Mekanism Case

3. What types of brands stand to gain from using viral advertising? Which brands may not?

Viral marketing is valued because it enables reaching millions of consumers quickly and cheaply via word-of-mouth. It also offers increased accountability and low costs. Brands that value, or even rely on low costs and accountability stand to gain the most from using viral marketing. Companies that are unable to supply robust advertising budgets or even those that choose to allocate a smaller percentage of their funds to advertising should focus their advertising strategy on viral marketing. These companies could include start-ups, small niche companies, and even companies that are local and do not yet have a national presence. These sorts of companies will be unable to compete in advertising with larger, more established competitor companies, so viral marketing could allow them to make up some ground in their effort to draw in a larger piece of the consumer pie. In addition, well-known companies which are still growing could benefit from viral marketing. Such companies may be consistently investing profits back into the company in other areas, and may not be able to support an expensive ad campaign. These companies could pay a fraction of normal advertising costs (TV, print, etc.) by opting for a viral campaign. If they employ a company like Mekanism, which a proven success rate, they could benefit by reaching a larger audience but not paying as much for that audience as their competitors.

Viral campaigns are generally conducted over social media. The Mekanism case mentions that Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are the primary platforms where videos go viral. Active users of these platforms are most often young (mid-twenties). Brands with young consumer bases would stand to benefit by using viral marketing more than brands with older consumers. For instance, video games generally have younger consumers. A video game company would stand a better chance at being the subject...