Apple no longer actually needs to do ANY advertising when it launches new products, marketing chief Phil Schiller testified Friday in the Apple v. Samsung patent trial in a San Jose, Calif., federal court.
Instead, the company relies on these two strategies:
- Rely on the media to create buzz for its products through positive reviews.
- Product placement in TV shows and movies.
Schiller, discussing the iPhone, said Apple decided not to pay for any advertising during a brief period after the device was introduced in January 2007 and when it went on sale later in the year.
"We didn't need to," Schiller said. He read from several rave reviews of the iPhone and iPad, explaining that such stories did a better job than advertising to build buzz.
Apple also relies heavily on product placement, Bloomberg says:
"We would love to see our products used by stars," Schiller told the jury.
One of Apple's employees works closely with Hollywood on so-called product placement so its gadgets are used in movies and television shows, Schiller said.
None of the tactics are a surprise. Anyone who has ever watched a movie or a TV show has seen actors turning to their iPads and MacBooks as props.
But Apple, famously, hates talking about its own advertising and marketing. That's why it's so interesting to hear one of Apple's senior executives actually say this stuff aloud, on the record.
And find out what we've learned from the Apple-Samsung trial below:Related:
- Here's what personal data Facebook stores on its FBX cookie
- This LinkedIn Deck Shows The ROI For 8 Of Its Biggest Ad Clients
- Here's The Deck Facebook Showed Wall Street Before Its Stock Crashed
More From Business Insider