• Connect

Comment From Donna @ Kryptonite

Donna kindly responded to my piece below on the Kryptonite thing. It’s worth reading the comment – she makes some fair points. In response I’d say:

  1. I did read the response to Rebecca on Dave’s site. I’ll leave it at that.
  2. Communications is an integral element of any brand – it directly influences reputation and consideration, which in turn impact buyers behavior. So, to answer the question, "shouldn’t you buy
    a lock based on the effectiveness of the lock? Thieves don’t care how
    we communicate an issue, they care about whether or not they can defeat
    a lock on the street." The answer is yes – but you can’t break the company, the lock and the brand from each other. They are one. That’s why I didn’t buy. Oh, and theives aren’t the audience, bikers are – especially those of us stupid enough to fork out thousands on a new bike. We really care how good the company that made the good lock is. And if you aren’t telling us that where we are reading (aka, blogs) – we won’t find out.
  3. To the point that Kryptonite would like to get past this but can’t because people like me write about it, well, I’m only writing about it because you are doing interviews. You’ve made the very issue hot again and of interest to me. You turned the conversation back on. Which gets back to my point that you always want to avoid speaking to the mechanics of the past.

So, here is another thought. Kryptonite is clearly a good, "do no evil" kind of  company. Start framing this one positively. Show us how incredibly strong these locks are. Use every opportunity to talk about that. And issue a $1m challenge to anyone who can pick it using a Bic pen. Take it to the market. Explaining the mechanics of the past is of less interest to us prospective buyers than the integrity of the company and product today.

Maybe I’ll get a Kryptonite lock for xmas?


Speak Up — Add Your Thoughts


  • Connect
How did you connect?   [?]