Electronic References
Home Register login Logout

INTEL Knows Best? A Major Marketing Mistake

TitleINTEL Knows Best? A Major Marketing Mistake
# of Words1689
# of Pages (250 words per page double spaced)6.76

INTEL Knows Best? A Major Marketing Mistake



INTEL Knows Best? A Major Marketing Mistake


Problem Statement

     When Thomas Nicely, a mathematician at Lynchburg College in Virginia, first
went public with the fact that Intel's new Pentium chip was defective Intel
admitted to the fact that it had sold millions of defective chips, and had known
about the defective chips for over four months.  Intel said its reasoning for
not going public was that most people would never encounter any problems with
the chip.  Intel said that a spreadsheet user doing random calculations would
only have a problem every 27,000 years, therefore they saw no reason to replace
all of the defective chips.  However if a user possessed a defective chip and
could convince Intel that his or her calculations were particularly vulnerable
to the flaw in the defective chip then Intel it would supply those people with a
new chip.   This attitude of 'father knows best' fostered by Intel created an
uproar among users and owners of the defective chips.   Six weeks after Mr.
Nicely went public, IBM, a major purchaser of Pentium chips, stopped all
shipments of computers containing the defective Pentium chips.   Intel's stock
dropped 5% following this bold move by IBM.  IBM's main contention was that it
puts its customers first, and Intel was failing to do this.
     Intel's handling of this defective chip situation gives rise to many
questions.  During the course of this paper I will address several of them.  The
first of which is how did a company with such a stellar reputation for consumer
satisfaction fall into the trap that the customer does not know best?  Secondly,
what made this chip defect more of a public issue than other defective products
manufactured and sold to the public in the past?  Finally, how did Intel recover
from such a mistake?  How much did it cost them and what lessons can other
companies learn from Intel's marketing blunder so that they do not make the same
mistake?

Major Findings
     Intel is spearheaded by a chief executive named Andrew Grove.  Grove is a
"tightly wound engineering Ph.D. who has molded the company in his image.  Both
the secret of his success and the source of his current dilemma is an anxious
management philosophy built around the motto 'Only the paranoid survive'."
However, even with this type of philosophy the resulting dominance he has
achieved in the computer arena cannot be overlooked.  Intel  practically
dominates the computer market with $11.5 billion in sales.  Intel has over 70%
of the $11 billion microprocessor market, while it's Pentium and 486 chips
basically control the IBM-compatible PC market.  All of these factors have
resulted in an envious 56% profit margin that only Intel can seem to achieve.
So what did Intel do to achieve this sort of profit margin?
     In mid-1994 Intel launched a $150m marketing campaign aimed at getting
consumers to recognize the Pentium name and the "Intel Inside" logo.  In order
to achieve this goal of  brand recognition Intel advertised its own name in
conjunction with the "Intel Inside" logo and stated 'with Intel Inside, you know
you have got. . . unparalleled quality'.   This provided immediate name
recognition for the company and led the consumers to associate Intel with high
quality computers.  Then Intel went the extra mile in the marketing world and
spent another $80m to promote its new Pentium chips.  The basis for this extra
$80m was to "speed the market's acceptance of the new chip".   The marketing
campaign was a success.  Intel had managed to achieve brand recognition.  "Once
the products were branded, companies found that they could generate even higher
sales by advertising the benefits of their products.  This advertising led
consumers to regard brands as having very human personality traits, with one
proving fundamental to brand longevity  --  trustworthiness."   Consumers
readily identified a quality, up to date computer as one with a Pentium chip and
the 'Intel Inside' logo stamped on the front.  This "push" marketing strategy of
Intel totally domin...This is ONLY a preview of the article. If you would like to view the entire document, you must subscribe to Electronic References. Please register below now!

Get This Full Article After Registration

When you subscribe to Electronic References, you get complete access to the meta-collection of full text articles and papers written by researchers and students spanning the last 5 years. For $19.95 a month, you will receive unlimited access and the ability to expand your research opportunities and knowledge.

This subscription package includes:

  • 24-hours-a-day, 7 days a week unlimited access on any computer with Internet access
  • Complete access to all 60,000 articles, essays, and research papers
  • Ability to view, save, print and download any document you find
  • Ability to browse through perfectly arranged catalog of articles
  • Superior search and relevancy ranking techniques using our optimalized search engine
  • Instant access to the online database after registration
You can pay by credit card or checking account. You get instant access after registration:

1 Month ($ 19.95)
3 Months ($ 29.95)
6 Months ($ 39.95)


You will be billed $19.95 every 30 days or $29.95 every 90 days (recurring billing) starting on the day you subscribe.
Your credit card or checking account will automatically be renewed for your convenience until you cancel.


Home | Register | Login | Logout | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Help | FAQ | Contact Us | Cancel Subscription

Copyright 1998-2007 Electronic References. Electronic References is designed only to assist students and researchers in the preparation of their own work. Anybody who use our services are responsible not only for writing their own papers, but also for citing Electronic References as a source when doing so. By accessing and using this page you agree to the Disclaimer.