I was thinking about one of the ads Tamar showed in class regarding the Stop Smoking campaign that was “integrated” with the bus, and I looked around for some more like it that creatively use its placement [on the bus] as part of the image. I came across this.
Now there’s a refreshing step away from the mundane. And I’m sure I’m not the only one who changes the channel when advertisements come on, flip past the pages with ads on them, skim over online banners, and close annoying pop-ups in a flash. Indeed, I feel like I’ve trained myself to tune out the orthodox methods of advertisement because there are simply way too many. Creative ones like these bus ads, however, present themselves one at a time. And I give it attention not because the product is relevant or interesting, but because the ad itself is interesting, which by association makes the product interesting.
Sure, they might cost quite a prettier penny than the regular ads, but in the end, it’s a good investment to demosntrates the company’s innovation. At least I think so. Besides, we could definitely use a good laugh like this when we’re waiting at the bus stop or at a red light. Let’s just hope they aren’t causing car accidents and such!
There’s almost a science to giving away free stuff. And I’m sure McDonald’s probably already got it figured out.
Multiple times a year they have these free coffee giveaways; some require coupons, some limit the drink size, and some are completely free like the ongoing one. So what are they doing, dumping what must amount to millions of dollars on high frequency television, radio, and internet ads (just to name a few) solely devoted to spreading the word about free coffee? Let’s break it down:
Exhibit A: Behavioural conditioning. Put simply, it brings in new customers. Customers who may never have tried a McDonald’s coffee think, “Hey, why not.” And I mean really, why not? There’s minimal costs involved, and the risks are absurdly low. Quite honestly, not long ago I seriously doubted that McDonald’s, a fast-food chain, could make any decent coffee… And look where I am now, up to my eyes in caffeine (Hey, it was free alright?).
So people walk in, try one and decide they like it, so they come back. The beauty of it is coffee is one of those those things that are almost daily necessities. Every day, almost without fail, people will get their daily fix; perhaps even two or three times a day. To them it’s almost like a cheap, risk-free addiction. Anyway, you multiply that by 365 days, and well… that’s a lot of revenue coming from a single person. Don’t forget, a McDonald’s coffee is also slightly cheaper than big coffee dominators like Starbucks and Tim Horton’s, and economical customers like that. While we’re on the topic, what do you think the cost is on a cup of coffee? I would guess no more than 50 cents a cup – including cream, sugar, etc etc… And that’s already a 100% mark-up at least!
Exhibit B: Bundling. Recently I had the luck to experience this technique first hand – or more like fall prey to it. Basically, the strategy works because people who come in for a free coffee oftentimes grab stuff to go with it; a breakfast muffin, a quick snack, perhaps a fry… Indeed, the last time I visited I just got food and almost forgot the whole point of going was to get free coffee! On the cost side of the equation, all they need to cover the cost of that free coffee is for any one of the other food items to have a margin of more than the cost of the coffee, which we estimated to be around $0.50; easy (Ok, ok, yes there are DL, MOH, yada yada. Let’s leave that discussion for the accountants).
So there you have it. Free coffee? Eh… Not really. But for the consumer, at the end of the day, it is exactly what it is: a free coffee.
I came across Graeme Lee’s blogpost about the new Axe campaign, Clean Your Balls. Really, you wouldn’t believe it if I told you so I’ll just repost the video up here:
The guy’s face at 0:48 is priceless.
Anyway, Graeme really nailed it when he explained how the raunchy nature of this video made it downright uncomfortable to watch, which was essentially my first impression. Given that the actual televised ad was a 30 second abridgement of the video, even that I found a bit obscene. Now I know I wrote a post a while back about ads liking humourous ads (as was the case in Old Spice’s campaign), though the first 10 seconds of this ad did make me slightly giggle like a 9-year-old, they took it a bit too far.
The point being, there’s a very, very fine line between lawl and lewd.
So I came across an excellent pratical example of applying marketing concepts. It was a producer that decided to introduce new uses for its products to extend the product life cycle. The company has clearly thought very deeply about its market segments, and decided to pursue a benefit-based positioning strategy. I’m referring to, of course, the following ad for Eminem’s new album, Recovery:
And yes, that’s the Shamwow guy; celebrity endorsement.
On a similar note, another “unofficial” advertisement for Recovery featured a guy ranting about how terrible Eminem’s new album is, complete with an admonish against buying the cd. It’s extremely interesting how an ad like this can be promotional for the upcoming release. However, such an ad is completely within Eminem’s persona, as it were. Loyal fans will know that he is always speaking tongue-in-cheek, making fun and saying things sarcastically in his music, interviews, shows, and appearances. To put the cherry on top of the cake, the ad serves as a biting mockery of critics of his music who often post similarly-styled videos on Youtube.
All things said, the point he makes is clear: If you don’t like my music, don’t buy my album!
Not long ago, GAP attempted to rebrand itself with a completely new logo (read more about it on Storefront Backtalk Blog). As you can see from the image below, they decided to shun their old, very familiar tall white seriffed lettering in a solid blue box, a time-tested imagine with 20 years’ worth of vastly reaching recognizability… And don this new, plain, black font on empty backdrop, with a puny, pathetic icon of its former blue-squared greatness. Honestly, it reminds me of an old Microsoft product (Microsoft Suite perhaps?) from 1998.
Needless to say, loyal customers responded with a bona fide firestorm, and the overwhelming backlash from their fanbase caused the company to immediately retract their damning blueprint. Good call.
But to echo what Evan Schuman wrote, the interesting bit is not that they decided to push forward with this risky image-altering proposition. Rather, Gap had the foresight to launch the logo on its website long before its scheduled debut in stores. Thus, they were able to “test the waters” before any serious irreparable damage could be done to tarnish the name, the brand, the image. Whether this was an ingenious clairvoyance or a serendipitous coincidence, they were able to test the consumer reaction on a relatively maleable pallette.
As we can see from how the story unfolded, it is more than evident that this strategem yields a valuable advantage and serves a critical purpose: it reduces the risk that the corporation must assume in any rebranding or any major changes they wish to implement. Much like how when new products are introduced, they are sold within the confines of a local market where they carefully check consumer reactions, before coming out with a full scale launch.
On the topic of “National Positioning”, I couldn’t agree more with Armand’s recent post re: German cars and Albertan beef. There’s certainly a big plus to marketing a country’s products, as there can be associative or reputational purposes behind this type of marketing. And I believe there are two thoughts in regards to this aspect.
Firstly, citizens who identify strongly with a nation are very susceptible to these “nation pride” marketing tactics. So slapping a maple leaf on everything Canadian produced is a great way to attract consumers in this situation. And I’m not just referring to hardcore fanatics who will only buy Canadian produced goods, but in general I think there is a large inclination to feel warmly toward one’s home country, and that’s why the leaf sells.
Secondly, often times products bear the Canadian label because Canada is genuinely good at what it does; and by that I mean top in its class, a real world-quality product. So to put a “Real Canadian” before maple syrup actually makes sense because our syrup truly is one-of-a-kind and world renown. And there can be many qualitative attributes that give rise to this phenomenon: China has an abundance of cheap labour that allows it to produce low-cost goods in large supply; Germany is always first to arrive in the innovative engineering game; Canada is rich in natural resources that allow it to manufacture grade A stuff.
The second point differs from the first on that not everything is attached with the Canadian icon, but only the things that we truly excel at and do better than everyone else; equivalently, the leaf is not rubber stamped from an ink pad, rather intricately and artistically etched. Same goes for any other product made in any other country.
Porsche, Porscchhhhhe… shhhhhh… that’s how quiet this car is…
Land Rover. It doesn’t just drive, it roves; over roads, land, terrain, sand, gravel, rocks, boulders, and anything and everything else that gets in between it and its destination.
What’s in a name? The name, perhaps a product’s most important asset, shapes consumers’ perception. Through its phonetics, onomatopoeia, connotations, denotations, and even its length, a name is capable of sculpting the product from cold, hard, grey clay.
It’s almost like a word association game, in that the name itself evokes certain emotions or tints the perception. Axe has a sharp, almost stinging smell; a Canon shoots heavy metal balls and photos. Now, whether these associations were carefully planned or purely coincidental… You decide.
John Caddell’s blog mentioned a couple of pointers that make a great name, and while I agree with all of them, there are two that I find particularly important:
1) Easy to say.
The brand should almost flow off the tip of the tongue. You want people to throw your product name around in conversation as liberally as possible, without having to pause and repeat it several times in different accentuations when a blank look comes up on the other person’s face. Without a sayable name, how can word-of-mouth marketing to occur? On that note, two cars come to mind, Altima and Peugeot. I’ve always had difficulty saying that (I often find myself repeating the name several times to make sure it sounds correct as possible), and in the latter case, I actually had to pause and think while typing it.
Foreign brands are particularly adroit at befuzzling the consumer. Indeed, Givenchy has had my head spinning for years now. That being said, sometimes it is actually beneficial to have a foreign name like that, for it endows exoticness through its nationalism. Sennheiser; only the highest German sound-quality standards! Another reason that brands may seek hieroglyphic names is that it conveys exclusivity or superiority – I can pronounce it, thus I’m fit to wear the name.
2) Easy to remember.
“I really recommend that restaurant down the street, I don’t remember what it’s called… The food tastes amazing though!” Being short or even monosyllabic sometimes helps here. The whole point is that customers who tried it once know exactly what it’s called so they can find it again. Stick it in the buyer’s retrieval set and staple it down, even if the buyer doesn’t realize it! This aspect is very intimately related to the first point mentioned above; if it’s easy to say, chance are it’s easy to pronounce. The best example of this hard-to-remember name is… Well I can’t quite think of one right now.
One third point that I find particularly effective is the ability of the product to penetrate everyday language. Google this; Wiki that; grab me a Kleenex; Xerox it; let’s have a Coke; my head hurts, I need to take a Tylenol. As you can see in these examples, these names tend to fall into two categories: the first is the name that has become synonymous with the product itself, like Kleenex. The second category includes the names that can be used as a verb: Google it.
Reflecting on Kristine Liu’s blog about Whole Grain Oat Honey Nut Cheerios, I couldn’t help but wonder whether the companies who make the switch to health-conscious ingredients are voluntarily doing so, or forced to by market pressures of prevailing social trends. While I agree with Kristine that General Mills certainly does an excellent job marketing the tastiness of this enriched cereal, I’m sitting here lamenting the retirement of one of my favourite cereals, crying, “Oh how they butchered him so!” Needless to say, I was indeed very turned off with this evolution of breakfast staples and I resolved never to make the switch, even if the classic Honey Nut were to enter extinction.
But wait a second here. Did they actually change this tried and true recipe? Or is it in fact the same cereal, but merely the consumers’ perception that is being changed? Upon closer inspection, it’s really the same product packaged in a different box. And what’s different about this box is that it proudly proclaims its Whole Grain Oat ingredient. As far as I was concerned, Honey Nut Cheerios had always been an extremely health conscious choice as far as cereal goes (especially in the face of its sugar-loaded cousins and competitors out there). Not only that, but the soluble fibre in original Honey Nut Cheerios has been known to reduce cholesterol and heart disease risk, receiving such sanctions as from the American Heart Association for being “heart-healthy”.
So what’s the deal here? Is this Whole Grain stuff not really all that new OR improved? Checking out the back of my cereal box, it says quite clearly that the primary ingredient in Honey Nut O’s are Whole Grain Oats. So while the same cereal have always been just as healthy as ever, the only difference is that buyers are more aware of it.
And that’s an interesting thought to ponder: Are brands really pushing more healthy foods, or are they just more acute about its advertising aspects? Are people really eating healthier, or are they just more conscious of it?
One last thing that I’d like to point out, was when I looked at the photo of the cereal box on Kristine’s blog, I thought to myself, “Huh… Do those O’s look darker, or did they just happen to burn that batch?” Let’s do a quick side-by-side:
Now it definitely looks a lot darker don’t it? Clearly, they’re trying to show that this “new and improved” cereal is made of the healther whole grain oats by drawing a parallel between white bread and its healthier brown cousin. White bread is to unhealthy as brown bread is to healthy; similarly, white cereal is to unhealthy as brown cereal is to healthy!
Lately I’ve been following Michael Fleischner’s marketing blog and enjoying each piece he comes out with. A self-proclaimed marketing expert and established author, he often ties in current events or recent news updates into his posts which I find refreshingly informative. His acute marketing analyses are tinged with a dry wit that makes his blog all the more entertaining to read through. Check him out, really!
All irony aside, Fleischner brought up an interesting point about affiliate marketing. Specifically, “…affiliates are adding value because they are increasing the size of the market and creating a competitive marketplace.” Really, I’ve never thought of it that way. Every time I see one of those online ads proclaiming, “Visit Amazon.ca for more amazing deals!” or “This tech review featured on Cnet.com!” I instinctively think of them as merely online advertisement campaigns based on external link-portaling, placed conspicuously for a quick buck.
But to see these affiliates as business partners is multitudinously more difficult. As Fleischner noticed, it’s certainly a lot more apparent in brick-and-mortar shops and stores, though. A lone restaurant on the block meekly cries of its own merit, with no benchmark or point of comparison readily available. But as soon as another pops up right beside it, not only is healthy competition introduced, but it’s almost like building a huge sign that says, “Hey, check out my neighbour and compare, compare, compare!”
On a related note, I recently bought a dinner coupon from Dealfind, which is very similar to the burgeoning Groupon (yes, this post is just teaming with affiliate marketing!), in which restaurants offer a massive discount on its products and services by selling to the distributor’s loyal customer base, with spectacular demand bound to follow. There is an additional offer wherein for every referral who buys a coupon, you the buyer receive a significant portion in as rakeback. Therefore, usually after 5 or so referrals, the original coupon he bought comes absolutely free! To offer this kind of incentive, on top of the insane discounts of upwards of 50%, to me is truly phenomenal. These marketing companies are paying lavishly not to directly sell their coupons, but to introduce new users; $5 today could be potentially hundreds of dollars in coupon purchases in the future.
Oh the power of referrals and affiliates!
The other day my girlfriend and I were chatting on the bus when an interesting thought experiment came up. My question went like, ‘If you were to hire a marriage counsellor, whom would you choose?’ I proffered four options: A married man, a married woman, a divorced man, or a divorsed woman.
Her choice was a married man. “If he knows how to keep it, then he’s more familiar with it, and he can probably advise on it. And it’d be a man because then I would better understanding the guy’s viewpoint.”
My choice was the polar opposite, a divorced woman. Since she’s been through it all, she would be able to teach me what not to do or how not to lose a spouse. Once again, it’d be a woman so I can at least see the opposite viewpoint.
Then we reasoned, if the counsellor is divorced, it’s possible that he sucks at this whole marriage business and really doesn’t know anything about keeping his relationship intact. By the same token, who knows how many times he’s already been divorced?
So we eventually reached a pseudo-compromise, but not before we added some qualifiers: It would have to be someone who has undergone several divorces, but has now been happily married for over 5 years. A mix of negative and positive experience, doesn’t hurt to get the best of both worlds, don’t you think?
The crucial question it boiled down to was, What is the best way for a professional, in this case a marriage counsellor, to market themselves? What personal experience would sound the best to potential customers? I thought and advertisement like ‘Happily married for 30 years’ would sound pretty effective and credible… but my girlfriend thought otherwise (“Does a psychiatrist advertise that she’s been sane for 30 years?”). At any rate, I figured, it’d sound a lot better than ‘Divorced more than 30 times!’. Though I suppose someone in that situation wouldn’t need to work as a counsellor… She’d be rich.