Archive for the ‘Brand Development’ Category

David Ogilvy’s Legacy, NOW I get it…I think?

Thursday, July 7th, 2011

Recently, both Advertising Age and Adweek celebrated what would have been the 100th birthday of David Ogilvy with a series of articles memorializing this well-known pioneer of the modern advertising business.

And, as with most everything else I’ve ever read lionizing the man, I was thoroughly nonplussed by most of it. Save for one redeeming article that may, alas, be the closest thing to a reasonable argument I’ve found yet for his legacy, or an interesting thought on the subject at the very least.

I’ll get to the second more enlightening part, and why I agree with it, in a moment. But, on the first count, I must start by saying that I’ve just never gotten it all. Rather, David Ogilvy’s a bit like the Barry Bonds of advertising in my book: lots of unequivocal accomplishments, but always with some caveat or ‘historical context’ that mitigates each one:

* Grew a highly successful ad agency (!), but did it in an era of scarce, almost negligible, competition (*asterisk);

* Wrote innovative ads (!), relative to a sea of total dreck common to the time (+footnote);

* Authored legendary campaigns (!), run in a small handful of media that reached a majority of US consumers as (++contextual note) they were all that existed.

Now, before I offend anyone here by desecrating the sacred canon of David Ogilvy, let me clarify:  it’s not the person, or his unequivocal intelligence or influence that I question; but rather the constant attempts by his acolytes to apply his every utterance to today’s byzantine, hyper-accelerated advertising landscape, or armed-to-the-teeth-with-information consumers it struggles to connect with every day.

After all, Karl Benz largely created the modern automobile, yet I can’t imagine engineers at Porsche regularly pausing these days to consider how he might solve the problem of, say, maintaining optimal aerodynamics at 160mph; or designers of the Kindle studying old Gutenberg press models for a few product refinements; LeBron James waxing nostalgic about the deeper strategy of Naismith’s ideas in a post-game press conference. Get the picture?

It’s okay folks, really: a figure can be groundbreaking in their day, without necessarily being correct or relevant for all eternity. 

So, given my years of perplexity with the whole Ogilvy-mania thing, I truly enjoyed one writer’s smart, honest case for it. In an Adweek piece, Michael Wolff respectfully argues that Ogilvy’s influence was ultimately less on breakthrough ways to run marketing services firms than the importance of promoting them: on creating and maintaining an agency ‘brand’ around a singular expertise it alone owns—and gets paid appropriately for by clients.

Call it and elevator-pitch or what you will, but you’d best have one as a marketing services firm. Especially with continued ‘unbundling’ of full-service agencies by clients that effectively demands every shop understand, and be able to articulate, what they alone can provide and its essential value.

Now that, to me, is a truly well-deserved legacy—one that conveys the same value, relevance and urgent import today as it did decades ago. 

It’s just a shame it took me years of my career and reams of articles, stories, anecdotes, bon mots and fluff to see someone finally get to it so plainly…And that I won’t be around to glean another similar nugget of insight on “The David Ogilvy Bi-Centennial”.

HOW WE ATTACH TO PEOPLE AND THINGS

Tuesday, July 5th, 2011

Studies by neuroresearchers in the academic field of “attachment theory,” have been picking up steam.

In a nutshell, the theory maintains that we have an “attachment mechanism” in our brains, a series of circuits that work to create the relationships we have with others, as well as the preferences we have for things.

Human attachments are broken down into compartments that include:

* Romantic

* Parents

* Kin

* Friends

* Pets

* Strangers

These compartments can be subdivided to the point that we can be more attached to a pet than a sibling or even a parent.  Or, we might feel comfortable in large groups of relatives and/or friends, but avoid strangers. Details of these compartments can be found in my book, “Battling the Inner Dummy.

It appears that the same “attachment mechanism” with modified circuitry also shapes our preferences for things; from our favorite breakfast cereal to the automobile model we desire the most.  The point is that attachment is all physical.  It may vary in strength for people or things during time intervals, but usually reverts to a base line for each, which can be measured. Any significant and permanent change in strength usually requires a traumatic event or a series of them.

MSI has now developed a proprietary research process called the “Brand Attachment Index,” which helps us measure consumer attachment to branded products on a scale of 1 to 6, with 1 reflecting little or no strength and 6 reflecting passionate strength.  The stronger the attachment index among category shoppers is for a specific branded product, the more difficult it is for a retailer to replace it with something else.

Interestingly enough, the romantic attachment mechanism has been labeled by researchers in the field as the “Biosocial Romantic Attachment Mechanism.” How on target has yours been?  Don’t ask about mine.

Marketing and the NBA

Wednesday, April 20th, 2011

So, I was going to write this blog on how Derrick Rose is a dream come true for the NBA, but damned if anyone knows how to properly market the kid. 

Derrick is a joy to watch and has brought back a certain excitement to basketball that’s been missing (at least in Chicago).  He just makes it all fun again. You would think marketing him would be easy.  But no one seems to be doing it in a way that’s memorable. 

I was going to talk about the Adidas spot that has him shooting a gun (yikes!) that triggers fireworks.  But mostly he’s just being overshadowed by someone I can only assume is a soccer player, since I have no idea who he is.

 
I was going to discuss the “Fast Don’t Lie” spots that proved when it comes to making commercials, Rose is a great basketball player (he doesn’t talk in the ad, just dribbles and shoots…at the end he does wink, and it’s kinda awkward).

 

I was going to talk about how maybe he’s not naturally funny and charming, on camera he comes off a little uncomfortable and nervous, and how maybe that could be his hook. Give Derrick one funny thing to say, maybe a little under his breath and call it a day.  This worked pretty well for some ESPN and TNT ads.

TNT Spot

ESPN Spot

But the more I thought about it, and the more I watched, the harder it was to care a lick about marketing. It’s the playoffs now and it’s hard to wrap my mind around anything more than watching this team play great basketball.

At the end of the season I promise to give it more thought, but right now I’m just too darn excited to keep a clear head.

To leave this blog entry on a positive marketing note, I am including “5 Favorite Commercials with NBA Stars”…I only wish the one with Gheorghe Muresan was better quality, since it is awesome! Enjoy and GO BULLS!

The Popcorn Tape – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IL5WnqWqkrY

Chicks Dig Cabbage – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9uaDiRlLBQ&feature=related

Do You Like Popsicles? – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QIH8NrNeso&feature=related

The LeBrons – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnV6ND7PdvE

Shaqtastic! – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bo0ncg-2zPY

And one with a picture of Chris Paul - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I44BF3R4rmU

Check out what Crain’s Chicago Business has to say about marketing D. Rose

Are ‘Real’ Celebrity Brands Ready For Their Close Up?

Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011
Based on the strong Q4 sales results released at Macy’s recently, it would appear so.

Macy’s Net Jumps 50%, Beats Analysts’ Estimates on Celebrity Brands Sales    

And, as an agency that specializes in developing and promoting similar proprietary brands for major retailers, we’re not surprised.  Consumers continue to demonstrate a healthy acceptance of brands off the beaten national-name path, especially in certain categories where the quality of these products has risen to, or exceeds, the level of the best nationally-branded ones.  Apparel, perhaps surprisingly, being one we’ve found at MSI for two specific breeds of shoppers these days: price-conscious heads of households looking for a trusted endorsement on lower-priced items, and those confident, low-budget “fashionistas” who know a look they want and see themselves, not the name on the label, as the authors of their own style.     

For retailers, these celebrity-endorsed brands offer a sort of instant equity that a totally new name, logo or packaging can’t, as well as long-term, savings over developing a brand from the ground-up…If done properly.  Indeed, for every Martha Stewart success there are countless other ill-conceived, half-hearted or sloppily-executed efforts that wind up costing more in wasted time and money.  So identifying, integrating and supporting the right personality is key.  To that end, there are essentially two types of celebrity-endorsements to consider as we see it, each with its own strengths and weaknesses.  The first of these is the hoary traditional ‘Paid Celebrity Endorser’: a typically shorter-term tactic to bolster some specific facet of a brand (i.e. contemporize an old one, elevate a pedestrian one, etc.) by association with a popular personality who owns this attribute; the paid relationship is obvious to all, with no further connection to the brand than a paycheck and some contractual use.  For those over 40 think Susan Anton, or Steve Martin’s ‘Be somebody!’ drink umbrellas in The Jerk.    

The other more interesting (and I’d submit, sound) model is the increasingly prevalent ‘Celebrity Brand’ in which an actual, differentiated entity is established that: a) evokes a certain sensibility that imbues a product or line with new value, b) aligns with the retailer’s own brand and its core shoppers’ attitudes and c) is built upon the celebrity endorser’s personality, but ultimately stands for something in and of itself (e.g.  “style on a budget”) that can be owned and managed to over time.  Such is the actual relationship that it may even include the celebrity’s design or product input, if they have the credentials for it ideally.    

Jessica Simpson brand shoes, clothing and accessories are avilable at Macy's

Queen Latifa Fragrances are also available at Macy's

 

Again, there is no ‘better’ model per se, simply two different ones I hope to have made a case here for distinguishing between the two.  But from where we stand, the

latter partnerships do offer greater potential for long-term ROI, new store traffic around desirable exclusive items, and the addition of a real asset to a retailer’s portfolio—versus a catchy ad or two to cover up its deficiencies.    

Watch their star continue to rise in days ahead…We will be here.  

 

   

 

A Proposed 2011 Resolution for Marketers: Just (gasp) Sell the Product, Please

Tuesday, January 25th, 2011

 

Maybe I’m just seeing the world through a darker set of glasses this morning given my beloved Bears lost to the Packers and it’s freezing and gloomy outside (A-GAIN!), but I’m actually backtracking a bit on my typical Brand Guy stance and beginning to believe that not all products have deep ‘emotional’ dimensions worth leveraging in marketing communications.

Or, to paraphrase Sigmund Freud: that, yes folks, sometimes a bar of soap is just a bar of soap.

So, in lieu of some sort of useful info or insight I usually try to provide here, today’s post is mostly just me being cranky: about a certain type of really bad advertising that seems to abound these days; the kind that reeks of straight-from-focus group-to-execution banality; that screams ‘frustrated, high maintenance CD in a boring category’.

More specifically, looking at the current lot out there, a genre of overwrought, hackneyed attempts at approximating ‘grass roots’, ‘ social media’ and ‘consumer generated content’ in broad mass media like TV that can be reduced to three basic themes of:

 

1.     ‘It’s not a product, it’s a community of similarly minded folks all in love with it’.

In these increasingly hackneyed little train wrecks, agencies typically try to approximate the hip and intimate dimensions of social media simply by showing lots of people—thereby connoting a bottom-up consumer-driven tsunami of love around, say, Advil pain tablets. 

 

2.     ‘[We’re so wacky, we’re] takin’ it to the streets!’

We’ve all seen these, right? TV spots replete with tricked out parade floats resembling some sort of mundane consumer product, or vans emblazoned with brand logos dispensing kooky kids and spokespeople in public areas trying to approximate a ‘toilet paper flash-mob’ or something I suppose. To painful, clumsy effect usually.

 

3.     ‘It’s more than just a floor cleaner/widget, it’s a cultural/emotional touchstone/icon.’

Lastly, and more generally, any execution for a primarily ‘functional’ purchase that takes pains to avoid actually talking about old-fashioned niceties like benefits or efficacy. Pick one these days, but Allstate’s ridiculous efforts to create some sort of ‘MayhemSpuds McKenzie youth-oriented mascot are among the most egregious. Honestly, do you need to go to that much effort and expense to explain that ‘stuff happens, people get hurt and things get broken’? Good grief, like insurance is that complicated a sell.

 

Alas, it’s my hope that agencies and clients alike resolve to less of this artifice and obfuscation and more clarity and logic in 2011. Especially considering a still-challenging economic environment out there and marketing’s ultimate job of driving good old-fashioned sales within it.

 

Okay, again: I admit this may all just be influenced some by other external personal factors…I mean, I did mention it’s really, really dark and cold outside, right? And wait: and I’m now being told that apparently Lovie Smith is getting a contract extension?!!

 

Ugh. God help us all….Hmm: can that Mayhem guy be sent up to Lake Forest any time soon?

Home Center Shelf Presence Can Depend on More Than Consumer Awareness

Saturday, January 22nd, 2011

Brand leverage, of which consumer awareness is an element, remains a key for vendors who feel themselves vulnerable to the growing percentage of private label skus that home center chain retailers are putting on their shelves.  For example, longtime MSI client InSinkErator has done little consumer advertising over the years, but appears firmly ensconced on the shelves of THD and Lowe’s because, among other things, it is the overwhelming favorite of plumbing contractors.  Klein Tools, which has relatively low consumer awareness, but is a favorite of electrical contractors, has a growing position at THD.

Honeywell has both consumer awareness with its line of thermostats and is a favorite of HVAC contractors, although longtime MSI client White-Rodgers has overtaken Honeywell in the trade. Nonetheless, Honeywell remains established on retail shelves primarily because of its strong consumer awareness and the residue of its trade preference.  Pella has strong preference among trade contractors, but like Honeywell also has high consumer awareness, so it is ensconced at Lowe’s.  Consumer awareness plus trade preference is the perfect combination.

In a nutshell, vendors with brands with strong trade preferences need to nurture that preference among their trade channels, not only to strengthen their professional sales, but to create leverage with the home center chains.

P.S.  Vendor positioning at Menards is another story we’ll cover in the next blog post.

More Flags. More Fun?

Friday, June 11th, 2010

Six Flags is once again running their Mr. Six ads for the summer season.  I guess to some people the Mr. Six character, developed in 2008 by Six Flags and Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide, could be classified as an icon to the Six Flags brand.  I disagree…my Fun-O-Meter is at a negative ten with the introduction of the newest ad campaign.  Just when I thought this campaign could not be any more over the top (which is saying a lot when your commercial blasts a Venga Boys song and a creepy old man with scary dance moves), it just got creepier and more insane.  Now there is a tiny old man dancing with the original old man.  I don’t understand why the people at Six Flags think it is funny, and how that could ever translate to more fun at a theme park.  I believe the average height for getting on rides is somewhere around 48” which will probably leave the new Little Six character hanging around the carnival rides.  Not sure how high that will rate on the Fun-O-Meter!  In the end I don’t wonder if the ads really translate into dollars for Six Flags, but I would still like to personally thank Six Flags for the memories, fun times, and the nightmares.  Ok, I’m done venting on annoying commercials for today!

 

“Lo How the Mighty Have, Er, Crashed”

Monday, April 12th, 2010

Why Even Mega Brands Must Keep Firing On All Cylinders

Not to keep citing automotive brands as illustrative examples here, but if you ever wanted simple proof of the complex interrelation of dimensions like Differentiation, Esteem, Functional Product Benefits & Quality—and the need for all to contribute to brand strength—the recent Toyota fiasco offers a textbook study.  

 

That is: a global mega-brand that’s been the class of its industry and consumer opinion for decades is suddenly, in mere weeks, floundering hopelessly about for its voice over a single product-related incident; once a perennially clear, focused and softly-spoken brand backed by the big-stick of its stellar reputation, I’ve recently seen no less than four different Toyota TV spots testing different PR and Sales messages from “We’re Toyota, this is an anomaly we’re fixing” to “Hey, we drive these cars so we know they’re safe” to “Thanks for (please) bearing with us through this mess” to, most recently, shopper testimonials boasting how “The time to buy is NOW on this undervalued merchandise!”

 

Notwithstanding the veritable feeding frenzy of competitors smelling blood for the first time ever, aided by Buy-American political pandering and congressional inquiries, it’s still an amazing turnabout. And one that reasserts the inescapable 101-level truism that no one thing ‘makes’ a brand except consumers; no matter how much you spend, how big you are, or how esteemed your engineers, brands are ultimately built in consumers’ minds, not factories.   

 

Like all products cars are just cars at some point, ‘widgets’ essentially. And someone is always building a newer or better one. It’s what they say about us, the people  who buy and drive them, that matters and adds value to the nameplate. So when a car like Toyota that’s become synonymous with ‘no brainer, well-built, nice mainstream decision that looks okay in my driveway and won’t embarrass me’ suddenly looks fallible, the results can be seen playing out right now. Consumers have enough trust and confidence issues these days with the world. No one needs a car that makes them look like they’re out of the loop or ill-informed.

 

The moral in short is this: esteem is hard-won and easily lost. Much like political incumbency, it’s easy to look like you’ve got it all figured out when you’re in the catbird seat above the din and clamor spending gazillions on understated ‘image’ advertising. But even a small fissure in the dike that holds back the vast sea of consumer doubt, bias and attitudes can quickly reverse fortunes. And then watch how quickly every brick and stone gets rearranged.   

 

On the upside, while the Toyota story validates the fact that all brands are a delicate balancing-act of constant management and refinement, it should make those out there with less than $35 Billion in cash lying around feel better.  

 

Yes, building brands is relentless hard work. But even the mightiest of them face the same challenges as the rest of us, “Everyday”  ;  )

 

 

Pop Pays-it-Forward

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

Can soda companies change the world?  At a time when the fight against childhood obesity is a weekly headline, companies seen as contributors to the problem, such as Pepsi and Coca-Cola, are spending major dollars trying to change how we perceive their brands. 

PepsiCo and Coca-Cola have both committed to developing healthier products and promoting healthier, more active lifestyle choices.  But those ideas can be a tough sell to consumers who love (or hate) their brands because of their bubbly, sugary, sweetness.  And both brands seem to be finding that an easier way to change their image might just be to change the world first.  PepsiCo is forgoing Super Bowl ads this year and running a major social media campaign called The Pepsi Refresh Project.  Through their website (refresheverything.com), Facebook page and YouTube Channel, Pepsi is encouraging people (young people, ideally) to do something good for their planet.  Individuals, groups and organizations can submit ideas that would positively impact their community and beyond.  Submissions are voted on by other viewers/entrants/participants – and Pepsi is giving monthly grants from $5K to $250K to help make those winning ideas a reality. 

 

Coca-Cola, who has had a longtime partnership with the Olympics, is promoting the first “zero-waste, carbon-neutral” Olympic sponsorship.  The company is making good on their sustainability vow by providing everything from emission-free soda coolers, to Olympic Village furniture made from salvaged pine-beetle epidemic wood, to dressing the staff in uniforms made from recycled bottles.  But days before the Opening Ceremonies, of course, is the Super Bowl – and Coca-Cola will be advertising.  Coke is running two spots as part of their Open Happiness campaign, which as the company puts it, is to remind people that “whenever they enjoy a Coca-Cola, they play a role in helping us make a difference in the lives of others.  By opening a Coke they create a happiness multiplier” (a “pay-it-forward with soda” theme, if you will).  Coke has also teamed up with Facebook to offer fans virtual gifts to send to friends and family.  Each virtual gift is matched by a $1 donation to  Boys & Girls Clubs of America, as well as giving the sender a sneak preview of the Super Bowl spots.  And their website, livepositively.com, further encourages visitors to get involved somehow, whether it’s donating to relief efforts in Haiti, recycling for the Green Schools program, or serving the community as part of the Sprite/MTV Step Off Challenge.

So are consumers going to swallow what some might call “propaganda”?  Or will the dollars spent translate into glowing halos around the brands?  In the end, does it really matter if the efforts positively impact individuals, communities and the environment?  I haven’t made up my mind — I’m a water drinker myself.

Ey Oh! The phenomenon known as Jersey Shore

Monday, January 11th, 2010

A few weeks ago MTV premiered a new “reality” series about young self proclaimed Guidos and Guidettes, that appear to have been rejected from Real World casting auditions, called “The Jersey Shore.”  I must say that previews for this awesomely bad show had me intrigued from the very beginning, and as the season continues I get more excited for each episode. Not only has the show given MTV another hit reality show, but the cast and the lifestyle portrayed has become a marketing force with in both interactive and traditional media channels.

Although big name advertisers like Dell and Domino’s Pizza have pulled their ads from the shows time slot, it appears that many nontraditional forms of marketing are capitalizing on the show’s popularity. From blog posts, quotes, to Facebook Applications such as “Jersey Shore Name Generators” and viral videos here – are some of my favorite Jersey Shore marketing materials.

 

Facebook added an application that would produce your Jersey Shore nickname.  Some of the more popular names from the show being Mike “The Situation” and Nicole “Snooki.”  I tried the generator out and it provided me the nickname Christos “The Sausage Party” Ellis.

Take the quiz for yourself

*note you may need to login to Facebook

 

Chicago’s local free news paper The Red Eye has several blog posts regarding the show.  My favorite being Vote for best fist-pumpin’ “Jersey Shore” quote – Part 5,  which is a weekly recap of the episodes including an area to vote for your favorite quote of the week. 

My favorite quote so far would have to be from DJ Pauly D where he explains how to battle to house music with fist pumps, he says “It’s like we beat up that beat!”

 

The new movie Youth and Revolt actually marketed their movie in ads that ran on MTV starring the Jersey Shore cast and actor Michael Cera.  The cast gives Michael lessons and tips on how to be a Guido.

Watch for yourself