Scan the QR code in the image to register Recently, we reviewed several cases of BC integrated operations in channels and found that even unknown new brands can move through channels much faster than with deep distribution. We were amazed! Deep distribution is the limit of channel push (selling power). So why does BC integrated channel power far exceed deep distribution? Our conclusion is: because digitalization reaches C-end consumers, and by mobilizing C-end resources to activate B-end, it actually creates channel pull. When push and pull are superimposed on the same channel, the influence on the channel far exceeds traditional brand-driven + channel-driven approaches. Push is the forward force of the channel, pull is the reverse force of the channel. This discovery is of great significance to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). SMEs can now play the pull-sell game at the terminal. In the past, pull-sell (brand-driven) was a high-profile, high-cost approach. Do SMEs get this good news? -01- As mentioned earlier, the biggest change brought by channel digitalization is the change in channel power. So, what is channel power? Traditional Chinese marketing has two major driving forces: one is brand-driven, the other is channel-driven. Brand-driven is pull-sell, channel-driven is push-sell. The best effect comes from combining push and pull. Traditional brand-driven is mass media communication directly targeting consumers. As long as brand power is formed, it creates pull in the channel. The brand pull model is: Brand (F) → Mass media communication (F2C) → Consumer brand awareness (C) → Consumer purchases at terminal (C2b) → Pulls terminal (b) → Terminal orders from distributor (b2B). In current internet language: F→C→b→B, i.e., F2C2b2B. Channel is push, commonly known as selling. Correspondingly, brand power is pull-sell. However, few people use the term "pull-sell." I use it often. Push-sell is persuasion level by level. The manufacturer persuades the distributor, the distributor persuades the retail terminal, and the terminal persuades the consumer. The channel push model is: Brand (F) → Distributor (B) → Retail terminal (b) → Consumer (C). In internet expression: F2B2b2C. Because brand-driven is a "money-sea tactic," not all companies can afford it. Therefore, SMEs often only do channel-driven. Channel-driven is a "people-sea tactic," but it can be implemented in local areas. This is the base market. China's channel structure is: F→B→b→C. If you start from B, it's push; if you start from C, it's pull. Push and pull are neither good nor bad; they just have different points of application, but the direction of force is the same. Just like pushing a cart vs. pulling it, the point of application differs, but the direction is the same. "Money-sea tactics" are not easy; at least you need enough money, and even for established brands, continuous investment is needed to maintain the brand. "People-sea tactics" are even harder, especially to achieve nationwide channel coverage, requiring at least 4 internal management levels and 2 channel management levels. With a total of 6 management levels in the channel, it's a challenge worldwide. Of course, push-sell and pull-sell are the perfect combination, a balanced marketing. At least in China. Excellent Chinese companies ultimately combine push and pull. 15 years ago, I called brands formed by brand-driven as (consumer) "first-choice brands," and brands formed by channel-driven as (channel) "first-recommended brands." "First-choice brands" solve the problem of consumers "willing to buy," while "first-recommended brands" solve the problem of channels "willing to sell." In the past, China had no concept of marketing; business was collectively called "buying and selling." If someone buys, of course someone sells; if someone sells, someone buys. Of course, it's best to have both buyers and sellers. So, in the past, when talking about channel power, it mainly referred to channel push, solving the problem of channel partners "willing to sell." Channel work such as distribution, stocking, display, and end-cap displays must be based on solving the problem of channel partners "willing to sell." -02- After channel digitalization, channel power will change. Channels will not only have push but also pull. This conclusion should surprise many. Channel digitalization is divided into two stages: Stage 1: User digital reach; Stage 2: User digital operation. Stage 1 includes full-chain digitalization and full-scenario reach. This process is still F2B2b2C, still relying on channel push. In traditional deep distribution, the manufacturer only reaches the terminal. Channel digitalization requires reaching C-end, which requires greater push. Traditional enterprises with deep distribution experience should have no problem with full-chain digitalization. The bigger problem is full-scenario user reach, which requires getting hundreds of millions of users online. This requires stronger channel push. Once user online reach is achieved, the next step is user online operation. There are two modes of user online operation: one is pure online operation, relying on marketing automation in the middle platform; the other is BC integrated operation combining online and offline. The essence of BC integration is: by mobilizing users (C-end) online, driving traffic to terminals (b-end), thereby activating terminals. The core of BC integrated marketing is: using incremental volume to activate existing stock at b-end. This is a method we have tried and tested repeatedly. As long as b-end is activated, of course, distributors (B-end) can also be activated. In the marketing digitalization of traditional enterprises, we have always emphasized BC integration, and this is the reason. Pure online operators don't understand BC integration well. The process of BC integrated operation is: F→C→b→B. This model is exactly the same as the brand pull model. After channel digitalization, channels will have both push and pull. This will completely change channel operation models. -03- Since BC integration can create channel pull, is there a difference between BC integration pull and brand-driven pull? There is a big difference. Traditional brands, if not formed by history (accumulation), are mostly formed by mass communication. In the industrial era, a business model of mass production, mass communication, and mass distribution was formed. There is a logical relationship among the three. Only with mass production can there be sufficient scale and strength to support mass communication, and only with mass communication can mass distribution be easily formed. Brand power is actually cognitive density; density is brand. Cognitive density requires communication investment and frequency to reach a fairly high threshold. Therefore, some call brand a "money-sea tactic." Since it's a "money-sea tactic," not all companies can afford it. Therefore, some companies have to go channel-driven. So, does BC integrated channel pull also require "money-sea tactics"? Does it require sufficient resources to play? The answer is no. At least not currently. In practice, we summarize BC integrated play into three models: single-store rolling, small-area rolling, and nationwide sensation. BC integration can precisely target "single stores" for placement and activation. It can be precise to specific stores, specific time periods, and specific customers. This is the benefit of digitalization. Single-store rolling means activating one store first, then after success, activating another store. This strategy is called rolling strategy, similar to "base market rolling development." Activating a single store is within the capability of any company. Therefore, BC integration currently has no threshold. When multiple stores are activated simultaneously and a certain density is formed in a small area, an area can be activated. When one small area is activated and then another, it forms a small-area rolling strategy. When small areas are activated simultaneously, it becomes a nationwide sensation strategy. At this point, we can summarize the difference between brand pull and BC integration pull: Brand pull targets a large number of uncontrollable C-end consumers, requiring sufficient communication resources, frequency, and time. Of course, effective communication strategies and art are also needed. Without these conditions, brand power is hard to form. BC integration pull can precisely guide traffic and activate. It can activate single stores, small areas, or nationwide, depending on resources and strategy. -04- After channel digitalization, channel push and pull coexist. Of course, channel pull is built on the premise of channel push. Without channel push, there is no user online; without user online, there is no BC integrated channel pull. The combination of push and pull has obvious benefits. For example, the cycle of channel activation and maturity is shortened, and resource investment is reduced. At least for now, it's absolutely beneficial for SMEs. Another example: push is often one-way communication. Combining push and pull becomes two-way communication. However, problems also arise. For example, the skills required for combining push and pull are obviously higher than for single push. Of course, digitalization brings only tool dividends. All tool dividends have a dividend period; only companies that use them first get the dividend. When tools become widespread, they become basic work. The characteristic of basic work is "you can't not do it, but doing it gives no competitive advantage." -05- Finally, a few digressions related to this. There is a widely circulated saying: Marketing makes selling superfluous. When I first studied marketing, I was shocked by this sentence. Later, I found it problematic. It is said to be a famous quote by Drucker. I have been looking for the source. Even if it is Drucker's original words, it should be understood in context. I am a follower of Drucker, but I believe in his logic, not his conclusions. At least in China, this statement is problematic. Marketing in Europe and America has entered 1P marketing. The marketing mix has 4Ps, and manufacturers mainly handle one P (product, brand). Channels are independent third parties regulated by contracts. Only Chinese manufacturers fully control all 4Ps: product, price, place, promotion. The US has millions of (terminal) salespeople, but not China's tens of millions of (channel) salespeople. Without channel push, only brand pull, the pull gradually weakens. Many world-famous FMCG brands entered China and eventually disappeared. Multinational brands that do well in China are those that compromised with the Chinese environment in channel operations. This is survival of the fittest. In the Chinese market, channel push is so important for two main reasons: First, China's channels are fragmented (reasons not discussed here), requiring manufacturers' channel teams to connect them and go deep into terminals to approach consumers; second, China's business has three important elements: cognition, transaction, and relationship. Relationship is a unique factor; Chinese business customer relationships differ from European and American CRM management. Because China is an agricultural country, living radius and business radius overlap, and acquaintances are also regular customers. Relationships help lower cognitive barriers, thereby lowering transaction barriers. Even if cognition and transaction are fully internetized, Chinese channels will still exist. As long as channels exist, channel push is indispensable. Even world-class brands cannot ignore selling in China.