An Original Schteinn Science Report
~Tenth Edition ~
Brought To You By: The Schteinn School of the Sophisticated Sciences (S.S.S.S.)
~ Bringing you a joint effort by the school's Marketing And Advertisement Sciences Department and the Leisure Sciences Department
NOTE: Post inspired by a long-ago Monday, Five Minute Freewrite: Pink Baby Pool By @mariannewest. It's just taken the Schteinn School of the Sophisticated Sciences a LONG time to get it out for publication, during summer break and fruit processing season.
Case Study No. 47
Bankruptcy and Failed Business Practices Report
Marketing Case Study
This report is being put out to public as part of our ongoing series on the analysis of businesses that have passed from highly successful and thriving, to going out of business in a very short time. This past month the Schteinn School of the Sophisticated Sciences was called upon by a high-ranking member of our society, to look into the recent economic collapse and eventual demise of a local toy company.
And we at the S.S.S.S. were delighted to receive, then pass this project on to two of our stellar academic groups within the school. The Marketing And Advertisement Sciences Department and the Leisure Sciences Department. With sole intent of final analysis and eventual publication. This project also allowed some of our newer faculty researchers to 'get their feet wet' within the research and analysis end of things.
The Newly Minted Baby-Toy Company recently closed their doors for business, after 127 years of service to the community of Meeland, Ohio. Upon further perusal into the coming's and going's of this company, we at the S.S.S.S. feel we have narrowed down the problem as to why this company failed to stay in business. The following is our analysis and conclusions of failure, and can be found in the forthcoming publication under the heading: Results Of Findings & Logistics (R.O.F. L.) ~ The Newly Minted Baby-Toy Company
The Proof Is in The Bath Water
Though babies are broadly conceived, the marketing principal addressing this burgeoning crowd of new people is all too often narrowly conceived and followed up upon. Thus leading to ultimate failure within the marketing scheme.
Even though some products are well planned and thought out, short sighted advertising, or worse, improper naming of a new product, may make the item SO specialize, off-putting, narrowly conceived in light of intended audience, or downright esoteric, to preclude anyone in the market from taking advantage of said product. The analysis of the item targeted in this report, is one such example. No product should be so poorly conceived and followed up upon, to sink the item's ultimate success, and with it in far too many cases, drag the whole 'ship' of the company down with it, as it 'goes'.
Summary of Study
Findings and Conclusions
The Pink Baby Pool Syndrome
The Newly Minted Baby-Toy Company
◊ Pink Baby Pool ◊
By Author and Researcher: Paylon G. Bissulfyte M.S.-L.A. (Masters of Study-Leisure Analysis)
After further perusal, the reasoning for the failure of this particular business can be reduced down to a single product of sale , offered solely by this company. What is ironic is that this item was a proposed flagship toy of their leisure brand.
The Pink Baby Pool. We at the S.S.S.S. are certain this particular item was the cause for the ultimate failure of this company. The here-to-date, unpublished analysis file is included below. Results for this case study are presented by the primary researcher, Paylon G. Bissulfyte, M.S-L.A.
The Singular Audience Conundrum
They Don't Stay Pink For Long
As the title of this product proclaims, this item of sale appears to only target babies that are pink. And new. And though I have not had opportunity to observe a ton of babies in real life, as a proper comparative measure, I HAVE seen many babies on the television. Particularly late at night. Primarily during the commercials. (I do not believe the film industry uses real babies while creating most movie films.)
What I have discovered is that babies in commercials are all very young. And quite pink in color. But I'm pretty sure babies are only pink for a very short time. Then they grow up. And change, to other, more adult colors.
EXAMPLE: My younger sister had a couple of babies. When I would go visit, my niece and nephew were only pink for a very short amount of time. Then they got older. The pinkness faded, then went away. I'm pretty sure they were not TRULY pink past a year or so in age. At least when I went to visit them they weren't still pink.
Though, I suppose this DID change a few times. When they were older. It happened whenever we went to Florida, on family vacation. Though in hindsight, EVERYONE in the family turned pink. Except those that stayed indoors, with the TV on, or just lounging around on the divan. So I don't think that is what we are talking about here.
Plus, there is no reason to bring a wading pool to Florida anyway. There is an ocean surrounding you in all directions. Not only that, I'm quite certain these inflatable pools would not fit in the airplane overhead compartment, if one DID decide to include them as luggage. Even WITHOUT all the air still inside.
Results of Finding
Very narrow band width of utility for this particular product. Babies do not stay the requisite pink shade for more than a very short time. Therefor, product has exceedingly limited viability. And though the family practice of 'handing down' an object of usability to a new member of the family, or to other neighbors, is very common, this product would not 'fit the bill'. It is an inflatable device. Prone to puncture by all manner of yard and driveway bumps, sharp impediments or rocky surfaces over time. NO, this particular pool can not be considered as an object efficiently passed on, to take advantage of other, newer pink babies coming into existence down the long road of procreation.
Baby-Agism and the Body Size/Heat Indices of Cooling
As the name suggests, this product is solely intended for babies. Particularly in light of the research discussed in the paragraph above. The short-term viability of the pink baby, suggests this pool is only available for children under a year or so old. This seems a bit baby-ageist. Or more accurately, is very child, age-range preclusive. What about the older kids? They get hot in the summer weather. Probably HOTTER than babies, since they are in much larger bodies. I compare this to a smaller, standard garbage can versus a full-sized dumpster in an alley during hot, sunny weather. The dumpster gets MUCH hotter than the smaller can. I know, I've touched both of them. On the SAME day. The larger item is much much hotter to the touch.
No doubt this is because the dumpster is bigger. More surface area to gather the sun's rays. So, this proves beyond a doubt, the older, bigger kids want to cool off, just like everyone else. And as this science points out, NEED to. Like the large dumpster in the alley. I'm talking about the kids from say, 2 to 12 years old. Those in the post-pink, color years.
Results of Finding
Utilizing these protocols, this product precludes a large band of children that could take advantage of this pool for cooling purposes, if they so desired. Not just the little, pink babies when they are hot. Once again, by it's very name, the Pink Baby Pool has a very limited audience of use, and viability as a product of success in the marketplace.
~ § ~
The Baby Of The Family Omission/Preclusion Principle
This brings up another valid, Scientific point. Concerning adults and baby pools. That is, once we move beyond the pink baby dilemma. We shall use the family I grew up in, as as example. My sister is the youngest child in our family. Everyone has always called her the baby of the family. And there she shall remain... the baby, in all familial situations...for the rest of her born days. Does this mean she is the only one in our family that would be allowed to use this pool? Even if we move beyond the whole pink issue?
Results of Finding
This does not seem fair. And once again limits the scope, demand, and ultimate usefulness of this particular, water holding device. There are a lot of family members in the world that are NOT the baby of the family, as per established definition. I suppose, scientifically based, there can only BE one. Or maybe a few more, in the case of twins, triplets, sextuplets, etc. These 'others' that are not the baby, or twins and such, should not be exclusioned because of their birth order, and standing along the family tree of being.
The Big Brother Redefinition Of Age
There are also times when a child (or adult, in particular families) are stochastic-ally re-defined by other members of the immediate family. This happens often. At least it did in OUR family. Most times during what is better known in the Scientific field as 'roughhousing', or 'other sibling rascality'. Most often seen in older brother/younger brother rivalry interactions.
This happened to me with my older brother. More often than I would like to admit. Circumstances often arose that, in the end, resulted in my brother re-labeling me as that baby of the family. Though it was usually shortened a bit, to a much simpler, big baby. (Even though my standing in the familial tree theoretically precluded this, as I was the middle child. And I wasn't all that big, in reality. At least compared to my brother and his friends.)
This attenuation of my standing was uttered on a semi-regular basis, though seemingly most often while larger brother was perched on my chest, pinning my arms to my side by heavier, older brother knees, accompanied by the standard, rather disgusting inclusion of older brother Pepsi Spits. Further research into this phenomenon is needed, but anecdotal evidence through discussions around the S.S.S.S. cafeteria suggests this is a very common, standard practice in inter-sibling rivalry interactions.
Results of Finding
Common or not, such re-labeling or age degradation beyond actual and true, numbric family child order , may lead to advanced confusion, and further difficulties involving the purchase of this Pink Baby Pool. If this item is intended solely for babies of the family, how does the re-labeled child fit within this scenario? Are the older children allowed to use it, even though authority (no matter how tenuous), has suggested otherwise? And what of those not sure of their numeric, lineal status, due to this re-labeling in the early, impressionable years of life?
These sorts of things sure can get very confusing, if you really think about them very hard. Further research is needed, and we feel a fine Masters of Study subject is now laid forth for followup. And also feel this was a large part of the downfall of this pool, and eventual Newly Minted Baby-Toy Companies demise.
The Inclusion Of Safety
Large brother/smaller brother dynamicies bring up another interesting point, that may have doomed this pool from the very start, and ultimately the company that relied upon it for revenue. I'm of course referring to the all-important, poolside Safety Factor. This pink Baby Pool did NOT come complete. As in, with requisite safety water wings provided as standard, water safety gear. I'm sure you are familiar with these devices. The inflatable, tubular arm coverings that one affixes to their upper arms, to maintain buoyancy in watery situations. Such as while splashing about in this Pink Baby Pool. This would have rendered this particular pool MUCH safer for everyone involved. Babies, on up to older, non-pink children, ranging on into the normal hued teenager, then moving up to the pastier, middle-aged adults.
Results of Finding
I can fully vouch for the utility and safety factor of these water wings. They worked wonders for my Grandmother, whenever we were on those Florida vacations. She floated very very well in the ocean currents with them on her upper arms, and never went anywhere on the beach without them affixed. And this Pink Baby Pool has MUCH smaller waves than the Gulf Coast ocean. I feel this logic-based safety gear should have been included as a standard accessory with the purchase of the Pink Baby pool. Once again, the lack of a pre-determined attitude toward safety was paramount to the failure of this pool, and the company that relied upon it for their very survival.
Not Every Baby Is Pink
There is one other very important consideration here. Not all new babies are pink. Babies come out in many colors and hues, throughout the world. By limiting a product to only 'pink babies', a company is cutting out a HUGE portion of the worldwide audience (and pool users), that could benefit from such a radiant cooling device. Re-naming this product as the All The Babies Of The World Pool would have been much more appropriate. And may have helped staved off the eventual demise of this pool, and the ultimate failure of the Newly Minted Baby-Toy Company in the end.
Analytical Conclusion On Commercial-ity Of This Product
This pool was doomed from the outset. By creating a wading pool intended solely for babies, and pink ones at that, the manufacturers and sales outlets assured the ultimate failure of this product from the start. This brings up the most glaringly obvious of conclusions in the world of high commerce and product production. Name and intent is everything. And in this case, the name and ultimate intent "sank" their product. A fitting, highly ironic way to classify the ultimate failure of a Pink Baby Pool, full of water.
Make a pool for ALL people, babies, children and adults. Not just the pink babies. Do not make your product so specific to age and age-based colorization, that you completely limit your product viability. This sort of activity not only lowers sales potential, and dooms the marketability of a product such as this, but also insults people all over the place. From babies, to youngsters, all the way up to full-age adults.
Thus, in closing, I do hope you take my ideas into consideration, and talk to future staff at the stores, and the manufacturing managers, and get this all ironed out. And start to make some pools more appropriate for ALL ages. Not just the pink babies. I really think these pools should be for EVERYONE.
It's just the right thing to do.
Thanks for stopping in and viewing the latest, highly Scientific Discussion about Pink Baby Pools. If you have any thoughts about wading pools, the appropriateness of these pools for differing age groups, how long babies stay pink, or anything else this post reminds you of, please feel free to comment away in the spaces below. I'd love to hear from you.
*Scientific Note: This article is being published after the rainy season has ended. The school has heavily suggested I send these deeply-researched articles out for peer review. I tried this, but got few answers back. And it takes too long anyway. So, I'm putting this out without peer review. The results are just TOO important to delay any longer.
A huge shout-out from the Freelance Reporter's cardboard holler-horn goes out to the amazing @ocrdu for creating this marvy little identification credential for The Schteinn Science Report. Not only is it ultra-cool, but it allows me to poke about into databases and other larger places I'm probably not supposed to be. Though that IS the point of this on-the-edge, razor-sharp Science reportáge.
Please UPVOTE, COMMENT and FOLLOW if you enjoy my works.
And go to @ddschteinn -- There's a whole lot more...
Posted: 08/18/2019 @ 20:20~ Post No. 323
Excerpts From Late-Night Conversations With A Mechanical Cat
Fact Number 159
More Classic Cat Facts From Stinky the Cat