亚色在线观看_亚洲人成a片高清在线观看不卡_亚洲中文无码亚洲人成频_免费在线黄片,69精品视频九九精品视频,美女大黄三级,人人干人人g,全新av网站每日更新播放,亚洲三及片,wwww无码视频,亚洲中文字幕无码一区在线

2+1等于3,。在橫跨數(shù)周的時(shí)間里，消費(fèi)者迎來了一連串新訂閱服務(wù),，它們分別是Apple News+和Apple TV+,，以及迪士尼（用了一個(gè)很合適的名字Disney+）。這些服務(wù)承諾將讓人們的生活變得更加豐富多彩,。同時(shí),，它們的到來也讓這個(gè)日漸龐大的數(shù)學(xué)化媒體服務(wù)品牌大家庭變得更加擁擠,，其中包括迪士尼自家的ESPN+，而這也算是對科技領(lǐng)域原創(chuàng)品牌“+”模式的效仿,，例如Google+,。

但對于Google+來說，事態(tài)的發(fā)展并不怎么順利,。這家互聯(lián)網(wǎng)巨頭于4月關(guān)閉了運(yùn)營7年的社交網(wǎng)絡(luò),。盡管Google+最終是因?yàn)榕cFacebook的競爭以及大規(guī)模的隱私泄露而敗走麥城，但品牌專家說,，它的名稱在一開始就沒有什么吸引力,。

品牌命名機(jī)構(gòu)Catchword聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人勞拉·薩頓表示：“這就是[這種名字]所存在的最大問題。它并未透露任何信息,，也沒有告訴你會(huì)得到什么,，也沒說為什么不同。它只不過在最后加了一個(gè)最高級,，就像是在說‘終極’或‘高級’或‘更好’一樣,。”

當(dāng)然,，“更好”正是像蘋果和迪士尼這樣的公司所希望傳達(dá)的信息,。Naming Group創(chuàng)始人兼總裁妮娜·貝克哈特說：當(dāng)你把“很強(qiáng)大、很知名的母公司品牌與+號連用時(shí),，它會(huì)讓人們想起,，例如……這就是迪士尼——我們不會(huì)嘗試去另起爐灶?！彼€指出,，但問題在于，品牌隨后會(huì)失去實(shí)現(xiàn)自身差異化的機(jī)會(huì),，而且也會(huì)面臨仿造風(fēng)險(xiǎn),，但這些仿造品牌并不好銷售。不妨去看看那些在首字母加i的已破產(chǎn)電子品牌,。

那么這個(gè)簡單的+號到底是有效還是畫蛇添足,？薩頓說,，這是一個(gè)失去的機(jī)會(huì),，“看看迪士尼就知道，其品牌全都與魔法和奇景有關(guān),?！?’這個(gè)名稱并沒有起到任何作用，也沒有體現(xiàn)品牌的內(nèi)涵,?！?span>（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

本文的一個(gè)版本出現(xiàn)在2019年5月刊的《財(cái)富》雜志，標(biāo)題為《當(dāng)加號變?yōu)闇p號》

作者：Aric Jenkins

譯者：馮豐

審校：夏林

Two plus one equals three. In the span of that many weeks, consumers were introduced to a trio of subscription services promising to add to their lives: Apple News+ and Apple TV+, plus one from Disney, aptly titled??—Disney+. They’ll complement a growing roster of arithmetic-branded media services, joining Disney-owned ESPN+ and following in the footsteps of the original “plus” brand in tech, Google+.

Things didn’t work out so well for the latter. The Internet giant shut down the social network in April after seven years. And while Google+ ultimately failed because of competition with Facebook and a massive privacy breach, its name didn’t do much to encourage engagement in the first place, branding experts say.

“That’s the biggest problem with [this type of name],” says Laurel ?Sutton, cofounder of brand-naming agency Catchword. “It doesn’t tell you anything at all. It doesn’t tell you what you’re getting; it doesn’t say why it’s different. It’s just adding a superlative on the end—like saying ‘ultra’ or ‘supreme’ or ‘better.’?”

Of course, “better” is the exact message companies like Apple and Disney want to convey. When you use the + “in conjunction with a really strong, well-known parent brand, it reminds people, like?…?this is Disney—we’re not going to try to reinvent the wheel,” says the Naming Group founder and president Nina Beckhardt. But the problem, she adds, is that brands then miss a chance to differentiate themselves, and they expose themselves to copycats with vague symbols that aren’t easily ?trademarkable. Just look at the knockoff electronic brands beginning with a lowercase i.

So is the simplicity of the + effective or obscure? It’s a missed opportunity, says Sutton. “Look at Disney—its brand is all about magic and wonder. The name ‘plus’ doesn’t do any of that stuff. It doesn’t appeal to the essence of the brand.”

A version of this article appears in the May 2019 issue of Fortune with the headline “When Plus Is a Minus.”