T
載入中...
載入中...
Do you know what Google, Starbucks, and Tik Tok have in common? None of them had an original idea. The truth is, you don't need an original idea to be
你知道 Google、星巴克和 TikTok 有什麼共同點嗎？它們都沒有原創的想法。事實是，你不需要原創的想法才能有
creative or to win. And through thousands of hours studying what makes brands win, I have learned that creativity doesn't really matter. You just need to know how to stand
創意或者贏。通過數千小時研究是什麼讓品牌獲勝，我了解到創意其實並不重要。你只需要知道如何脫穎而出
out. So, these are the four strategies that you can use to stop chasing original ideas and finally start winning. But first, let's break down why creativity doesn't actually matter. And
所以，這是你可以用來停止追逐原創想法、終於開始獲勝的四個策略。但首先，讓我們分析為什麼創意其實並不重要。這
it all has to do with something I like to call the pioneers curse. Creativity is overrated here. Is what the biggest brands in the world actually do to succeed. So, there's this saying,
一切都與我稱之為「先驅者詛咒」的東西有關。創意被高估了。這是世界上最大的品牌實際上如何成功的。有一句話是這樣說的
pioneers get the arrows and settlers get the land. Now, it's dark, I know, but it captures the secret brutal truth about innovation. The same truth that made Google the most successful
先驅者中箭，定居者得到土地。我知道，這很黑暗，但它捕捉了關於創新的殘酷秘密真相。同樣的真相讓 Google 成為世界上最成功的
search engine in the world. Now think about the search engines before Google.
搜尋引擎。現在想想 Google 之前的搜尋引擎。
Does anyone remember Alta Vista? It launched in 1995, way before Google existed. Then Yahoo came along and actually bought Alta Vista only to shut it down later. So these were the
有人記得 Alta Vista 嗎？它在 1995 年推出，遠在 Google 存在之前。然後 Yahoo 出現，實際上收購了 Alta Vista，結果後來把它關掉了。所以這些是
pioneers. They figured out search technology, spent millions on development, and educated the market about why they needed a search engine in the first place. And then Google showed
先驅者。他們搞清楚了搜尋技術，花了數百萬在開發上，並且教育市場為什麼他們首先需要搜尋引擎。然後 Google 出現
up and just dominated them all. And this isn't an isolated event. This pattern repeats everywhere because being original is brutally expensive.
然後就主宰了他們所有人。這不是孤立事件。這個模式到處重複，因為做原創是非常昂貴的。
You are paying to learn all the early mistakes while everyone watches and then learns from your failures. So when you want to start a business or sell a
你在付錢學習所有早期的錯誤，而每個人都在看，然後從你的失敗中學習。所以當你想開始一個事業或銷售一個
product or service, stop asking, is this original? And start asking, "How can I stand out with an idea that's already proven to work and make money?" The first strategy to do that is to
產品或服務時，停止問「這是原創的嗎？」開始問「我怎樣才能用一個已經被證明有效且能賺錢的想法脫穎而出？」做到這一點的第一個策略是
win with better branding. Starbucks built a billionoll empire with someone else's beans and someone else's store layout. Now, here's how it happened. So, Pete's Coffee had been around in like
用更好的品牌獲勝。星巴克用別人的咖啡豆和別人的店面佈局建立了一個數十億美元的帝國。這是它如何發生的。Peet's Coffee 從
since the 1960s. They had the specialty coffee thing figured out decades before Starbucks existed. They pioneered the whole concept of making coffee cool and premium in America. So, when Starbucks
1960 年代就存在了。他們在星巴克存在之前幾十年就搞清楚了精品咖啡這件事。他們開創了在美國讓咖啡變得酷和高端的整個概念。所以，當星巴克
came along in the 70s, they literally copied Pete's store layout with, you know, permission, which is good to know.
在 70 年代出現時，他們字面上複製了 Peet's 的店面佈局，當然是經過許可的，這很重要。
But here's the crazy part. They even sold Pete's coffee beans instead of Starbucks beans in the beginning. They weren't trying to hide what they were doing. They just said, "Hey, we're going
但這裡是瘋狂的部分。他們一開始甚至賣 Peet's 的咖啡豆而不是星巴克的豆子。他們並沒有試圖隱藏他們在做什麼。他們只是說「嘿，我們要
to take this proven concept and we're going to brand it better." And that's exactly what they did. Starbucks had a much better brand. They expanded aggressively. They did more than just
拿這個經過驗證的概念，我們要把它品牌做得更好。」而這正是他們做的。星巴克有更好的品牌。他們積極擴張。他們做的不只是
coffee. They created the third place concept, the mobile app, the rewards program. They turned a commodity product into a lifestyle brand. Now, Pete's has a cult following among, you know, coffee purists. But Starbucks
咖啡。他們創造了「第三空間」的概念、手機應用、獎勵計劃。他們把一個大宗商品產品變成了一個生活方式品牌。現在，Peet's 在咖啡純粹主義者中有一群忠實粉絲。但星巴克
continues to own the market. They are the default choice. They're what people think of when they think of coffee shops. Now, this is the power of branding over being first. Pete's had a
繼續擁有市場。他們是預設選擇。他們是人們想到咖啡店時會想到的。這就是品牌超越先行的力量。Peet's 有
10-year head start. They had the product knowledge, the roasting expertise, and the credibility. But Starbucks understood something that Pets didn't. Branding is everything. The lesson here is that you don't need a
10 年的領先優勢。他們有產品知識、烘焙專業知識和信譽。但星巴克理解了 Peet's 不理解的東西。品牌就是一切。這裡的教訓是你不需要一個
better product to win. Sometimes you just need a better brand. And building a better brand is often easier and cheaper than building a better product because brand is about perception and storytelling. And that's
更好的產品來獲勝。有時候你只需要一個更好的品牌。而建立一個更好的品牌通常比建立一個更好的產品更容易也更便宜，因為品牌是關於認知和說故事的。那是
pure marketing strategy and execution. In a saturated market, stop trying to out feature competitors. Study what the market leader brand makes people feel.
純粹的行銷策略和執行。在一個飽和的市場中，停止試圖用功能超越競爭對手。研究市場領導者的品牌讓人們感受到什麼。
Identify what's missing from that emotional experience and then build your brand to basically fill that gap. Use storytelling, positioning, and identity to differentiate when the product can't. Strategy number two is to
找出那個情感體驗中缺少什麼，然後建立你的品牌來基本上填補那個空白。當產品無法差異化時，用說故事、定位和身份來差異化。策略二是
win with a better product. So, Twitter owned Vine. They had short form video content figured out years before Tik Tok existed. Vine was popular. It was fun
用更好的產品獲勝。Twitter 擁有 Vine。他們在 TikTok 存在之前幾年就搞清楚了短影片內容。Vine 很受歡迎，很有趣
and people loved it, but Twitter shut it down in 2017 because it wasn't taking off the way they want it. Then along came Tik Tok with literally the same idea. Short vertical videos you
人們喜歡它，但 Twitter 在 2017 年把它關掉了，因為它沒有按照他們想要的方式起飛。然後 TikTok 帶著字面上相同的想法出現了。短豎屏影片，你
just scroll through endlessly. Nothing original about the concept. But here is what Tik Tok did differently. They had a stellar algorithm, like genuinely better than anything else out there. It learned what
只是無止境地滑動。概念沒有任何原創的地方。但這是 TikTok 做得不同的地方。他們有一個出色的演算法，真的比其他任何東西都好。它學會了你喜歡什麼
you liked Gary fast and it kept you hooked. They also had music licensing solved which made creation just like a million times easier. And they actually incentivized creators with
喜歡什麼，而且學得很快，讓你上癮。他們還解決了音樂授權問題，這讓創作變得容易一百萬倍。而且他們實際上用
funds and features. So the best creators just flocked to the platform. So it's the same concept as Vine. Better execution. And now Tik Tok is worth over hundred billion and growing while Vine
資金和功能激勵創作者。所以最好的創作者就湧向了平臺。所以這是跟 Vine 一樣的概念，更好的執行。而現在 TikTok 價值超過一千億美元並且還在增長，而 Vine
is dead. This is the path to winning.
死了。這就是獲勝的道路。
You you don't need a new idea. You need to identify what's already been proven and then build a genuinely superior version of it. The key word here is
你不需要一個新想法。你需要找出什麼已經被證明有效，然後建立一個真正優越的版本。這裡的關鍵詞是
genuinely. You cannot just slap a coat of paint on something and call it better. Tik Tok's algorithm really was better. The creator tools really were more robust and their incentive structure really did
「真正」。你不能只是在某個東西上刷一層漆然後就說它更好了。TikTok 的演算法真的更好。創作者工具真的更強大，他們的激勵結構真的
attract better content. They didn't win because of marketing or branding in the beginning. They won because the product was undeniably superior. Here's how to use this strategy. Find an existing
吸引了更好的內容。他們一開始不是因為行銷或品牌獲勝的。他們獲勝是因為產品無可否認地更優越。這是如何使用這個策略的。找一個現有的
category with a proven product that's been done poorly. There are a lot of them. Look for what people complain about in the current market leader.
類別，有一個已被證明有效但做得很差的產品。有很多這樣的。看看人們對目前市場領導者抱怨什麼。
Could be missing features, a clunky experience, poor execution overall, and then build the version that it should have been. The next strategy is the one Apple used to become one of the most
可能是缺少功能、笨拙的體驗、整體執行不佳。然後建立它應該成為的版本。下一個策略是蘋果用來成為有史以來最
disruptive and recognized brands of all time. It is this: positioning against the competition. Apple's think different tagline is one of the few slogans that's permanently tied to a brand identity.
顛覆性和最知名品牌之一的策略。那就是：針對競爭對手定位。蘋果的「Think Different」標語是少數永久與品牌身份綁定的口號之一。
But here is what nobody talks about. IBM was the leader in personal computers.
但這是沒有人談論的。IBM 是個人電腦的領導者。
They had the mainframe business. They were moving into personal computers and they practically owned corporate America. Their tagline was think clean, simple corporate. Apple didn't try to come up with something completely
他們有大型主機業務。他們正在進入個人電腦領域，而且他們實際上擁有企業美國。他們的標語是 Think——乾淨、簡單、企業化。蘋果沒有試圖想出完全
original. They took IBM's message and said okay but what if you think differently? Steve Jobs took this a step further by fighting to make it think different instead of think
原創的東西。他們拿了 IBM 的訊息說，好的，但如果你想得不同呢？Steve Jobs 更進一步，堅持把它變成 Think Different 而不是 Think
differently because the whole point was to be grammatically rebellious. So it became this iconic representation of Apple as the alternative, the outsider, the creative's choice. Now this strategy is positioning. Apple
Differently，因為整個重點是在語法上叛逆。所以它成為蘋果作為替代品、局外人、創意人選擇的標誌性代表。這個策略是定位。蘋果
wasn't trying to be original. They were trying to be the alternative.
不是試圖原創。他們是試圖成為替代品。
And that's actually easier than being original because you're essentially copying. You're borrowing the market leader brand awareness. When you position against a competitor, everyone already knows who the competitor is. By saying, "Think
而這實際上比原創更容易，因為你本質上是在複製。你在借用市場領導者的品牌知名度。當你針對競爭對手定位時，每個人都已經知道競爭對手是誰。通過說「Think
different." Apple is essentially saying, "We're not IBM." without having to explain who IBM is or why someone might want something else. The market already understands the landscape. You're just claiming your side of it.
Different」，蘋果本質上是在說「我們不是 IBM」，而不必解釋 IBM 是誰或為什麼有人可能想要其他東西。市場已經理解了格局。你只是在宣稱你的那一邊。
Now, this also taps into something psychological, so people just love underdogs and outsiders.
這也利用了一些心理學的東西，人們就是喜歡弱者和局外人。
Harley-Davidson built an entire empire on being the rebel brand. Jeep did the same thing. You don't have to invent the concept of being the alternative. It is already a proven positioning
Harley-Davidson 建立了一個完整的帝國，就是靠著成為叛逆品牌。Jeep 做了同樣的事情。你不需要發明成為替代品的概念。這已經是一個經過驗證的定位
strategy. You just have to own it for your industry. Look at what the market leader is saying and then position your brand as the explicit opposite. So, if they're enterprise, you're personal. If they're
策略。你只需要在你的行業中擁有它。看看市場領導者在說什麼，然後把你的品牌定位為明確的對立面。所以，如果他們是企業的，你是個人的。如果他們
featureheavy, you're simple. If they're corporate, you're rebellious. borrow their brand awareness by positioning directly against them and then make the contrast impossible to miss in your messaging.
功能豐富，你就簡單。如果他們是企業化的，你就叛逆。借用他們的品牌知名度，直接針對他們定位，然後讓對比在你的訊息中無法錯過。
The last strategy is the fastest and cheapest way to dominate when you can't change the product or outspend the competition. It is winning with brand voice. This crazy study on bottled water
最後一個策略是當你無法改變產品或超越競爭對手的支出時，最快也最便宜的主宰方式。那就是用品牌聲音獲勝。這個關於瓶裝水的瘋狂研究
proves you can sell anything with the right strategy. So, there was a study on bottled water years ago where they took the exact same water and put different labels on it with different
證明你可以用正確的策略銷售任何東西。多年前有一個關於瓶裝水的研究，他們拿了完全相同的水，貼上不同的標籤，用不同的
brand voices. Voices like rugged, sophisticated, playful, neutral.
品牌聲音。聲音像是：粗獷、精緻、活潑、中性。
The crazy part is nobody bought the neutral one. But all the ones with personality, even if people, you know, disagreed with that personality, those sold. This proves that
瘋狂的部分是沒有人買中性的那個。但所有有個性的，即使人們不同意那個個性，那些都賣出去了。這證明了
people need brands to have a point of view in order to help those people make decisions. Neutral is forgettable. Neutral is invisible. Even if 30% of people hate your brand voice,
人們需要品牌有一個觀點，才能幫助那些人做決定。中性是可以被遺忘的。中性是隱形的。即使 30% 的人討厭你的品牌聲音
you're better off than if 100% of people don't remember you exist. Liquid Death proved this at scale. They sell water in a can. There were other waters and cans
也比 100% 的人不記得你存在要好。Liquid Death 大規模證明了這一點。他們在罐子裡賣水。他們推出時市面上有其他罐裝水
when they launched, so they could have been knocked off pretty fast. But their brand was so strong, so distinct that the product almost didn't matter. They sold attitude, not hydration.
所以他們可能很快就被抄襲。但他們的品牌太強大、太獨特了，產品幾乎不重要。他們賣的是態度，不是補水。
And that voice built them into a $1.4 $4 billion brand on canned water. And here's the beautiful part. This costs almost nothing to implement. You're not retooling your product. You're not
而那個聲音讓他們在罐裝水上成為一個 14 億美元的品牌。而這是美妙的部分：這幾乎不需要成本來實施。你不是在重新設計你的產品。你不是在
rebuilding your service. You're not outspending anyone on very expensive ads. You're just changing how you sound, which is completely in your control. This is the path when you don't have resources for product
重建你的服務。你不是在非常昂貴的廣告上超支任何人。你只是在改變你的聲音，這完全在你的控制之內。這是當你沒有產品開發資源
development or millions for branding campaigns. You just need to be bold. Choose a bold brand voice that resonates with your specific audience.
或數百萬品牌活動預算時的道路。你只需要大膽。選擇一個與你特定受眾產生共鳴的大膽品牌聲音。
Study what they already respond to. Pick an archetype like hero, outlaw, caregiver, explorer, and then commit completely. Be willing to alienate some people in order to deeply resonate with your target market. When
研究他們已經會回應什麼。選擇一個原型，像是英雄、反叛者、照顧者、探索者，然後完全投入。願意疏遠一些人，以便與你的目標市場深度共鳴。當
you can't compete on product or budget, compete on personality. If this has changed how you think about creativity and originality, hit subscribe so you do not miss the next video. And if you want
你無法在產品或預算上競爭時，就在個性上競爭。如果這改變了你對創意和原創性的看法，按訂閱以免錯過下一支影片。如果你想
to go deeper on building a distinctive brand voice and talking like the 1%, watch this video
更深入地建立獨特的品牌聲音並像頂尖 1% 那樣說話，看這支影片
點擊句子跳轉到對應位置
Do you know what Google, Starbucks, and Tik Tok have in common? None of them had an original idea. The truth is, you don't need an original idea to be
你知道 Google、星巴克和 TikTok 有什麼共同點嗎？它們都沒有原創的想法。事實是，你不需要原創的想法才能有
creative or to win. And through thousands of hours studying what makes brands win, I have learned that creativity doesn't really matter. You just need to know how to stand
創意或者贏。通過數千小時研究是什麼讓品牌獲勝，我了解到創意其實並不重要。你只需要知道如何脫穎而出
out. So, these are the four strategies that you can use to stop chasing original ideas and finally start winning. But first, let's break down why creativity doesn't actually matter. And
所以，這是你可以用來停止追逐原創想法、終於開始獲勝的四個策略。但首先，讓我們分析為什麼創意其實並不重要。這
it all has to do with something I like to call the pioneers curse. Creativity is overrated here. Is what the biggest brands in the world actually do to succeed. So, there's this saying,
一切都與我稱之為「先驅者詛咒」的東西有關。創意被高估了。這是世界上最大的品牌實際上如何成功的。有一句話是這樣說的
pioneers get the arrows and settlers get the land. Now, it's dark, I know, but it captures the secret brutal truth about innovation. The same truth that made Google the most successful
先驅者中箭，定居者得到土地。我知道，這很黑暗，但它捕捉了關於創新的殘酷秘密真相。同樣的真相讓 Google 成為世界上最成功的
search engine in the world. Now think about the search engines before Google.
搜尋引擎。現在想想 Google 之前的搜尋引擎。
Does anyone remember Alta Vista? It launched in 1995, way before Google existed. Then Yahoo came along and actually bought Alta Vista only to shut it down later. So these were the
有人記得 Alta Vista 嗎？它在 1995 年推出，遠在 Google 存在之前。然後 Yahoo 出現，實際上收購了 Alta Vista，結果後來把它關掉了。所以這些是
pioneers. They figured out search technology, spent millions on development, and educated the market about why they needed a search engine in the first place. And then Google showed
先驅者。他們搞清楚了搜尋技術，花了數百萬在開發上，並且教育市場為什麼他們首先需要搜尋引擎。然後 Google 出現
up and just dominated them all. And this isn't an isolated event. This pattern repeats everywhere because being original is brutally expensive.
然後就主宰了他們所有人。這不是孤立事件。這個模式到處重複，因為做原創是非常昂貴的。
You are paying to learn all the early mistakes while everyone watches and then learns from your failures. So when you want to start a business or sell a
你在付錢學習所有早期的錯誤，而每個人都在看，然後從你的失敗中學習。所以當你想開始一個事業或銷售一個
product or service, stop asking, is this original? And start asking, "How can I stand out with an idea that's already proven to work and make money?" The first strategy to do that is to
產品或服務時，停止問「這是原創的嗎？」開始問「我怎樣才能用一個已經被證明有效且能賺錢的想法脫穎而出？」做到這一點的第一個策略是
win with better branding. Starbucks built a billionoll empire with someone else's beans and someone else's store layout. Now, here's how it happened. So, Pete's Coffee had been around in like
用更好的品牌獲勝。星巴克用別人的咖啡豆和別人的店面佈局建立了一個數十億美元的帝國。這是它如何發生的。Peet's Coffee 從
since the 1960s. They had the specialty coffee thing figured out decades before Starbucks existed. They pioneered the whole concept of making coffee cool and premium in America. So, when Starbucks
1960 年代就存在了。他們在星巴克存在之前幾十年就搞清楚了精品咖啡這件事。他們開創了在美國讓咖啡變得酷和高端的整個概念。所以，當星巴克
came along in the 70s, they literally copied Pete's store layout with, you know, permission, which is good to know.
在 70 年代出現時，他們字面上複製了 Peet's 的店面佈局，當然是經過許可的，這很重要。
But here's the crazy part. They even sold Pete's coffee beans instead of Starbucks beans in the beginning. They weren't trying to hide what they were doing. They just said, "Hey, we're going
但這裡是瘋狂的部分。他們一開始甚至賣 Peet's 的咖啡豆而不是星巴克的豆子。他們並沒有試圖隱藏他們在做什麼。他們只是說「嘿，我們要
to take this proven concept and we're going to brand it better." And that's exactly what they did. Starbucks had a much better brand. They expanded aggressively. They did more than just
拿這個經過驗證的概念，我們要把它品牌做得更好。」而這正是他們做的。星巴克有更好的品牌。他們積極擴張。他們做的不只是
coffee. They created the third place concept, the mobile app, the rewards program. They turned a commodity product into a lifestyle brand. Now, Pete's has a cult following among, you know, coffee purists. But Starbucks
咖啡。他們創造了「第三空間」的概念、手機應用、獎勵計劃。他們把一個大宗商品產品變成了一個生活方式品牌。現在，Peet's 在咖啡純粹主義者中有一群忠實粉絲。但星巴克
continues to own the market. They are the default choice. They're what people think of when they think of coffee shops. Now, this is the power of branding over being first. Pete's had a
繼續擁有市場。他們是預設選擇。他們是人們想到咖啡店時會想到的。這就是品牌超越先行的力量。Peet's 有
10-year head start. They had the product knowledge, the roasting expertise, and the credibility. But Starbucks understood something that Pets didn't. Branding is everything. The lesson here is that you don't need a
10 年的領先優勢。他們有產品知識、烘焙專業知識和信譽。但星巴克理解了 Peet's 不理解的東西。品牌就是一切。這裡的教訓是你不需要一個
better product to win. Sometimes you just need a better brand. And building a better brand is often easier and cheaper than building a better product because brand is about perception and storytelling. And that's
更好的產品來獲勝。有時候你只需要一個更好的品牌。而建立一個更好的品牌通常比建立一個更好的產品更容易也更便宜，因為品牌是關於認知和說故事的。那是
pure marketing strategy and execution. In a saturated market, stop trying to out feature competitors. Study what the market leader brand makes people feel.
純粹的行銷策略和執行。在一個飽和的市場中，停止試圖用功能超越競爭對手。研究市場領導者的品牌讓人們感受到什麼。
Identify what's missing from that emotional experience and then build your brand to basically fill that gap. Use storytelling, positioning, and identity to differentiate when the product can't. Strategy number two is to
找出那個情感體驗中缺少什麼，然後建立你的品牌來基本上填補那個空白。當產品無法差異化時，用說故事、定位和身份來差異化。策略二是
win with a better product. So, Twitter owned Vine. They had short form video content figured out years before Tik Tok existed. Vine was popular. It was fun
用更好的產品獲勝。Twitter 擁有 Vine。他們在 TikTok 存在之前幾年就搞清楚了短影片內容。Vine 很受歡迎，很有趣
and people loved it, but Twitter shut it down in 2017 because it wasn't taking off the way they want it. Then along came Tik Tok with literally the same idea. Short vertical videos you
人們喜歡它，但 Twitter 在 2017 年把它關掉了，因為它沒有按照他們想要的方式起飛。然後 TikTok 帶著字面上相同的想法出現了。短豎屏影片，你
just scroll through endlessly. Nothing original about the concept. But here is what Tik Tok did differently. They had a stellar algorithm, like genuinely better than anything else out there. It learned what
只是無止境地滑動。概念沒有任何原創的地方。但這是 TikTok 做得不同的地方。他們有一個出色的演算法，真的比其他任何東西都好。它學會了你喜歡什麼
you liked Gary fast and it kept you hooked. They also had music licensing solved which made creation just like a million times easier. And they actually incentivized creators with
喜歡什麼，而且學得很快，讓你上癮。他們還解決了音樂授權問題，這讓創作變得容易一百萬倍。而且他們實際上用
funds and features. So the best creators just flocked to the platform. So it's the same concept as Vine. Better execution. And now Tik Tok is worth over hundred billion and growing while Vine
資金和功能激勵創作者。所以最好的創作者就湧向了平臺。所以這是跟 Vine 一樣的概念，更好的執行。而現在 TikTok 價值超過一千億美元並且還在增長，而 Vine
is dead. This is the path to winning.
死了。這就是獲勝的道路。
You you don't need a new idea. You need to identify what's already been proven and then build a genuinely superior version of it. The key word here is
你不需要一個新想法。你需要找出什麼已經被證明有效，然後建立一個真正優越的版本。這裡的關鍵詞是
genuinely. You cannot just slap a coat of paint on something and call it better. Tik Tok's algorithm really was better. The creator tools really were more robust and their incentive structure really did
「真正」。你不能只是在某個東西上刷一層漆然後就說它更好了。TikTok 的演算法真的更好。創作者工具真的更強大，他們的激勵結構真的
attract better content. They didn't win because of marketing or branding in the beginning. They won because the product was undeniably superior. Here's how to use this strategy. Find an existing
吸引了更好的內容。他們一開始不是因為行銷或品牌獲勝的。他們獲勝是因為產品無可否認地更優越。這是如何使用這個策略的。找一個現有的
category with a proven product that's been done poorly. There are a lot of them. Look for what people complain about in the current market leader.
類別，有一個已被證明有效但做得很差的產品。有很多這樣的。看看人們對目前市場領導者抱怨什麼。
Could be missing features, a clunky experience, poor execution overall, and then build the version that it should have been. The next strategy is the one Apple used to become one of the most
可能是缺少功能、笨拙的體驗、整體執行不佳。然後建立它應該成為的版本。下一個策略是蘋果用來成為有史以來最
disruptive and recognized brands of all time. It is this: positioning against the competition. Apple's think different tagline is one of the few slogans that's permanently tied to a brand identity.
顛覆性和最知名品牌之一的策略。那就是：針對競爭對手定位。蘋果的「Think Different」標語是少數永久與品牌身份綁定的口號之一。
But here is what nobody talks about. IBM was the leader in personal computers.
但這是沒有人談論的。IBM 是個人電腦的領導者。
They had the mainframe business. They were moving into personal computers and they practically owned corporate America. Their tagline was think clean, simple corporate. Apple didn't try to come up with something completely
他們有大型主機業務。他們正在進入個人電腦領域，而且他們實際上擁有企業美國。他們的標語是 Think——乾淨、簡單、企業化。蘋果沒有試圖想出完全
original. They took IBM's message and said okay but what if you think differently? Steve Jobs took this a step further by fighting to make it think different instead of think
原創的東西。他們拿了 IBM 的訊息說，好的，但如果你想得不同呢？Steve Jobs 更進一步，堅持把它變成 Think Different 而不是 Think
differently because the whole point was to be grammatically rebellious. So it became this iconic representation of Apple as the alternative, the outsider, the creative's choice. Now this strategy is positioning. Apple
Differently，因為整個重點是在語法上叛逆。所以它成為蘋果作為替代品、局外人、創意人選擇的標誌性代表。這個策略是定位。蘋果
wasn't trying to be original. They were trying to be the alternative.
不是試圖原創。他們是試圖成為替代品。
And that's actually easier than being original because you're essentially copying. You're borrowing the market leader brand awareness. When you position against a competitor, everyone already knows who the competitor is. By saying, "Think
而這實際上比原創更容易，因為你本質上是在複製。你在借用市場領導者的品牌知名度。當你針對競爭對手定位時，每個人都已經知道競爭對手是誰。通過說「Think
different." Apple is essentially saying, "We're not IBM." without having to explain who IBM is or why someone might want something else. The market already understands the landscape. You're just claiming your side of it.
Different」，蘋果本質上是在說「我們不是 IBM」，而不必解釋 IBM 是誰或為什麼有人可能想要其他東西。市場已經理解了格局。你只是在宣稱你的那一邊。
Now, this also taps into something psychological, so people just love underdogs and outsiders.
這也利用了一些心理學的東西，人們就是喜歡弱者和局外人。
Harley-Davidson built an entire empire on being the rebel brand. Jeep did the same thing. You don't have to invent the concept of being the alternative. It is already a proven positioning
Harley-Davidson 建立了一個完整的帝國，就是靠著成為叛逆品牌。Jeep 做了同樣的事情。你不需要發明成為替代品的概念。這已經是一個經過驗證的定位
strategy. You just have to own it for your industry. Look at what the market leader is saying and then position your brand as the explicit opposite. So, if they're enterprise, you're personal. If they're
策略。你只需要在你的行業中擁有它。看看市場領導者在說什麼，然後把你的品牌定位為明確的對立面。所以，如果他們是企業的，你是個人的。如果他們
featureheavy, you're simple. If they're corporate, you're rebellious. borrow their brand awareness by positioning directly against them and then make the contrast impossible to miss in your messaging.
功能豐富，你就簡單。如果他們是企業化的，你就叛逆。借用他們的品牌知名度，直接針對他們定位，然後讓對比在你的訊息中無法錯過。
The last strategy is the fastest and cheapest way to dominate when you can't change the product or outspend the competition. It is winning with brand voice. This crazy study on bottled water
最後一個策略是當你無法改變產品或超越競爭對手的支出時，最快也最便宜的主宰方式。那就是用品牌聲音獲勝。這個關於瓶裝水的瘋狂研究
proves you can sell anything with the right strategy. So, there was a study on bottled water years ago where they took the exact same water and put different labels on it with different
證明你可以用正確的策略銷售任何東西。多年前有一個關於瓶裝水的研究，他們拿了完全相同的水，貼上不同的標籤，用不同的
brand voices. Voices like rugged, sophisticated, playful, neutral.
品牌聲音。聲音像是：粗獷、精緻、活潑、中性。
The crazy part is nobody bought the neutral one. But all the ones with personality, even if people, you know, disagreed with that personality, those sold. This proves that
瘋狂的部分是沒有人買中性的那個。但所有有個性的，即使人們不同意那個個性，那些都賣出去了。這證明了
people need brands to have a point of view in order to help those people make decisions. Neutral is forgettable. Neutral is invisible. Even if 30% of people hate your brand voice,
人們需要品牌有一個觀點，才能幫助那些人做決定。中性是可以被遺忘的。中性是隱形的。即使 30% 的人討厭你的品牌聲音
you're better off than if 100% of people don't remember you exist. Liquid Death proved this at scale. They sell water in a can. There were other waters and cans
也比 100% 的人不記得你存在要好。Liquid Death 大規模證明了這一點。他們在罐子裡賣水。他們推出時市面上有其他罐裝水
when they launched, so they could have been knocked off pretty fast. But their brand was so strong, so distinct that the product almost didn't matter. They sold attitude, not hydration.
所以他們可能很快就被抄襲。但他們的品牌太強大、太獨特了，產品幾乎不重要。他們賣的是態度，不是補水。
And that voice built them into a $1.4 $4 billion brand on canned water. And here's the beautiful part. This costs almost nothing to implement. You're not retooling your product. You're not
而那個聲音讓他們在罐裝水上成為一個 14 億美元的品牌。而這是美妙的部分：這幾乎不需要成本來實施。你不是在重新設計你的產品。你不是在
rebuilding your service. You're not outspending anyone on very expensive ads. You're just changing how you sound, which is completely in your control. This is the path when you don't have resources for product
重建你的服務。你不是在非常昂貴的廣告上超支任何人。你只是在改變你的聲音，這完全在你的控制之內。這是當你沒有產品開發資源
development or millions for branding campaigns. You just need to be bold. Choose a bold brand voice that resonates with your specific audience.
或數百萬品牌活動預算時的道路。你只需要大膽。選擇一個與你特定受眾產生共鳴的大膽品牌聲音。
Study what they already respond to. Pick an archetype like hero, outlaw, caregiver, explorer, and then commit completely. Be willing to alienate some people in order to deeply resonate with your target market. When
研究他們已經會回應什麼。選擇一個原型，像是英雄、反叛者、照顧者、探索者，然後完全投入。願意疏遠一些人，以便與你的目標市場深度共鳴。當
you can't compete on product or budget, compete on personality. If this has changed how you think about creativity and originality, hit subscribe so you do not miss the next video. And if you want
你無法在產品或預算上競爭時，就在個性上競爭。如果這改變了你對創意和原創性的看法，按訂閱以免錯過下一支影片。如果你想
to go deeper on building a distinctive brand voice and talking like the 1%, watch this video
更深入地建立獨特的品牌聲音並像頂尖 1% 那樣說話，看這支影片