Category: comm296

I know some of us here are huge fans of M&Ms. Some of us also happen to be Angry Birds addicts. M&Ms are round. Those lovable birds (and pigs) are round as well.

Ladies and gentlemen, may I present to you: Angry Birds M&Ms.

Okay, granted my Photoshop job wasn’t the sharpest (It came to me last night in the midst of Stats homework, so you can imagine what kind of craziness my mind was filled with), don’t you think it’s a stroke of genius? Imagine it now, Rovio can partner up with Mars Inc., M&Ms’ parent company and extend the Angry Birds brand to food! First we have Angry Birds plush toys, then came the tag-team with the animated feature Rio. Is there a limit to what or where our loveable feathered friends will go? The company’s long term goals include building up the Angry Birds brand and I think a partnership with such an influential confectionery company will only bring good things to the once struggling Rovio. If the partnership again takes off, this may lend itself to other food-related ventures such as Angry Birds breakfast cereal, and as crude as it sounds, Angry Birds bucket meals at KFC (oh the irony)!

There can be a whole marketing campaign surrounding these lovable birds!  I see it now: There can be instructions posted on the internet or distributed virally (e.g. YouTube, “street teams”, flyers) on how to build your own DIY catapualt to launch the M&Ms/breakfast cereal onto user-made “levels” with green M&Ms substituting for the pigs and graham crackers for wood planks etc. etc. – kind of like playing with your food (but infinitely better).

The games development company has in fact set itself some lofty goals: in an interview with tech magazine Wired, Rovio’s Peter Vesterbacka (who’s business card reads “Mighty Eagle”) outlines the company’s plans for these angry avian friends of ours: “What we’re doing is we’re building out the Angry Birds world…Pac-Man is only one game. Mario is a better benchmark.” Mars Inc. + Rovio = WIN.

—

Stay tuned for more Angry Birds/M&M mash-ups in future posts! I fully intend to make a whole set of them so check out the blog often~

Oh Charlie Sheen, you never fail to amuse us with your crazy antics. Dating numerous strippers, beating up your girlfriends, going on cable TV to denounce your boss. You, who has the “DNA of Adonis” and “the blood of a tiger”, is currently jobless. Your string of marital problems is troubling, but does Hollywood care? I don’t think so. Sure no network in their right mind would hire Mr.Adonis but you can’t deny the firestorm of publicity Charlie Sheen’s weirdo interviews have generated – as well as the piggy-backers trying to ride on the coattails of Mr. Sheen’s infamy.

In their defense, the following people aren’t opportunistic vultures waiting to eat up the remains of Sheen’s career…or maybe they are. Nonetheless, this story (like many others) stresses the importance of maintaining a personal brand. Negative publicity can hurt your reputation – or in Sheen’s case, diversify your career options. Sadly, just like when Michael Jackson’s popularity skyrocketed after his untimely demise, we can expect Charlie Sheen to become even more famous post-Two and a Half Men. After all, who needs a crummy long-running show when you’ve been “blessed with a new brain” and have “magic…and poetry at [your] fingertips”?

• Winnipeg, MB native Jarrett Moffatt dreamed up the site Live The Sheen Dream in his room one boring winter afternoon. To date, it has had nearly 396,000 Likes on Facebook and 15,000 retweets on Twitter. Even the man himself has described Moffatt’s “social media experiment” as “epic.”
• From the publication house that brought you the Sarah Palin series of comics comes The Infamous Charlie Sheen. Bluewater Productions will be releasing the Sheen-centric comic book during the Summer months.

  

• One company not so happy with Sheen’s antics however (and no, it’s not WB) is Xango LLC., purveyors of XANGO™ Juice, which, according to the company website: “harnesses the nutritional attributes of the whole mangosteen fruit through a proprietary formula”. Now that must be why Sheen has so much vim and vigor these days, since he has been seen waving a machette around, a bottle of XJ in hand. The company’s quick to distance itself from Charlie Sheen though, confiding to gossip website TMZ’s sources that they are “very nervous” to be associated with him. Come on Xango, Charlie’s waiting for his sponsorship deal – don’t disappoint!

(This is a continuation of my current stream of Apple-related posts. Don’t blame me, blame the Church of Steve.)

—

As if I can’t talk enough about Apple. The folks at 1 Infinite Loop have done it again with the release of the optimized iPad 2, the original iPad’s faster and lighter cousin. It is interesting to note that the pricing has remained the same as the original iPad’s: $499 for an entry-level 16GB model, $599 for a 32GB model and $699 for a brand new 64GB one.

Now pricing shouldn’t even be an issue for Apple. But nonetheless it makes you wonder why they didn’t change the price at all for a product that is supposed to be equipped with new bells and whistles only a fanboy could dream of. All things considered, the iPad 2 isn’t a marked improvement from its predecessor – much like when Apple released the iPhone 3GS boasting everything the iPhone 3 has…with improved speed. Incremental tinkering like the kind done with the iPad 2 would make it hard to justify say, even a $50 increase in price in the eyes of your average joe and most people who can’t see the between the two.

One could argue that the company had to keep prices at an even level rather than raising them given the fact that there wasn’t much done in the innovation department (aside from the cameras everyone’s been dying to have on their iPads). But one thing’s for sure: lowering the price isn’t an option. Price is one of the few ways Apple has maintained its allure as a high-quality brand and to lower the price of a new product that hasn’t quite entered its growth phase would probably do more harm than good (harm in the sense that the product’s prestigious image might be cheapened in the eyes of Apple’s core consumers). In maintaining the old price point however Apple has communicated another message: “This is the new iPad. For the same price as the old one you can get all the excellent features it had…and more! Now isn’t that a great value?”.  This is a characteristic move by a company who makes it a point to communicate the product’s value every chance they get.

Now excuse me while I ogle at the new iPad.

(I’ve been away from the blog for quite some time now! That’s what 3 midterms on the same week + Assignment Mountain does to you. Now back to your regularly-scheduled programming.)

—

At the rate Apple is releasing products, I might never buy another iPhone/iPod/iPad/iThing.

I’ve owned at some point in time an iPod Mini (when I was a wee tyke), an old 1G iPod Shuffle that was handed down to me, an 3G iPod Touch which I got for Christmas two years ago (only to be rendered obsolete by the 4G version) and as of today I am the proud owner of a hand-me-down: my dad’s ancient (if you consider 2008 old) 2nd-gen iPhone. There was always a point in time when I regretted my buying decisions and I vowed never to buy an Apple product (obviously I broke that vow so now I’m not too keen on keeping promises I can’t keep). Buyers’ remorse always hits, but quickly dissipates as the next model makes the rounds on the internet (rumors), TV (like those snazzy Apple ads) and in-store ads (don’t you just love those store displays?).

There must be a reason why droves of Macheads still go to the Church of Steve (Jobs) and hang on to his every word – why, when the iPhone 4 came out, they were quick to line up even though the iPhone 3G was released just a few months ago. The residents of 1 Infinite Loop know what makes people tick. The desire to be on the forefront of things is often a driver for many “early adopters” but at what price? Do we the consumer constantly have to pick up the tab? Certainly consistently rolling out new models is done at the risk of annoying the few who buy the product in its dying phase (the “laggards” and even the “late majority” are guilty here), but does Apple really care?

Probably not. It’s up to the consumer to decide on the right time to buy items with a relatively high turnover, monitoring rumors and keeping abreast with all the news coming out. We can’t really blame Apple for coming out with something new every 6 months, as that is the nature of innovation – to always be one step ahead, constantly improving oneself in order to maintain that advantage. This is the business strategy they’ve chosen – us Macheads just have to live with it. Or buy a Vaio.

(Fellow blogger Ruth’s Bieber-themed post inspired me to write about the boy wonder, so for all you Beliebers out there hold on to your pants. Seriously.)

—

Justin Bieber must think he’s the luckiest kid alive right now. The 16 year-old Stratford, ON native has catapulted himself to international stardom by flexing his vocal chops on YouTube all while capturing the hearts of millions of squealing girls all over the world. The teen idol has lent his name to a whole range of items, from a look-alike Ken version of himself to nail polish to even headphones.

Those who may have seen his television ads with Proactiv however would be aware that the company has added Bieber to their growing roster of celebrity endorsers who include singer Mandy Moore, actress Jenna Fischer (aka. Pam from The Office) and rapper/mogul Sean Combs. Here’s the commercial anyway for those who haven’t seen it (or just want an excuse to ogle him):

Guthy-Renker, the company behind Proactiv, reportedly shelled out nearly $3 million over the next two years for the teen idol to become one of their many spokespersons. The same article in the link mentions how the company is hoping to leverage much of Bieber’s popularity with the teen girl market in order to boost sales.

Sure, Justin’s tween fans may not have the purchasing power to buy Proactiv themselves, but their parents probably do – and this is exactly what the company wants, to have legions of mothers buy the product online where the company makes nearly 60% of its sales. They realize that anything Justin Bieber touches turns into gold (figuratively of course) and that there is a legitimate opportunity in marketing directly to teens when before their celebrity endorsers largely catered to a more mature crowd. Any success with the teen crowd will translate into free word-of-mouth marketing wherein teens will extol the virtues of Proactiv and urge their BFFs to try it out, making their BFFs’ parents consider purchasing the product.

See guys, it’s a never-ending cycle.

Parents, take heed: do not underestimate Tween Power.

I am a self-confessed geek. I love playing video games and so do my two late 20-something brothers. From the Super Nintendo we graduated onto the Gameboy when even my technology-challenged dad would enjoy playing Tetris for hours on end. Eventually me and my siblings were gifted the Playstation (which saw better days) as well as its successor the PS2. With a couple of exceptions, we’ve sold our souls had a long history with Nintendo. My family is not alone however in our adoration for the video game industry giant: in 2009 Nintendo saw sales figures that were well into the billions of dollars worldwide. 15 billion in fact

Nintendo has maintained its leading position in the highly-competitive video game industry due in large part to its keen understanding of the audience. Nintendo pretty much has a product for every marketing segments it caters to – for every large slice of video game pie Nintendo knows exactly what goes with it. The company has learned over the years that selling video games to the usual target markets (children and the youth in general) just won’t cut it anymore – it wasn’t enough to segment the market based on demographic criteria, consumer lifestyles had to be taken into consideration as well. Capitalizing on the fitness renaissance of recent years, Nintendo released the Wii in 2006 hoping that they would be able to tap into a growing number of health-conscious individuals as well as so-called “casual gamers” who often feel left out by the industry’s usual offerings.

The console’s flagship game, Wii Sports was applauded by Nintendo’s intended target market and the numbers don’t lie: to date, the company has sold over 75 million copies of the game worldwide. Its more fitness-oriented cousin on the other hand, Wii Fit, has been received well by fitness enthusiasts and couch potatoes alike. The lesson: it pays to go beyond the horizon.

I guess they must be doing something right. As for me? I’ll be playing Super Mario Bros. On my pink NDS.

Crowd-sourcing is nothing new. As a prelude to this Sunday’s Superbowl, PepsiCo launched a contest during September of last year asking people to make a 30-second commercial showing their love for Dortios and Pepsi Max. Avid snack munchers naturally responded and they have created some ingenious ads that rival even the infamous Snickers commercial featuring Betty White. Here’s my favourite one (for Doritos):

High-profile companies like Amazon and PepsiCo are increasingly turning to us, the consumer for marketing advice! Crowd-sourcing is a highly interactive means of directly involving consumers with the brand. It often creates added value for the consumers as they are in a sense more invested in the product because well, they helped shape it! Before, companies never would have dreamed up of this because there was so little emphasis on the consumer – despite the adage “the customer is always right”. But now they aren’t content until we turn into their product slaves repeat customers (and hopefully eventual advocates of the brand). I think part of the reason why crowd-sourcing has the attention of major brands is that it is one way of generating additional value to the consumer without necessarily altering the existing product.

It doesn’t come without its own pitfalls however: imagine having to screen thousands upon thousands of entries from people! The company has to screen entries thoroughly just to make sure nothing that certain consumer groups consider “offensive” make it past their filter. Any negative publicity can spread like wildfire through word of mouth and if not capped/controlled, the company can face serious damage to their brand. There is some control with crowd-sourcing as there are screening mechanisms in place, but at the same time they can’t control exactly what you and I submit. Tricky!

Crowd-sourcing is not the marketing world’s panacea for all its problems. With anything these days, it comes with pros/cons that should be weighed against each other. PepsiCo however has used crowd-sourcing to their advantage with great results: the ad above could very well be the next great Superbowl commercial!

You may have been titillated. You may have been turned off (or on, I hope not). You may have been absolutely disgusted. Chances are however, you have have been perturbed by the proliferation of American Apparel ads featuring topless women and butt cheeks hanging around with reckless abandon. The “Downtown L.A”-based clothing provider has cultivated a reputation for the provocative and their advertisements are a clear indication of that. Some (heck most of them) are quite NSFW, but let’s just say that most of them have the occasional butt cheek/boob/crotch in plain view. I had a hard time looking for an ad I could actually post (surprise!) so you’ll all have to settle for this one (sorry men, no nudity here):

That’s AA President Dov Charney there hard at work trying to save the company as if it’s nobody’s business, flanked by his two gorgeous creative directors. In bed. The bolded caption reads: “In Bed with the Boss“. It’s an excellent example of how the power of marketing can be utilized to manage the consumer’s perceptions of and attitudes towards the company. Just months ago, American Apparel was facing bankruptcy and what better way to reassure the public than a genuine window into how one man (and his harem of employee-models) are lifting the company out of near disaster. And while there aren’t any naked models prancing around the ad, it still manages to maintain what AA calls its “provocative, real, unpretentious aesthetic”. Just like how Albertan beef farmers managed to reverse pubic fears over the whole Mad Cow disease scare by managing consumer attitudes, American Apparel is using this ad (and many others) to show the world that not only are they on top of things, but they have managed to keep the inventive spunk that has drawn droves of trendsetters to patronize the brand. Releasing a “boob-free” ad like this one is AA’s way of manipulating potential customers’ affective attitudes towards the company, by painting themselves as a company that at the end of the day can get things done.

Now how’s that for managing impressions (in bed)?

SHREK: For your information, there’s a lot more to ogres than people think.

DONKEY: Example?

SHREK: Example? Okay. Uh… ogres are like onions.

DONKEY: They stink?

SHREK: Yes. No!

DONKEY: Oh, they make you cry?

SHREK: No!

DONKEY: Oh, you leave them out in the sun, they get all brown and start sprouting little white hairs.

SHREK: No! Layers! Onions have layers. Ogres have layers. Onions have layers. You get it? We both have layers.

DONKEY: Oh… you both have layers… You know, not everybody like onions. Cakes! Everybody likes cakes. Cakes have layers.

SHREK: I don’t care what everyone likes. Ogres are not like cakes… You dunce, irritating, miniature beast of burden. Ogres are like onions. End of story. Bye bye. See ya later…

There you go onions, if you are in need of a PR manager then our favourite (and occasionally grumpy) green ogre has you covered! See what proper product placement can do for you? A supporting role in a feature movie!

Okay, so the cameo came before the hype (and by hype I mean an unusual surge of interest in all things onion-y). But onions will not just sit in the sidelines while they watch other vegetables like baby carrots steal the spotlight! Our oft-maligned friend the onion (they don’t always make you cry) has enlisted the help of the Shrek, with Dreamworks granting the Vidalia Onion Committee (VOC) rights to plastering the Shrek name all over packaging and promotional material. According to ABC News, the council has reported a 50% increase in onion sales largely in part due to the ogre’s appeal to a demographic that has always had a hard time eating their vegetables: kids.

But before we hastily conclude that having every single animated character endorse vegetables is a solution to the age-old problem of children refusing to eat their Brussels sprouts, let us look at why exactly this odd partnership works. The VOC has probably had to take into consideration the immediate environment they operate in. Onions have never really been marketed to a specific group of people like baby carrots have in recent years, so why not start now? To reach out to waves of beleaguered home cooks, why not go through their children? It is a known fact that once children fix their beady little eyes on something they find “cool” they will badger their parents to buy it for them. In this case, the committee’s “consumers” are not just the parents who do their groceries, it’s their kids as well. Kids are generally known to be a hard group to sell to, as they are brutally honest with their likes (Justin Beiber, Silly Bandz, Miley Cyrus) and dislikes (vegetables, slimy things, monsters).  In this case the best course of action would be to have an endorser with high referential power among children – Shrek and his motley crew seem to be the perfect role models (well, sort of) whose popularity with this particular demographic can be leveraged to sell what kids often consider boring old vegetables.

Who would have thought that a green ogre could get children to eat their onions? Now if only the same were true for Brussels sprouts…

(link to the original ABC News article: Shrek Boosts Vidalia Onion Sales)