for a while and has become mainstream to anyone interested in video. Apple has reached a stage where its messaging is powerful enough to manipulate mainstream media. Trump isn’t quite there yet and it may not be possible in the current messaging pattern, but it may be a reality once the messaging changes in the actual election campaign. What makes him so dangerous to his competitors is the fact that he is dismissed as a fluke and is not seen not someone who can actually win the nomination and run.
About 20 years ago, Microsoft dismissed the iMac. About 15 years ago, Microsoft dismissed the iPod. About 8 years ago, Microsoft dismissed the iPhone. About 5 years ago, Microsoft dismissed the iPad. Today, Microsoft is facing declining PC shipments and PC sales, lost the battle in smartphone arena and is left with the perception of a company that is picking up the breadcrumbs that Apple has left behind.
If the Republican and Democrat presidential hopefuls continue ignore Trump’s strategy and abilities, they’ll be picking up the breadcrumbs he leaves behind for the then inevitable 4 years of his presidency.
Post A Comment:
0 comments: