Case Study Analysis : The iPhone in South Korea

Introduction

The enthusiasm for the IPhone launch in 2007 seemed universal. However, Apple decided to not enter the South Korean market until 2008 as the market requires special attention since many other failed before due to a lack of research and the wrong strategy. The current paper discusses the implications of the South Korean market conditions and its environmental factors in regard to the special market requirements in context to the entry mode and marketing mix for a successful launch of the IPhone. The competitive forces in the market environment force Apple to clearly position its product and be aware of its micro-environment. South Korea is a ‘Newly Industrialised Economy’ (Lasserre, 2007) and ‘Emerging Market’ (Kotabe and Helsen, 2008) wherefore a profound research in regard on the macro-environment is substantial to identify opportunities and threats. This paper considers these environmental opportunities and threats and puts them in relation to Apple’s global product strategy in regard to the Korean customers needs and wants by adapting its marketing mix accordingly. The marketing mix may be extended by Booms and Bitner’s (1981) additional three Ps: participants, physical evidence and process but their framework will not be part of this report. Moreover, determinants of the possible monitoring process of the success are outlined in relation to the 4 P’s.

1. Competitive Forces

Before entering the South Korean market, Apple needs to critically evaluate the competitive forces that have made its business environment more complex in recent years, by taking into account Porter’s five forces (exhibit 1).1 The threat of new entrants seems to be the biggest threat for iPhone because as South Koreans are most likely to use mobile phones with the latest technology and features, they are more likely to switch phones. Thus, the customer switching costs and their brand loyalty are very low, which makes it easier for new entrants to compete. Moreover, the Korean Communications Commission has now opened this industry (Ramstad et al, 2009), which makes it easier for foreign companies to enter the market. Consequently, this will allow increasing competition. Another threat for the iPhone is the fact that South Koreans are very quick in embracing new technology. Having done so, local companies will be able to compete with iPhone.

The threat of substitutes is linked with the threat of new entrants because their ability to take up the latest technology might lead to cheaper substitutes, and the costs of switching to substitutes seem to be low in South Korea. Considering the population of South Korea of 48 million people compared to phone suppliers,

the bargaining power of buyers seems to be low. However, this is compensated by low costs to switch suppliers. Moreover, Apple might consider selling iPhone through a local phone carrier, which is discussed later on. As the South Korean phone network is driven by an oligopoly of three telecom organizations, the concentration of iPhone’s direct buyers is quite high. Thus, the bargaining power of buyers is also a threat Apple has to analyse. As the iPhone’s production settings are mainly based in China, the bargaining power of

suppliers is a less important threat for the company when launching the iPhone in South Korea.

The intensity of rivalry is also a great threat for iPhone. Protection of local mobile phone manufacturers helped home grown companies like Samsung and LG to sell together about 90% of mobile phones in the country (Ramstad et al, 2009). With the opening up of the industry, competition will increase and prices become more competitive. However, the low switching costs of consumers as well as a differentiated product might be an advantage for iPhone when entering the market.

2. Implications for the success of the iPhone in South Korea

The South Korean market conditions and its environment require special advertence regarding the success of launching iPhone. In order to make a statement about implications for iPhone’s success, the PEST analysis is

applied for analysing its micro-environment in South Korea. South Korea is characterized by a constitutional democracy consisting of executive, legislative and judicial branches. The country opened up many trade barriers in the last decades, and entered many international organisations such as WTO, OECD, UN etc. (CIA, 2008). These are positive political factors for the launch of iPhone. However, the political situation of its neighbouring country North Korea is of high concern, particularly regarding its nuclear tests which are a threat to the country, and therefore might have negative implications.

South Korea belongs to the twenty largest world economies.2 The economical growth was encouraged by close ties between government and business sectors through direct credit and import restrictions (CIA, 2008).3 The South Korean economy is highly concentrated on electronic and technological development. The mobile phone market is almost saturated. The phone network is driven by a clear oligopoly of three telecom organisations (SK Telecom, KTF, LG Telecom) which provides clear restrictions for market entries.4 The South Korean culture is characterised by its high homogeneity.5 Koreans strive for being up-to-date, particularly regarding latest fashion and technology, and moreover inherit big brand awareness as status symbols. Also South Korea’s demographical factors6 are positive for the launch of iPhone, as the product suits a majority of the population, but in return it also portrays a threat, as the product must tick all boxes of the high expectations towards mobile phones.

The technological environment in South Korea is of high standard and is substantial for the mobile phone industry, which accounts for one of the highest mobile phone penetration rates in the world.7 Moreover, the CIA (2008) points out the outstanding telecommunication networks and technologies, achieving the high standard required and appreciated by the South Korean population and its focus on innovation. Therefore, it is essential to offer a product which can keep up with the high standard of the market in order to be successful. To sum up, the South Korean market holds a big potential for the introduction of iPhone by

means of the well-being of the economic and financial environment, its stable legal and political situation and a big group of potential customers.8 Nevertheless, there are potential risks and obstacles of entering the market, which have to be taken into consideration, such as the almost saturated mobile phone market, an unstable situation in North Korea and the highly competitive environment, creating pressure in terms of market entry, pricing and technological development.

3. Aspects to be considered before entering the market

Besides the market entry strategy and marketing mix, iPhone should also consider the external factors influencing the choice of entry mode and time of entering the South Korean market. In respect to the external factors, socio-cultural distance between home and host country, country risk/demand uncertainty, market size and growth, direct and indirect trade barriers and intensity of competition are vital factors to be taken into account by iPhone (Hollensen, 2007). Even if South Korea is home to leading hardware manufacturers, a thriving computergame industry and savvy technology consumers, Koreans are still happy to carry a mobile

phone and an MP3 player as separate devices instead of using a “one-product-does-all” device, and one way for iPhone to outrun this gap regarding culture might be to strongly rely on Koreans avidity for the “latest and greatest” trends in mobile phone technology and their generally stable and large incomes. The Self-Reference Criterion can be a powerful negative force in global business (Keegan et al, 2008), and iPhone should not neglect it, otherwise their market entry could be a failure. South Korea, a market dominated by two major players, Samsung and LG, carries a demand uncertainty that should likewise be considered before launching the product. Regarding the market size and growth, the perspectives seem encouraging with a GDP per capita of $28,100, GDP – real growth rate 2.3% and an unemployment rate of only 3% for South Korea in 2008. (CIA, 2009). The Korean government raised trade barriers on smart phones

to protect domestic manufacturers and this probably represents iPhone’s major constraint for entering the market. The strategy used by the government made Samsung and LG the second and third largest makers of cellphones by units in the world and it helped the country to develop one of the broadest markets for cellphones. So, iPhone should consider facing a hard strife, and tailor the necessary strategies in order to win an important market share in the market. One of the main questions for iPhone is when to enter the South Korean market. The answer may be related and dependent on Korea’s Communication Commission that decided only in late 2008 to open its home market in April 2009 to advanced cellular phones using foreign

platforms. A rule set in 2005 forced advanced cell-phone devices to use Korea's Wireless Internet Platform for Interoperability. The move effectively stopped foreign wireless handsets, such as those from Apple entering their market . Another issue that iPhone has to take into consideration is the legal environment that may seriously delay their entry to the South Korean market. There are a set of regulatory hurdles regarding the location-based services that iPhone provides for its customers (e.g. maps, direction finders) and that are subject to government permission. As a last aspect that iPhone might consider before entering the South Korean market is the iPhone clones that, in case these are not stopped from popping in the market, will

considerably depress its expected sales, as it happened in China.

4. Marketing Mix

After performing a SWOT analysis (exhibit 2), Apple will be able to draw a marketing plan. The marketing mix elements will be discussed below to decide on how to approach the iPhone’s entry into the South Korean market. The first step Apple need to pay attention to is its global product strategy. Should the

company aim for a standardized9 or adapted product strategy? Adaptation of the iPhone means considering differences in customers’ needs in South Korea. Consequently, “appropriate changes are made to match local market conditions” (Kotabe et al, 2008, p.353). Apple also has to consider legal conditions in South Korea such as taxation. Adapting the iPhone to local needs will increase customer satisfaction but also leads to higher production costs. The market is not only characterized by protection of local phone manufacturers (Ramstad et al, 2009), but Apple must also carefully consider technological issues next to South Koreas’unique environmental and marketplace conditions.10 Consequently, Apple should consider the product adaptation approach when entering South Korea, taking into account localconditions and wants in order to boost customer satisfaction, and hence increase sales. They might modify the iPhone by augmenting the core product and product attributes with localized support features that cater local market conditions.11

Having made the decision about its global product strategy, Apple has to decide on whether to enter South Korea with an advanced version of the iPhone before launching it anywhere else. As a consequence of stiff local competition, time might be a key success factor for Apple when entering South Korea. The market is almost saturated, and Apple will enter it late because it has already embraced 3G technology. As South Korean consumers are quite tech-savvy and most likely to use mobile phones with latest technology and new features, they are very likely to switch mobile phones. Consequently, entering the market with an advanced version of iPhone might create a competitive advantage for Apple and probably results in gaining market share more quickly. In terms of global pricing, Apple follows a price standardization policy.12 Keegan et al (2008) differ between three alternative global pricing policies: extension/ethnocentric, adaptation/polycentric and geocentric.13 Exhibit 3 discusses the ethnocentric/standardization and polycentric/differentiation pricing

policies, which Apple might consider when launching iPhone in South Korea. The more flexible geocentric approach recognizes that several factors are relevant to pricing decisions: “local costs, income levels, competition, and the local marketing strategy” while price is integrated with other elements of the marketing program. “Local costs plus a return on invested capital [ROI] and personnel fix the price floor for the long term” (Keegan et al, 2008, p.382). In the short term, Apple might set the price less than its costs plus ROI in order to penetrate the market and gain market share. Hence, the geocentric approach lends itself to global competitive advantage because prices support “global strategy objectives rather than the objective of maximizing performance in a single country” (Keegan et al, 2008, p.382). Kotler et al (2008) differ between two global pricing strategies/objectives: market skimming/financial objectives (Appendix B) and penetration pricing/nonfinancial objectives. Penetration pricing may be used by Apple to gain a market position in South Korea by setting a low price, and hence attracting a large number of buyers. Apple might consider penetration pricing due to the intensive local competition from Samsung and LG in South Korea whose

selling price for phones is almost twice as high as it is outside the country.14 Exhibit 4 shows the pricing of selected Samsung mobile phones in South Korea. Moreover, in 2009, the South Korean GDP per capita at nominal values (US$17,074) and GDP at PPP per capita (Intl. $27,938) was far behind the USA’s (US$45,934, Intl. $45.938) (IMF, 2010). Apple should consider the lower income levels of its local consumer when setting a price, but they have to avoid setting the price for iPhone so low that consumers lose faith in the product’s quality (Hollensen, 2010). Summarizing the discussion above, iPhone is advised to respond to competitive and market conditions, and should consider the geocentric approach in connection with penetration pricing when entering South Korea, because this will enable Apple to quickly penetrate the

market and gain market share from its strong local competitors in the short term, and lends global competitive advantage while Apple’s global strategic objectives are supported rather than the objective of maximizing performance only in South Korea.15 Having gained a stable market share in the country, local costs plus ROI will characterize the iPhone’s price in the long-term. Regarding its promotional strategy, Apple has to make three decisions: How to position the iPhone in South Korea? Which media to use for communicating the message? Building up a standardized or adapted promotion? Having identified the target audience (Appendix B), Apple can now determine the communication objectives and design a message. How should the company position16 the iPhone in South Korea? As South Korean mobile phone users appreciate fashion combined with function, Apple should position iPhone in South Korea on the basis of

performance/technology and design while differentiating it from competitors. Nevertheless, Apple is advised to refrain from promoting iPhone as a “blue ocean” product because both Samsung’s and LG’s strategy of creating blue ocean products and offering these phones at high prices failed (Ramstad et al, 2009). Therefore, Apple should learn from its competitors and position iPhone as an inspiring product that is useful and ahead of consumers’ expectations instead of narrowing the market into unprofitable niches. Apple must now select channels of communication. Kotler et al (2008) differ between personal18 and nonpersonal communication channels. Apple might decide to use nonpersonal communication channels such as print media (newspapers) and broadcast media (television) to reach as many consumers as possible. Although advertising and public relations within the marketing communications mix are more expensive than other tools, especially PR creates awareness and interest in iPhone before its launch. An original but tasteful TV campaign, that pays particular attention to iPhone’s performance and design features, will finally lead to desire and action (buying the iPhone) when iPhone is launched. Especially opinion leaders will be affected by this communication. They will carry messages to people who are less exposed to media, so that finally personal communication will be stimulated through word-of-mouth (Kotler et al, 2008). Furthermore, it has to be discussed whether to standardize or adapt Apple’s promotional strategy. Because “advertising is based largely on language and images, it is mostly influenced by the sociocultural behaviour of consumers” in South Korea.19 As iPhone has no market share in South Korea yet and is therefore an unknown product, the company is advised to react to the market, and adapt its advertising in a way that emphasizes iPhone’s

performance and design features. Also language has to be adapted. Consequently, the initial high spending on its promotion strategy will pay off in the long-term because Apple’s global strategic objectives are supported. Considering iPhone’s distribution strategy, Apple has now to decide on how to enter the

South Korean market (Appendix B). Lasserre (2007) describes four entry modes: Joint Venture, acquisition, agreements such as franchising, licensing or distributor contracts and direct entry. The choice on entering the market is based on a combination of ownership dimension/level of control and investment intensity (exhibit 5). Exhibit 6 discusses direct entry, acquisition and Joint Venture, which Apple might consider when launching the iPhone in South Korea. However, the most suitable entry mode for iPhone into South Korea seems to be a distribution contract with a local phone carrier. A distribution contract requires fewer investments but might lead to a conflict of interests that emerge when sales of iPhone reach a certain level.20 Especially when the country is risky and characterized by stiff competition, Apple might want to test the market without committing too many resources upfront. Hence, a distribution contract will be the most

suitable solution for entering the market quickly.21 Having analyzed consumer needs and set channel objectives, the company might now make a decision on the number of channel members. Kotler et al (2008) differ between three strategies: intensive, exclusive and selective distribution. Exhibit 7 discusses intensive and

exclusive distribution. Due to their disadvantages, Apple should rather consider selective distribution, which means using “more than one but fewer than all of the intermediaries who are willing to carry” (Kotler et al, 2008, p.325) the iPhone. This will allow Apple to “develop good working relationships with selected channel members and expect a better-than-average selling effort” (Kotler et al, 2008, p.325). Moreover, by using selective distribution, the market will be more covered with iPhone compared to exclusive distribution, and it will give the company more control over prices and promotion than intensive distribution does. Summarizing the discussion above, Apple is advised to sign distribution contracts with approximately two to three phone carriers in South Korea which enables to enter the market profitable and successful.

5. Monitoring

The success of Apple’s market entry depends on its concrete goals and objectives. These will influence marketing performance measures and standards. Regarding its product strategy, possible market performance measures will be numbers of sales of its advanced model compared to other markets in which the iPhone was launched and compared to competitors (so far information available), sales growth rate within a certain time, market share gained after a certain time, percentage of total profits, return on

investment, and by the monitoring criteria listed by Sargeant and West (2001):

 the actual sales achieved against the budget,

 the actual costs incurred against those budgeted,

 the overall strategic direction that the organisation is taking – i.e. will the overall

corporate objectives be achieved in a manner commensurate with the organisation's

mission?

In terms of iPhone’s promotion strategy in South Korea, possible performance measures will be the advertising effectiveness like the awareness level achieved, cost per contact with target audience, sales per territory relative to its potential. Measures to control the performance of iPhone’s pricing strategy will be the response time of competitors to iPhone’s selling price, margin structure relative to marketing expenses,

margins relative to channel member performance. Regarding iPhone’s distribution strategy, possible market performance measures will be sales, expenses and contribution margin of Apple’s distribution contracts, percentage of stores carrying the iPhone/market coverage, sales relative to market potential of each phone

carrier, percentage of on-time delivery, expense-to-sales ration of each partner, order cycle performance of each carrier (Hollensen, 2010). If nothing else, the success of iPhone’s market entry can also be measured by behavioural control such as reactions about the iPhone launch in newspapers etc.

Conclusion

Once IPhone has evaluated the forces affecting competition in the market, the political, economic, socio-cultural and technological factors with significant implications for them, as well as other external factors influencing the entry mode and queries that might come up after entering the Korean market, then the plan of action can be shaped and the appropriate strategies in terms of product, price, place and promotion formulated. Relative pros and cons of any of the strategies that have to be taken into consideration have been broadly discussed in this paper. Taking into account all the aspects debated, IPhone’s launch in South Korea will be profitable and successful when :

· Apple adapts iPhone to local market condition and customer wants to a certain

amount, and introduces an advanced version of its product,

· chooses a geocentric pricing approach while penetrating the market with lower prices

compared to competitors in the short term,

· promotes the iPhone through PR before launching, and through an adapted TV

campaign at the time of launch while emphasizing on the product’s performance and

design,

· distributing the iPhone through two to three selected local phone carriers.

To which extend the iPhone’s entry into the South Korean market has been successful can be monitored by regular control of output, like profits, sales figures and expenditures as well as by behavioural controls.

Appendix B

Additional information question 2

According to Lasserre (2007), South Korea can be categorised as a Newly Industrialised  Economy holding the following market characteristics: The market growth is high, the size is medium to high, the segmentation is an established middle class and a diversity of segments, customer’s value product differentiation and  service, the distribution is characterised by pull logistics and beginning of mass retailing, and the competition is deregulated, active and diverse.

The PEST analysis might be extended by environmental and legal factors to PESTLE analysis to additionally analyse iPhone’s macro-environment in South Korea. Environmental factors such as global warming, pollution, energy consumption or waste regulations are in this case of less importance. South Korea’s legal system is a combination of continental European civil law, Anglo- American law, and Chinese classical thought (CIA, 2008). This allows Apple to operate in a secure legal environment which is substantial for the market entry.

Additional information question 4: global pricing strategy/objective market skimming Market skimming might be used by Apple to achieve financial goals such as return on investment when a high price is set to skim maximum revenues from the top end of the market so that the company makes fewer but more profitable sales in a short term. A great disadvantage of this approach is that due to Apple’s small market share in South Korea, it is unlikely that the company will bear up against local competitors like Samsung and LG.

Building a premium position also requires enough resources for promotion etc. as well as visible local presence of Apple in South Korea. Market skimming might also lead to grey markets when they sell the iPhone more cheaply in other countries (Hollensen, 2010).

Additional information question 4: iPhone’s target audience Usually, Apple’s primary customer targets are middle-upper income professionals who use the iPhone to coordinate their busy schedules and communicate with colleagues, friends and family. Its secondary customer target market consists of high school, college and graduate students who need a portable multifunctional device. Additionally, the South Korean target market is also characterized by its tech-savvy phone users who might use the iPhone as a status symbol.

Additional information question 4: iPhone’s distribution strategy

First of all, Apple should follow the network perspective, which means that the company makes use of a business network for internationalization and especially when expanding into the South Korean market because through the relationship of its domestic network, Apple has gained experience and improved knowledge, which can be used as bridges to networks in South Korea.