Proofreading Exercise $02$: find errors

Marketers have always had to juggle two seeming contradictory goals, making their brands distinctive and making them central in their category. Central brands, such as Coca$-$Cola in soft drinks and McDonalds in fast food, are those that are most representative of their type. They$$re the first ones to come to mind, and they serve as reference points for comparison. These brands shape category dynamics, including consumer preferences pricing, and the pace and dimension of innovation. Distinctive brands, such as Tesla in cars and Dos Equis in beer, stand out from the crowd and avoid direct competition with widely popular central brands. Striking the right balance between centrality and distinctiveness is acritical, because a company$$s choices influence not just how the brand will be perceived, but how much of it will be sold and at what price$$and$,$ ultimately, how profitable it will be$.$ And yet, marketers have lacked the tool needed to get this balance right. Traditionally, companies have analyzed brand positioning and business performance separately: To locate gaps in the market and gauge how people feel about their brands, marketers have used perceptual positioning maps, which typically represent consumers$$ perceptions of brands or products on opposing dimensions, such as budget versus premium or spicy versus mild. To assess performance, they have used a different set of strategic tools that map or measure brands on yardsticks such as market, growth rate, and profitability