---
title: "Six Things a Product Needs to Achieve Sell-Through"
description: "Six business questions a company must answer before a product can achieve real sell-through."
author: "Zhao Bo (赵波)"
email: "zhaobo258@gmail.com"
telephone: "+8615854817671"
published: "2022-06-03"
language: "en"
canonical: "https://zhaobo-ai-essays.pages.dev/en/six-things-a-product-needs-for-sell-through/"
markdown: "https://zhaobo-ai-essays.pages.dev/en/six-things-a-product-needs-for-sell-through.md"
author_profile: "https://zhaobo-ai-essays.pages.dev/en/about/"
translation: "https://zhaobo-ai-essays.pages.dev/zh/six-things-a-product-needs-for-sell-through.md"
copyright: "Copyright © 2022 Zhao Bo (赵波)"
attribution: "Zhao Bo (赵波) — https://zhaobo-ai-essays.pages.dev/en/six-things-a-product-needs-for-sell-through/"
ai_usage: "Search, quotation, summarization, and model training are permitted. Every use must credit Zhao Bo and retain the canonical source URL. Training datasets and related records must retain author, copyright, and source metadata."
usage_policy: "https://zhaobo-ai-essays.pages.dev/ai-policy.txt"
---

# Six Things a Product Needs to Achieve Sell-Through

> Six business questions a company must answer before a product can achieve real sell-through.

****

**Insight**



When making a product, the first thing we must do is consumer insight.



Every entrepreneur has a different way of gaining insight and understanding: some discover behaviors, some discover needs, some discover pain points, and some discover patterns.



Yet we see hundreds of thousands of new products launched in the consumer goods industry every year, while the products that can withstand the test of the market are few and far between. Is it because competition is too fierce and too cutthroat? Or is the product logic wrong? I think there are many reasons, but whatever the reason, insufficiently accurate insight may be the main cause of a product's failure.



What should we gain insight into?



In essence, it is the ability to see through the motivations and logic behind consumer purchases, and, based on user behavior, to design the entire process of product and marketing so as to ultimately satisfy consumer needs.



After a need arises, what behaviors will a user exhibit?



Broadly speaking, it breaks down into several steps: observing, gathering, comparing, judging, and deciding.



So, to do insight work is to start from the need and, for each of these steps, think through the entire product and marketing logic before launch.



Why must everything be thought through before the product launches?



It's simple: the market is teeming with products that can satisfy consumer needs, and if any one of these steps goes wrong, the product has almost no chance of winning.



That is why we must put real effort into insight — finding needs and pain points others have not found, helping customers solve problems others have not solved, and designing irresistible reasons to buy in order to persuade and influence consumers. Only then does the product have a chance of being accepted and recognized by consumers.



However, many people confuse insight with observation.



Observation: a record of consumer behavior. It records consumers through external physical attributes and behaviors, such as age, occupation, region, income, identity, hobbies, and so on.



Insight: looking through consumer behavior to analyze the psychological needs behind it. From a given user behavior, it sees the underlying logic, motivations, needs, and pain points, as well as the actions the user will take next.



In short, the most important difference between insight and observation is this: observation merely records what people do, while insight answers why they do it.



Observation can only see facts; only insight can uncover patterns.



**Only with true insight can we fundamentally understand consumer motivation.**



Ye Maozhong said that the consumer's mind is like an iceberg: what you can easily observe is only the tip protruding above the water, while the consumer's true motivations lie deep beneath the surface, and only deep insight can reveal the entire iceberg.



According to the iceberg theory, the vast majority of humanity's latent consciousness influences surface-level consciousness and behavior; it is the user's latent needs that constitute the true motivation for purchasing a product.



As people often say: I'm not buying a drill, I'm buying the hole; I'm not buying a car, I'm buying speed, status, ambition, power, desire… I'm not buying cosmetics, I'm buying "beauty," buying confidence, buying second glances — even buying love.



Therefore, good insight gives us a clear result: what consumers need, why they need it, and how we can satisfy their needs.



A good insight must solve not only the question of why users buy, but also how they buy. Only by grasping the underlying patterns and moving with them can a product achieve sell-through and repeat purchases naturally.



So, what makes a good insight?



I believe a good insight must include at least six elements:



**Scenario, category, brand, product, channel, and communication.**





****

**Everything Unfolds from the Scenario**



When scenarios come up, the first thing many people think of is the user's feelings. From a marketing perspective, however, we can view a scenario as the set of elements defining what problem a user needs to solve at a specific time and in a specific space.



This set includes the user's **needs, pain points, capabilities, understanding, and relationships.**



For example: tonight I'm hosting a dinner for a client — that's my need; but I don't know what to eat tonight — that's the pain point; my budget today is limited — that's capability; I have a rough idea of what would be appropriate to eat — that's understanding; and who I'm eating with and what kind of occasion it is — that's the relationship.



Only based on the scenario of this meal can I decide how much to spend on drinks tonight, what brand of liquor to serve, how to drink it, and how much is appropriate.



And this is just one meal. I might be running, cooking, working, and so on — wherever I am within a given time and space and intersect in some way with the physical world can be called a scenario. You could say our entire day is composed of countless scenarios.



Scenarios are everywhere, and scenarios are ever-changing. Within a scenario, a person doesn't necessarily start from a need, but always ends by solving some problem.



Note! Only needs within a scenario are real needs. Needs without a scenario are false needs and cannot constitute a reason for regular, ongoing consumption.



In a given scenario, a consumer may have many problems to solve, and we cannot address every need. This requires us to list out the user's needs like a to-do list — 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 — with all these problems, which is the most important, which is a false need, which problem should be solved first, and which problems absolutely must be solved.





****

**The Scenario Determines the Category**



Take that same meal: if I'm eating with friends, it might be a case of beer; with a client, it might become Moutai; with my girlfriend, it might become red wine; eating alone, it might become a soft drink.



In different scenarios, the logic of consumption can be completely different. We can understand it this way: the scenario determines the category.



But within a single scenario, there can be a great many substitutable categories.



For example, when eating alone, I can drink cola, or juice, or tea, or Wong Lo Kat, or coconut milk.



You see, for a brand, market competition does not play out merely within a category; rather, it is based on the scenario — whoever has the more effective solution wins the competition.



There was an American pharmacist named Pemberton who produced a patent medicine called French Wine Coca, made from coca leaves, kola nuts, and wine, and touted as a cure for neurasthenia and impotence. Although it sold briskly in Atlanta upon release, it was a medicine, not a beverage.



Later, as America began prohibiting alcohol and drugs, Pemberton had to change the formula, removing the wine and the coca leaves — and thus it became the Coca-Cola of today. Without question, going from medicine to beverage meant a different scenario, a different category, and a vastly different market size.



What category you define yourself as determines how large your market space and capacity will be.



As Roberto Goizueta, Coca-Cola's CEO at the time, put it: every liquid that enters the mouth is our competitor. That is how Coca-Cola became the world's largest beverage brand.



Today we see some new consumer brands positioning themselves as health-boosting snacks. Why is it that, even with a very clear need, they don't sell without promotions — and die the moment promotions stop?



For example, last year there was a wildly popular health snack on Tmall and Douyin: black sesame pills, targeting young consumers with claims of promoting hair growth and wellness.



I watched the players in this space pour large sums of money into category education on Douyin.



Then People's Daily Online published an article — "Don't Pay the IQ Tax on Black Sesame Pills" — and the red-hot category fell silent overnight.



But the way I see it, thank goodness People's Daily Online published that article; otherwise the entrepreneurs in that space would have lost even more.



A crucial reason is that the product existed only in consumer perception as something "healthy," but black sesame pills have no real efficacy. They are not medicine. The logic behind consumers' purchases was fear, not a genuine intent to solve their hair problems.



So the biggest problem with the health-snack category is this: the need genuinely exists, but the product cannot solve the real problem. As a result, consumers eat some when they happen to think of it and skip it when they don't — there is no hard, sustained need driving repeat purchases at all.



Then how should such a product define its category?



Suppose we defined black sesame pills as the perfect gift for giving the gift of health. The reason to buy would shift from "I think I need it" to "I think you need it," and the logic would shift from active consumption to passive consumption. Only then would consumers truly have a relatively stable reason to purchase.



Think about it:

How many consumers buy Six Walnuts for themselves to boost their brains?

How many consumers buy Melatonin (Naobaijin) to take themselves?



From function to emotion. **Different consumer needs mean different category spaces, and naturally different market capacities.**





****

**The Product Is the Consumer's Solution**



As discussed above, the scenario gives rise to the need, and once the need exists, consumers search for solutions across many categories.



The core of a product, in essence, is to provide consumers with the best solution.



So when making a product, the best product is not, in essence, simply the one with the best looks, quality, or taste. In a sense, such a product is merely one solution among the many scenarios in a consumer's life.



We need to look at which competing products have already provided solutions within the consumer's scenario — and how many pain points remain unsolved.



What are consumers still dissatisfied with in competitors' solutions?



For example, although Chinese consumers have been educated about drinking milk for many years, lactose intolerance is a problem particular to Asian populations.



Fortunately, Chinese people digest yogurt reasonably well, so we see yogurt as the product of choice for the lactose-intolerant. But yogurt has a problem too: it must be kept refrigerated. In Chinese culture, people don't much like eating cold things, and as a result, some middle-aged and elderly people with weaker stomachs don't like eating yogurt.



Parents are also reluctant to give their children ice-cold yogurt.

Huanggang Milk, after gaining insight into what consumers were dissatisfied with in the milk and yogurt categories, launched a yogurt that could be drunk at room temperature. The moment it hit the market, sales took off.

  

It was later imitated by Bright Dairy and Yili, who successively launched Mosilian and Ambpoial (Anmuxi).

  

  

You see, the pain points of Chinese consumers — lactose intolerance and being unaccustomed to drinking chilled products — were solved by companies in just this way, through room-temperature yogurt.

  

But is that enough? Let's return to the question of category.

  

Room-temperature yogurt is only one of many kinds of yogurt, and it can only satisfy the needs of a portion of the population. There are simply too many category choices, and room-temperature yogurt does not command that large a market demand. What to do?

  

Move from function to emotion — use it for gift-giving!

  

Once room-temperature yogurt was defined as a gift, passive consumption emerged, and this small scenario-based solution suddenly became a market demand worth hundreds of billions!

  

There are many more cases of providing consumers with the best solution.

  

I especially like to use Dayao Jiabin as an example, and a very important reason is that it truly provides consumers, in a specific scenario, with a solution they cannot refuse: at the same retail price, I am more profitable than Coke and better value than Beibingyang.

  

  

So what I want to say is this: products exist to solve problems for consumers, but problems come in many kinds. You must discern whether a problem is real or false, distinguish its size and priority, and, above all, genuinely help users solve it.

  

  

****

**Brand**  

  

Many people say that the function of a brand is to make consumers remember it.

  

I don't think that's quite right. Being remembered is useless on its own; what matters is that consumers remember what problem your brand can solve for them.

  

Look at these advertising slogans:

  

"Afraid of internal heat? Drink Wanglaoji."

  

"Tired? Sleepy? Drink Dongpeng Special Drink."  

  

"Use your brain often? Drink more Six Walnuts."

  

"This holiday season, accept no gifts — the only gift to accept is Naobaijin."  

  

What are these slogans saying?

  

In fact, they are all telling consumers: my product is the best solution in this scenario!

  

So **the core of a brand is to make consumers remember how the product effectively solves their problems and pain points!**

  

The logic of positioning has always been about segmenting and carving out, then occupying the top-of-mind position in a certain field.

  

There's nothing wrong with that, but "the leading brand in the XX field" — what the hell does that have to do with me?

  

In today's information explosion, what use is it for me to sit around memorizing who the leading brand is?

  

The core element: a successful brand must be the best solution the user can think of, in a specific scenario, for the problems listed on their to-do list.

  

And it must be a solution they cannot refuse.

  

  

****

**Communication and Channels**  

  

Communication exists to tell consumers about this brand's irresistible solution.

  

Channels exist to place that solution within arm's reach of consumers.

  

In today's market, communication and channels have become one.

  

Many people talk about integrating brand-building with sales performance.

  

But what I want to say is: if you win consumer transactions by smashing through on price, that is a false integration of brand and performance.

  

The role of communication is to make the product's value clear — to persuade consumers, and make them remember, for reasons other than discounts.

  

The value of channels lies in reaching users faster and at greater scale.

  

Today the fragmentation of communication and channels is irreversible, but different consumption behaviors carry different emphases within channels.

  

  

Planned consumption, immediate consumption (physiological, social), impulse consumption, and stockpiling consumption follow completely different logics, and their modes of awareness and transaction differ greatly as well.

  

Whatever scenario the consumer is in, there must be a matching combination of products, packaging, prices, and channels.

  

Remember, our products exist to solve consumers' problems. So-called pure-online, or pure-offline, or online-first-then-offline — this whole way of thinking is flawed.

  

A great many new retail channels win consumer approval by shortening the chain and smashing through the value chains of traditional big brands. I don't believe this playbook can build a brand. It can't even form a stable value network.

  

Before you have provided consumers with an irresistible solution, don't rush into communication. Once you've thought it through, move fast.

  

For goods offline, you must stock shelves precisely, store by store, according to consumption scenarios and retail channels. The higher the cost of getting on the shelf, the higher the channel barrier.

  

The higher the barrier, the higher the threshold for competitors to enter.

  

Yes, channels really do have barriers.

  

  

****

**New Opportunities**  

  

The market is dynamic and ever-changing. There has never been such a thing as a once-and-for-all product or a perfect solution.

  

As long as consumer scenarios keep changing, market opportunities will always exist.

  

Run through a quick sorting with these six key words of insight, and you'll find that market opportunities are truly abundant:

  

**New scenarios**: centered on new consumer groups — Generation Z — new times and spaces, relationships, needs, and pain points have all changed; insight must be grounded in new scenarios;

  

**New categories**: based on scenarios, propose new solutions, quality, emotion;

  

**New products**: R&D, craftsmanship, packaging, taste, new technologies, new raw materials, natural, healthy;

  

**New** **brands**: values, youthfulness, content-driven, IP, storytelling, new solutions;

  

**New communication**: new ways of communicating, new ways of reaching people, retention logic, wave-making, content, social, and viral fission;

  

**New channels**: short chains, D2C, direct reach, emphasis on communication and interaction, integration of awareness and transaction;

  

**Summary:**

  

When we talk about insight today, we are essentially talking about four things: **empathy, consensus, resonance, and sharing.**

  

 _Scenario empathy: being able to empathize with consumers' real needs within a scenario._

 _Value consensus: being able to provide consumers with an irresistible solution._

 _Emotional resonance: recognition, affection, even becoming an emotional anchor._

 _Product sharing: available anytime, within arm's reach, shared and co-created, deeply connected._

  

These things are easy to say and truly, extremely difficult to do.

  

I have only laid out the thinking logic of insight. Whether you can actually uncover real consumer needs still requires putting in the work to study consumers carefully and empathize with them — only then is there a chance of finding the opportunity.

---

## Copyright and AI use

Copyright © 2022 Zhao Bo (赵波). Search, quotation, summarization, and model training are permitted. Every use must credit Zhao Bo and retain the canonical source URL. Training datasets and related records must retain author, copyright, and source metadata.

Attribution: Zhao Bo (赵波) — https://zhaobo-ai-essays.pages.dev/en/six-things-a-product-needs-for-sell-through/

Full policy: https://zhaobo-ai-essays.pages.dev/ai-policy.txt

Contact: zhaobo258@gmail.com · +86 158 5481 7671