In early 2002, Pamela Pollace, vice president and director of Intel's worldwide marketing

operations, is debating whether the company should extend its "Intel Inside" branding
campaign to non-PC product categories, such as cell phones and PDAs. The "Intel Inside"
campaign has been one of the most successful branding campaigns in history. However, the
campaign is more than ten years old, and growth in the PC market appears to be stagnating.
In contrast, sales of portable digital devices--such as PDAs and cell phones--appear to be
growing at a healthy rate. Pollace is debating whether the "Intel Inside" campaign will work
in these other product categories, even though Intel doesn't dominate these other markets
like it does the PC market, and it isn't clear that consumers will associate Intel with these
other markets.

Inside Intel Inside: Expanding on a Branding Legacy

Creating what was one of the greatest branding projects in the era of technology, Intel's
decision to expand into the mobile industry set a new precedent for defining the limits of
branding campaigns.
The Intel Inside branding campaign made a brand inside a commodity a genius B2B practice.
Summary of the Case:
Intel's decision to market its product as a branded component was genius - it was ground
breaking in its industry of microprocessors at the time, and was instrumental in creating
equity as an input brand.
'Intel Inside' became the first trademark in the electrical component industry. They
effectively taught consumers to understand computers as an assurance of quality through
their name. Intel's main success factors included an established reputation in the
technology field, a willingness to collaborate with partners, and an aggressive marketing
budget
even
despite
economic
turns.
What is now difficult for Intel to achieve in the mobile market, as opposed to their highly
profitable and reputable PC market, is the level of necessity in smartphones and
tablets. They don't require the computing power that Intel fosters, meaning either a less
quality computing product option and one that sucks less battery power from mobile
devices, a constant problem for smart devices. Intel has to kick up its efforts more than the
'Intel Inside' campaign in the mobile market if they want to gain a foothold.

Lessons Learned:
1. Developing products in a B2B atmosphere means adapting to the needs and wants
of the customer base in each specific industry. Even if your customers comprise the
same foundation, in each respective industry (i.e., PCs vs. smartphones) they have varying
needs for each product or service you are offering, even in the B2B world.
2. Understand customer trust and innovative staff in the balance to move
forward. Intuition of a collaborative group of employees usually leads to smart decisions don't let previous dominance in a market or company policy withhold new idea generation!
3. Create feedback tools with existing and potential customers to generate important
data. It's the critical tool that, if the data is gathered honestly enough, can produce some
serious leads toward enhanced product design, especially in the case of Intel where risk
and uncertainty are prominent.
4. Don't fear the potential of new market entry: embrace it and accept the risk. Each
new industry have a wealth of opportunity and change - but, being in a position to research
and develop your business in these new fields is worth the risk, given the potential payoff.

Buyer's Viewpoint:
As Jim Bob, the average middle-class user-friendly appreciative consumer, I'm thrilled to
see that Intel Inside is expanding into the mobile market. I understand that the company is
worried about their image and market share, but as someone who has used Intel in my
computers before at work and at home, I'm excited! I hope it doesn't drain my battery
though - having to recharge my iPhone two times a day is enough of a hassle. I also hope
that Intel keeps its quality in the mobile market, although I'm not so much worried about
that part as much as their integration to the product driving up the price per item and
monthly service bills.
Extend to New Products?

Pamela Pollace, vice president and director of Intel's worldwide marketing operations, is
debating whether the company should extend its "Intel Inside" branding campaign to nonPC product categories, such as cell phones and PDAs. The "Intel Inside" campaign has been
one of the most successful branding campaigns in history, but it is too old, and growth in
the PC market appears to be stagnating. However, she is concerned that since Intel does not
dominate these other markets like it does the PC market, it won't be successful.
Initially the motivation behind the branding of Intel Inside was to establish the company by
name and identify the high performance products that were used inside the computer with
the company. This was in an effort to create an image for a company and to establish its
brand presence to the general public. They already had a well established reputation of a
quality brand, but they wanted to raise awareness of their brand and create a positive
image.

Key Issues and Solutions

The major problem faced by Intel was the competition from other microprocessor
manufacturers, who were producing chips which took aim at a cheaper computer
market which Intel had not yet tapped into.
Intel was unable to differentiate its products from its competitors due to the
number of clone products in the market.
Consumers were left confused and often guessing as to what was the content and
performance of MP.
Consumers knew Intel's product because of the cloning but Intel wanted them to
recognize the product through the brand itself.

Solutions:

They established a co-op advertising program to start attracting original equipment

manufacturers and place their products in mass produced PCs.
Fight the competitors with technology, marketing, lawyers, and money power. All
focused towards the same goal.

Intel Consultant Point of View

It would be wise for Intel to extend their technology and services to other products. At this
time, the sales and production of computer were stagnating, as PDAs and cell phones were
on the rise. The figures in the future would reflect the same trend and it creates a great
opportunity for Intel to use their band equity from the computer market and translate that
into the cell phone and PDA. If Intel were to capitalize on this, they could maintain their
presence in the PC market, while extending their reach to alternate markets and improve
their company.

1.

What were the strengths and weaknesses of the Intel Inside campaign?
I think it was a brave and brilliant business move for Intel to distinguish itself from a
commodity like position and establish itself as the brains of the computer industry.
Intel decided not to keep a low profile and make itself known. CEOs tended to see sales
of semiconductors and processors as engineer to engineer type sales believing that
they were simply fact based: who has the best product after evaluation. They employed
partnership marketing to build stronger customer relationships and increase profits.
Intel chose to have its logo on its customers products raising the profile of lesser
known computer manufacturers and at the same time levelling the field of computer
manufacturers. The campaign delivered results for the partners in a big way. It was a
gamble as the big three did not buy in initially. They worried that it diminished their
standing. Intel allowed the companies to independently choose their ads and they
would pay up to 50% of the cost to the point of 3% of sales. This was absolutely
win/win for smaller manufacturers and engendered great loyalty. It also comforted the
most timid and least financially able consumer and again engendered great loyalty. The
campaign promised upgradability (a big problem at the time as people were continually
forced to buy a whole new computer to keep up), power, affordability, compatibility
and someone to stand behind the purchase. I think a major strength is that Intel
understood the insecurities of its ultimate market and addressed them reducing
anxiety. In the end it also forced the larger manufacturers to play Intels game. For
consumers, in a fairly new and scary world, the branding represented safety and
quality. This was sorely needed at the time when few consumers considered
themselves qualified to choose a computer. A weakness is that the Intel numbering
system was not patentable and thus made them vulnerable. I remember the
controversy about the Pentium naming and I was a housewife at the time with small
children (meaning I was not exactly in the know.) There was significant free advertising
in this controversy alone. The logo itself had a weakness in translation to other
cultures. I think a final weakness may be in giving up on the campaign too soon.

2. Evaluate Intels continued use of the Pentium family of processors. Did Intel make
the right decision by extending the name through the Pentium 4 processor?
Absolutely, I think that they did the right thing. Pentium became the name of the right
amount of processing power at the time. It had cache like a designer label for computer
industry signifying that you were up to date and knowledgeable. Its initial high price reenforced its quality and exclusivity. Although sales were initially slow, they rose
dramatically when the price dropped based on this mystique of exclusivity and the
cache of being the brand. Now, the former commodity or ingredient was such a large
brand that they could advertise during the Super Bowl! Again, they understood the
ultimate purchaser so well. It was men that normally purchased and computers
became
the
new
phallic
symbol
for
techie
yuppies.
3. Suppose you were the chief Marketing Officer for AMD. How would you propose
that
AMD
institute
an
Inside
like
ad
campaign?
This is a tough question. I guess that being number two is difficult and you could
choose a Hertz type of ad we try harder but they should try harder to find staff with
vision for advertising as a first step. I think that I would identify the ultimate buyer. I
would realize the maleness of the customer, the testosterone driven competition for
more power and yet the anxieties involved in fear of inadequate knowledge to run or
fix the computer. From there I would embrace sporting, Nascar or where ever the male,
knowledge/ competitive types were. Maybe I would do an ad with a famous Nascar and
driver tearing up the track, rushing into the pit for a team of specialists to change the
tires and was the windows in a quick stop and then have the car pull up on a suburban
street driveway and the guy helps his young smiling family (with baby asleep) out of the
same car. Tag line: Performance and Safety. Man, thats AMDs style. As he settles
down in his computer chair. My logo might be a race car with AMD simulating a
Nascar
brand
(or
a
Porsche).
4. Evaluate Intels segmentation strategy. Is having a good/better/best product line
the best positioning for Intel. Should it discontinue a line(s) and focus on the other(s).
I think that I would be tempted to spin off the lowest end chips now. They are
established and they could bring in an important market on their own but they dilute
the quality message that I think will be crucial to Intel going forward into consumer
products. Many pharmaceutical companies do this when their products are
approaching the end of their patents. They continue to get revenue but they reduce
the price to a generic level and often just spin the product off to concentrate on big
money makers. Intel has been the everything to everybody company until now. At one
time Toyota built bicycles too but they moved on. Celeron should be spun off to

compete with and draw AMDs attention. I think that they should maintain the better
and best lines to accentuate the message of high quality for their other products
especially for B2B and for consumer products. They also need to focus on QUALITY
production. The Itanium fiasco cost them too much in terms of reputation for quality.
5. In light of Intels move to a digital home, did the companys executives make the
right decision in launching an entirely new brand identity? Did it make the right
decision in changing a 37 year old Intel logo and dropping the Intel inside campaign
for Leap Ahead? What other marketing strategies might the company employ?
Yes, a company like Intel must progress and develop new applications for its products. I
would have been reluctant to waste the 37 year impression that I had made on the
consumers consciousness especially when I was also shifting gears and when the
reputation was for quality but they did keep the essential logo and the Intel name.
However, given the demographic segment that will primarily be buying these products
there is some justification. The millennials who are approaching the size of the
Boomers in numbers are the ones who are absolutely comfortable with technology and
who will have the buying power. The Boomers may keep up with technology but they
are aging and not adept so Intel must make it very friendly for them. The important
point here is that Boomers may not be the primary market and that the Millenials do
not want to buy what their parents and grandparents bought. Even the new Rock Star
ad pokes fun at the Boomer sense of Rock Star adulation. (Witness the number of
Boomers flocking to Rolling Stones concerts. We would have laughed old men like that
off the stage in our own youth but this generation appears more accepting.) They have
maintained Intel but the logo has been tweaked and I think that is appropriate. Even
Campbells soup updates its label from time to time. As they will be marketing to the
MTV generation and to Boomers who stay flexible, they need to be careful not to
alienate them. An excellent website that provides information and service is a must.
Clear communication without equivocation is also required. This generation will not
take much propaganda. A perfect, easy to use product that enhances life and the
liveability of a home is the best way to go. Leap ahead reminds me of a toy that this
generation grew up with- Leap frog. It was a learning toy- not a bad fit.
6. Intel moved into consumer electronics products, such as digital cameras in 2000,
only to withdraw after receiving complaints from OEMs such as Dell. Does Intel face a
similar issue with its move into the digital home? Does this move too far outside
Intels
core
competency
of
producing
microprocessors?

Consumers are acquiring huge amounts and varieties of digital media on mobile and
consumer electronic devices as well as on PCs movies, games, photos, email, music

and more. They want to be able to access and enjoy that data easily and conveniently,
using any number of devices. To do that requires a home network that allows disparate
devices to interoperate seamlessly. Up until now, this consumer desire has remained
largely unfulfilled. The DLNA presents a great opportunity to bring together key players
in the PC, CE, and mobile industries, to address which standards and specifications are
needed to enable the digital home. Without cross-industry standards and
specifications, the growth of the digital home market would be very limited.
Taken

from

Intel

and

the

digital

home.

The mistakes of the past and the lessons gleaned from them have been plugged into
this decision. I think that this does represent Intels core competencies- innovation,
collaboration and marketing. The DLNA Board of Directors is run by representatives
from the following companies: Sony Electronics, Philips, Hewlett-Packard, Matsushita
Electrical Industrial, Microsoft Corporation, Nokia, and Samsung as well as Intel. All of
the companies are potential buyers of Intels future products. The process of home
digitization is in its infancy and is clearly the way of the future with only 2% of homes in
North America using home digital applications. Computers are always lead by the Star
Trek vision of the future with easy integrated computer technology that seamlessly
interacts with human beings. Intel is bringing that future to us.