[quoted from the Shanghai Media Post
dated 8 May 2007, 09:15g Pacific Rim Edition, Guest Editorial,
URL="hmtp://smp.asia.news.services/guest:editorials:pacrim:0915080507"]

[the following text has not been translated from Mandarin, for obvious
reasons, ed.]

Why "Notice" Failed in North America
  by John Cheng, Marketing Analyst for PacRim Securities

Much attention has focused on Matsushita's dramatic failure to capture
*any* share of North America's huge recreational beverage consumption
market.  A variety of theories have been put forth for this unprecedented
and spectacular failure by what is now the worlds's largest entertainment
producer.  Most of these theories have focused on Matsushita's formulation
of nootropics, which was particularly aggressive and poorly researched.
Indeed, it is the esteemed research arm of Matsushita which has born the
brunt of the resulting disciplinary initiative, itself the subject of much
discussion in the industry.  It is importnat to consider whether
Matsushita may be castrating itself by chastising R&D, when in fact the
blame lies elsewhere.  I believe it does: it is the Marketing division
which is responsible for this embarrassment.

The chosen name of the product, "Notice," went through an extensive QA
process, which involved marketing trials throughout Japan and parts of
Korea and Australia, with no trials attempted in North America.  As is
well known to all who have followed this debacle, Matsushita decided on a
marketing strategy in NA that involved instant and total saturation, with
media drives to complete the feedback loop.  For this reason, it was felt
that any NA market trials would signifcantly undermine the intensity of
the later Matsushita "blitzkrieg."  No market trials of any kind were
attemped in North America.  Australia was the only English speaking region
where any data was gathered.

Sales in trials were poor in Australia, but fair to brisk in Asia.  While
there was concern among the controlling committe about poor performance in
Australia, the poor sales were eventually blamed on the prevailing
economic conditions, in addition to the burgeoning xenophobia that has
followed the rise of PacRim investment in Australia and New Zealand.
Unfortunately for Matsushita, it was eventualy decided to disregard the
marketing data generated in Australia.  The committe remainied resolute,
and the marketing division readied its billion dollar(HK) advertising and
consumer conditioning campaign.  Distribution bought bandwidth in all
available channels.  On April 1, the product introduction began.  We are
all aware of what followed.

As those of us in China are actutely aware, the Japanese consortia
continue to operate with a cultural chauvinism - or at the very least, a
characteristic unwillingness to appreciate cultural diversity - that fans
the flames of economicaly damaging xenophobia throughout the PacRim.  In
this case, Matsushita did not offend any but themselves.  For, if
Marketing had but *asked* even *one* native Anglophone, they would have
been told that the English word they chose as the translation of "Notice,"
"notice," reads in english as "not iced."  It is well known that North
Americans prefer their recreational beverages cold, preferebaly with ice.

This kind of cultural chauvinism is not new in Multinational marketing:
thirty years ago the former American auto manufactuer, Chevrolet,
attempted to sell a car in Latin America named, "Nova," which means "Does
not travel," in Spanish.  Chevrolet, like Matsushita, remained baffled by
their marketing failure.

At any rate, North Americans obviously refused to buy a product whose name
blatantly refuted the images promulageted by Matsushita's Marketing
campaign.  As of this date, there is not yet any hard data supporting this
theory - but as I am sure most subscribers to this service recall from
their grammar-school English, this faux pas is quite obvious once it has
been "noticed."

Thus will Matsushita's error take its place in Marketing folklore,
alongside the Chevrolet "Nova," and Coca-Cola's "Bite the Wax-Tadpole."
(Although, the latter is not a particularly good example, as most native
Chinese speakers did not read that transliteration in that manner in the
first place.  However, this may be the exception that proves the rule.)

-------

[sidebar to guest editorial, appearing only in the southern PacRim edition
of the Shanghai Media Post, same date and time]

The Reaction of Australian Consumers to "Notice"
  by Kip Hawthorne, section analyst

A quick perusal of Matsushita's recently declassified (only through the
efforts of the National Information Mininstry) summary of their "Notice"
marketing trials in Sydney and Melbourne fail to show a single mention of
the bad connotation of the name "Notice," from being read as "Not Ice."
However, a full two-thirds of those surveyed expressed dislike for a
"persistent aftertaste," and the "strange color."  For full details, see
URL="htmp://archives.nim.au.gov/notice:importers:declassified:docs"