<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Market research vs. market intelligence</title>
	<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/smeinsight/strategy/2007/05/market-research-vs-market-intelligence/</link>
	<description>Take your Business to the next level</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 02:37:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: arvin dalangin</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/smeinsight/strategy/2007/05/market-research-vs-market-intelligence/#comment-257</link>
		<author>arvin dalangin</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2007 23:35:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.inquirer.net/smeinsight/strategy/2007/05/market-research-vs-market-intelligence/#comment-257</guid>
					<description>I have read your article about market research vs. market intelligence, i agreed to how you discribed market research but the market inteeligence???....
Maybe I only misinterpret your idea but as far as what i understand to what your example states isn't a good market intelligence.
Market Intelligence is a relevant information to company's marketing style. You also states "Technically", that market intelligence is still part of the domain of market research.
As far as we that the market research is the "process" of systematic gathering, analyzing and interpreting of data about customers, competitor's and market.
How you set your example now on market intelligence have no process is all desperate marketing style, because they don't get any data only information and i think it help's but not that good
and beside's marketing is not all about the people who think of the strategy is all about the customer's and how they satisfied and decide.

Good day!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have read your article about market research vs. market intelligence, i agreed to how you discribed market research but the market inteeligence???&#8230;.<br />
Maybe I only misinterpret your idea but as far as what i understand to what your example states isn&#8217;t a good market intelligence.<br />
Market Intelligence is a relevant information to company&#8217;s marketing style. You also states &#8220;Technically&#8221;, that market intelligence is still part of the domain of market research.<br />
As far as we that the market research is the &#8220;process&#8221; of systematic gathering, analyzing and interpreting of data about customers, competitor&#8217;s and market.<br />
How you set your example now on market intelligence have no process is all desperate marketing style, because they don&#8217;t get any data only information and i think it help&#8217;s but not that good<br />
and beside&#8217;s marketing is not all about the people who think of the strategy is all about the customer&#8217;s and how they satisfied and decide.</p>
<p>Good day!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Art</title>
		<link>http://blogs.inquirer.net/smeinsight/strategy/2007/05/market-research-vs-market-intelligence/#comment-265</link>
		<author>Art</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2007 01:20:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blogs.inquirer.net/smeinsight/strategy/2007/05/market-research-vs-market-intelligence/#comment-265</guid>
					<description>Hi Arvin, and good point. Yes, the "market intelligence" I described does seem rather haphazard and, more to the point, practically sleazy. :) But it does happen.

You are indeed correct in your assessment that this kind of information perhaps is not part of what marketing is all about, and that marketing is supposed to be about the customer. So perhaps my example may truly not be appropriate since it isn't exactly a market-oriented example.

On the other hand, whether market-oriented or not, intelligence-gathering activities do affect the market strategy. Such as when San Miguel gathered info about Asia Brewery's upcoming beer back in Hong Kong... because Hong Kong was San Miguel territory in the late 70s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Arvin, and good point. Yes, the &#8220;market intelligence&#8221; I described does seem rather haphazard and, more to the point, practically sleazy. <img src='http://blogs.inquirer.net/smeinsight/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> But it does happen.</p>
<p>You are indeed correct in your assessment that this kind of information perhaps is not part of what marketing is all about, and that marketing is supposed to be about the customer. So perhaps my example may truly not be appropriate since it isn&#8217;t exactly a market-oriented example.</p>
<p>On the other hand, whether market-oriented or not, intelligence-gathering activities do affect the market strategy. Such as when San Miguel gathered info about Asia Brewery&#8217;s upcoming beer back in Hong Kong&#8230; because Hong Kong was San Miguel territory in the late 70s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
