The branding stratery for srvicing a fragmented market can be atleast of two types:
1) To ensure that the brand conyves a very strong noticable and obvious image and messege. This would only mean that the brand cuts across a slice of the market , this slice should be such that it touches the maximum customer base.

Such an approach how ever would only be the out come of heavu expenditures in terms of Market Reserch, Branding, Covering all media type relevent...etc.

2) The other option (recomended!) would mean a basic brand and a few sub brands under it.
eg>>(lets assume) Kellogs ---- main Bran
frosties Sub-brand
Rice flakes Sub-brand

This would mean that you advertise for your main basic brand, which in turn would make your product familir with the customers, furthur, some specific cutomer focused ads could talk in details about the contents of the product branded as XYZ, like a product aimed at the college going crowd would have a diffrent messege near such institution , which would be difrent from the ad of another variation say for working single women which would talk about the attributes of a product which is similar yet in way that defines her product needs and usage.

AS the nature of product and the market it serves is not mentioned , still the bove template would fit in almost any kind of market situation.

I think how you market yourself depends on how many established players there are in this fragmented market and how well known they are. If most of the players are relatively unknown or not well established, then it pays to be very aggressive and establish yourself over the others. On the other hand, if there are already established players in this market, then focus on finding a suitable niche within that market. Really hard to be specific without more info.

prof,

WHICH STP are you talking about?
There are SO MANY......

::JBtron

Branding a product or service to a fragmented market isn't altogether much different from that of a niche market. In fact, it is probably easier to create a brand that has mass appeal than one that is hyper-focused. There are some common sense things that should be considered.

First, contrary to surinderjeetsekhon response, you should build a single solid brand that crosses the different market segments. Focus on the similarities not the differences. Line Extensions and sub-brands tend to confuse the market. Think Nike. Its a powerful brand that has bridged most segments of their market and nearly everyone in the world knows exactly what Nike does. The Michael Jordon sub-brand doesn't even come close.

Second, narrow your focus. A brand becomes stronger when it's focus becomes more precise. Think Starbucks here. Is there any doubt what Starbucks does?

Third, your brand should strive to own a word that is easily identifiable by your entire market. FedEx owns "overnight". Mercedes owns "prestige". It is even better if your brand can become synonymous with the product or service itself. In the UK vacuum cleaners are commonly referred to as Hoovers. In other words, your brand should almost promote your industry more than the brand itself.

These recommendations may seem rather fundamental and that is my point. Don't over complicate the branding process. I am always amazed at how complicated we tend to make things when a simple solution is available and works best most of the time. Go back to basics. Do more market research. Host a focus group or two or ten. Test and re-test.

If you couldn't tell, I like the book 22 Immutable Laws of Branding by Al Ries. It puts things in perspective in a simple, yet elegant way.

Take Care,
Dave