In the past, companies focused on channel dominance and winning at the terminal, but with channel restructuring and integration, traditional distribution channels have been disrupted, and you never know where your products will be intercepted. As a result, the way suppliers connect with customers must change: previously, whoever had the biggest business got connected, but now customers connect only when there is content, professional service, shared interests, and excellent scene experiences. The Arrival of the New Marketing Era "Many Chinese companies are accelerating into industry monopoly, which violates the laws of competition." In the context of new retail and O+O scenarios, channel dividends are gone. Let me tell a sad story: why does this scenario exist? Liu Qiangdong of JD.com has a clear vision: he wants to build 50,000 terminals in China's third- and fourth-tier markets, restructuring the rural retail market. This threatens the niche that deep distribution aimed to cover, and what is the scenario facing China's home appliance industry? The first channel is Suning and Gome, which were the traditional sales channels for manufacturers. The second channel is Tmall and JD.com, which are the online Suning and Gome. Previously, the only way manufacturers could make money was by controlling the traditional channels in third- and fourth-tier markets. Now JD.com and Suning are both going after this pie. No matter what technical connection methods you use, or how the deep distribution theory in books says to restructure the value chain, you cannot cope with this competition because JD.com, Tmall, and Suning directly ship to tens of thousands of retail terminals across China. They have set up special shipping teams. In the past two months, they opened over 600 stores in Hebei alone. Those stores used to do business with us, but when they got the orders, they saw prices 20-30% lower than ours. Who can compete with such a price difference? That's the first point. Second, these stores need maintenance. Who will do it? They poach people from the traditional home appliance industry. The traditional industry trained many people, paying 6,000 yuan a month. Now what do they offer? A base salary of 12,000 yuan, plus a bonus of 1,000 yuan, totaling 13,000 yuan. We tell them, "Business should also be about friendship; we've dealt with each other for years." They say, "Teacher Cheng, I'm not an ungrateful person. If they offered me 9,000 and you gave me 6,000, I'd still work for you. But if they offer 12,000 and I don't go, I can't explain to my wife and kids." You see, there's sentiment, but there must also be money to be made. That's the hardship of this era. In this scenario, how do we understand the market? A new marketing environment is coming, which is the main content of my sharing today. First, consumption scenarios have changed, as I just described: new consumer groups are rising, and consumption structure is forming. Second, the competitive environment in the industry is changing; for most companies, the competitive environment has already changed. I recently collaborated with a district-level enterprise with an output value of around 100 million yuan. I found that the situation in this industry has changed dramatically: two leading companies occupy most of the market. They use competitive advantages to lock in sales terminals, strengthen their competitive platforms, and build their own technology and product centers. From this, I conclude that in many industries, entering head-on competition too early will affect industry efficiency and innovation, making it impossible to proceed. For example, the yogurt you had at lunch, Anmuxi, is now China's largest yogurt brand. Before it, it was Guangming's Molisian, and before that, another yogurt brand was made by a small company. Small companies' innovations usually cannot be monetized because leading companies hold the threshold, making these small companies sacrifices of innovation. So these leading companies with resources no longer focus on marketing but have entered the oligopoly stage. This situation is not determined by competition but is driven by supply-side reform and many non-market means. Whether this phenomenon is good or bad, I dare not draw a conclusion prematurely. But from my observation of China's first-tier market, many Chinese companies are accelerating into industry monopoly, which violates the laws of competition. Some industries must go through this process; oligopolies should be fought for, not artificially created. Otherwise, it is detrimental to the industry itself. This is my personal opinion, for reference only. Third, the entire scenario is becoming intelligently interconnected, which indeed changes sales scenarios and business models, subverting traditional ways of doing business. Fourth, marketing channels are being restructured and integrated. Traditional distribution channels are disrupted, now accelerating toward the C-end, with new retail accelerating full-channel coverage and achieving cross-industry alliances and cooperation. I was doing deep distribution 20 years ago, and now I have to subvert the past. Why do I want to abolish my own martial arts? Because the era of guns has come; if you're still swinging a whip, is it useful? In theoretical research, I think it's meaningless to reheat leftovers; we should study the issues at the forefront. New Marketing: Shift in Philosophy and Orientation "The concept of distribution no longer exists." TCL originally had 30,000 people; we now want to cut it to 15,000. At the last meeting, our final goal was to reorganize the team to 3,000-5,000 people, with all three-level system companies reorganized. The entire model must change: the marketing departments of 30 third-level companies, about 15,000 people, will all shift to the terminal, doing C-end and supply-marketing. This is the transformation toward retail-oriented operations. There is no longer a concept of distribution; now we face retail and consumers. Everyone must understand this. So I redefined it: all service providers must change. Midea is also changing. Last year, I faced 500 Midea air-conditioning distributors nationwide. You should know that the most dedicated distributors each have assets of tens of millions. Basically, any air-conditioning distributor has become rich because air conditioners are bulk products and expensive; without big business, they can't sell. They are the most astute distributors in China's industry. Do you know what these distributors said to me after listening to my 3-hour lecture at lunch? They said: "Teacher Cheng, I came here full of joy, walked around, listened to your 3-hour lecture, and now I feel I don't know where my next meal is." Why are they so pessimistic? Midea also built a large e-commerce system, directly shipping to 80% of Midea's stores. These former distributor giants found that money no longer passes through them, goods no longer pass through them, and information no longer passes through them. Distributors now find they can only do regular products, acting as spare tires for traditional parts. So they are anxious and ask me: "Where is our path?" My answer is simple: You must shift from CLP to COT. If you can't become an enabler, you'll die and become a redundant link in the new environment. That's why distribution no longer exists. Recently, I've been consulting for a home furnishing company, building a docking platform. We need to redefine the distribution channels of China's furniture industry. Previously, a boss lady would open a store, receive customers, measure on-site, and handle delivery and installation. Now all that is unnecessary: I'll stock the goods, handle the service, and have dedicated people for delivery and installation. You just need to stand firm at a dock, give me good consumer experience and connection, and I'll do everything else. The entire enterprise shifts from past distribution to retail orientation. I mentioned three leading companies earlier; they are all undergoing such changes. From their practices, we can see the huge changes in China's market channels. Changes in Brand Communication "If you can't define the scenario and respond to the pain points and delight points of customers in that scenario, then the product's DNA is wrong from the start." Traditional e-commerce traffic conversion methods are outdated; buying traffic doesn't work anymore. Customers now go to content e-commerce and social e-commerce for what they need. I know a jewelry seller, an e-commerce jewelry influencer. She is on Guangzhou's jade street, doesn't open a store, and livestreams there every day. If you want to buy something, she goes to find it for you. She doesn't earn the price difference, only a commission, which I estimate is about 5-10%. And she protects her reputation like feathers; her promise to fans is that she absolutely doesn't earn the price difference. This traffic generation method is quite clever. The way suppliers and customers connect has changed. Previously, whoever had the biggest business got connected; now customers connect only when there is content, professional service, shared interests, and excellent scene experiences. In this context, what should companies do? Future marketing will shift from meeting needs to defining scenarios. From now on, for any product development, if you can't define the scenario and respond to the pain points and delight points of customers in that scenario, then the product's DNA is wrong from the start. It's not that those who stand high see far, but those who stand close see more truly. You must return to the scenario. That's the first point. Second, you must shift from product sales to value provision. China has many high-quality enterprises, and Sany Heavy Industry is one. Do you know how impressive its excavators are? They have a market share equal to the sum of Caterpillar and Komatsu in China. It makes a single large product: excavators. As long as you move earth, you'll use them. Look at any construction site; other machinery may vary, but excavators are essential. So many companies have entered the excavator industry; it's a handle for connecting projects. In this most difficult competitive field, Sany Heavy Industry's market share has reached the sum of Caterpillar and Komatsu. How did it do it? In terms of products, those companies have been making them for one or two hundred years; how long has Sany been doing it? Its product technology cannot surpass competitors. I'm an engineering guy who studied aircraft; I know this common sense: there is no overtaking on curves in product and technology research; it only follows the learning curve. How did Sany, with inferior product technology, achieve a comeback against these two leading brands through marketing service value provision? It did so by providing solutions and value, shifting transactions to customer management, building sustainable relationships, and moving from wide-area coverage to segmented precision, creating competitive plans in niche areas. Marketing is also changing from competitive response to barrier building, and from individual combat to systematic collaboration. The following content is highly valuable. Marketing is the last zero kilometers, with the highest technical content. That's common sense. Innovation Directions for Corporate Marketing Strategies Promotion strategies have changed: from promotional stimulation to scenario experience, from "blockbuster and big promotions" to sustained "small and beautiful."

  1. Brand strategy has changed: from "everyone's darling" to "unique affection." If you want to be loved by all, you lose charm, and it's impossible now. From high-profile to interactive connection, no brand can be a queen on high like before; "cold beauties" and "ice beauties" have no market. All brands are equal before consumers.
  2. Product strategy has changed: from "following trends and counterfeiting" to accelerated iteration, from "more children, more blessings" to attractive single products. What's the charm of a big single product? Don't think only high-tech can be a big single product; in traditional industries, Jingjiu, Six Walnuts, and Laoganma chili sauce are all big single products.
  3. Channel strategy has changed: from deep coverage to full-channel operation, from absorbing funds and pressing inventory to activating sales and empowering. Traditional channels are undergoing e-commerce transformation.
  4. Price strategy has changed: from low-price impact to pushing high and selling expensive, from laissez-faire price chaos to value chain management.
  5. Promotion strategy has changed: from promotional stimulation to scenario experience, from "blockbuster and big promotions" to sustained "small and beautiful," creating good "small and beautiful" scenario connections, doing them daily and persistently.
  6. Service strategy has changed: from fooling and showmanship to warm value-added, from passive response to relationship management. Service is a good handle; smart merchants know how to use it well. New Marketing Four Requirements for Marketing Organizations "Managing a marketing team well is like riding a wolf and a tiger; it tests your skill." Organizational building has many perspectives, such as strategy, efficiency, and flexibility. So, how should organizations respond to the needs of new retail? Why are there such big problems in marketing now? In peaceful market times, marketing is the position where professional managers most easily gain honor and wealth. If you want to get promoted and rich, go into marketing. And the threshold is not high; you don't necessarily need high IQ. But marketing is hard to manage; this field is full of banditry and wildness. So you can see my style is different from many teachers. Although I'm a professor, you might think I'm a bandit professor because I've been with bandits for a long time. Managing a marketing team well is like riding a wolf and a tiger; it tests your skill. I think Midea's success largely comes from managing its marketing team well. No one who left Midea curses it. Midea gave you a good platform; if you didn't get rich or promoted, it's because you lacked ability, because others who did well got rich and promoted. A company's culture is actually not that complicated; you don't need many concepts. I just ask you two questions: In the past three years, who got promoted fastest and who made the most money? If those with good virtue and strong ability got promoted, that's culture; if those with good performance got rich, that's culture. Otherwise, no matter how loud the slogans or songs, it's useless. Marketing is about performance and strength, not logic. How can we update marketing management models? What kind of organization should we build suitable for marketing? There must be unity in strategy, flexibility in tactics, and rigidity in execution. Only such an organizational structure can cope with current market competition. Therefore, the four requirements for a new marketing organization are:
  7. Faster response speed: customer-driven, close to the business frontline, quickly responding to market and competition, such as new products, promotion, delivery, and service.
  8. Higher operational efficiency: optimize the entire chain structure and innovate mechanisms, improve operational efficiency in each link, use new IoT technology, and reengineer core processes.
  9. Stronger professional functions: develop new marketing functions (new e-commerce, community interaction, etc.), expand professional functions' external service capabilities, platform-based integration capabilities, and market operation capabilities.
  10. More flexible control methods: maintain the organic nature of marketing organizations, balance centralization and decentralization, continuously empower, and enhance learning capabilities. Source: Huaxia Jishi e-Insight (ID: chnstonewx) Tips will be paid 400-2000 yuan once adopted. China FMCG + Internet Professional New Media Committed to FMCG manufacturers' transformation and upgrading and channel digital solutions