Sometime in August of last year TELUS thought it would be clever to rip off the famous “Old Spice” commercial. It launched its own version of the campaign and it seemed to be almost identical. I wonder why Telus would even bother trying to do such a thing, given the popularity of Old Spice’s version as well as the similarity between the two. You think someone, somewhere, would have stopped them.
The reality of the matter is that it only damaged their brand image as they strayed away from their classic and compelling “animal and catchy music” campaign (which I have always loved). It didn’t offer them any additional value and they merely came off as looking like copycats.
Now you can’t even find the campaign anywhere on the Internet. I assume Telus quickly realized their mistake as negative messages bounced around the Internet and began pretending like it never happened. However, it did exist. I saw it with my own two eyes, as did many others. See comments made by The Globe and Mail, Mobile Syrup, and TechVibes, and pay particular attention to reader’s comments on Mobile Syrup.
Beat-boxing Owl Commercial by Telus
If Telus is looking for innovative ways to reach its consumers, it shouldn’t completely disregard what works, and what they’re known for. Instead of replacing their cute and visually appealing animals with buff and obnoxious men, they should find ways to communicate the personality of their brand image through digitalized animals in new and exciting ways.
Recommended alternatives to copying Old Spice:
- Online Telus mobility site where you can download interactive backgrounds of your favourite Telus commercial characters
- Free mobile downloads of the songs featured on their TV ads
- A media contest where you can send in pictures or videos of your own cute animals to be digitalized into a Telus commercial.
There are a lot of ways for Telus to engage consumers with their current theme, they just aren’t thinking outside the box (clearly) or trying hard enough.
In response to Heena’s blog post about McDonald’s expansion into a more cafe-style line of coffee drinks (latte’s, cappuccino’s, iced-coffees, and fruit smoothies) as well as ambiance, I would like to comment on what was said about the new image “creating value for its customers by continuously adapting to its customers changing needs”
Previously, McDonald’s has catered to those who value convenience, quick service, and mediocre quality. The people in line want their coffee cheap and fast, and they realize that they get what they pay for. I wonder then, by introducing a new atmosphere and cafe-style options, if McDonald’s will be straying too far away from its original “family on a budget” image?
By offering options such as “with whipped cream or with caramel drizzle,” McDonald’s not only caters to slightly different clientele, but will also have to use extra labour time to complete the specialized coffee order. This obviously creates more costs and leads to a trade-off between quality and efficiency. Will McDonalds successfully supply higher quality coffees to compete with Starbucks and Tim Hortons, or will their traditionally low price-point and quick service be compromised by their extra add-on efforts?
To be honest, considering the mark-up price on coffee products for retailers, I doubt that McCafe would fail. Even offering specialty coffees at a few cents lower than their main competitors would provide them with a great competitive advantage. Complementary products, such as breakfast sandwiches, are still available at an unbeatable price point. This would make McDonald’s more of a one stop location for quick breakfast and/or coffee break needs.
McDonald’s, however, being known for its quick convenience, may not want to dish out the dough for fancy furniture and flat-screen TV’s just yet. It just seems to go against the grain of its strongly branded image too quickly. By encouraging consumers to think of McDonald’s as a place to catch up and relax rather than a place to quickly grab your favourite drink on the go, it might create an atmosphere that just can’t cohabit with their cheap price-point.
Meet Seth Godin, “His blog is perhaps the most popular in the world written by a single individual” and is a bestselling author on the topics of marketing, the post-industrial revolution, the way ideas spread, and changing everything (Seth Godin’s Blog). Sounds like my kind of guy. However, If Seth Godin is so well known, how come I didn’t recognize his face? How come the only reason I am talking about him now is because I googled “marketing blogs” in order to do my homework assignment? Obviously, if Godin has been marketing himself, his message hasn’t reached me yet. Am I not in his target market?
There is irony here. It lies in one of his most recent blog posts stating that, “The extraordinary thing about marketing is that a million people might see something or hear something or be sold something and only a thousand will actually take action” (Seth Godin’s Blog).
A year or so ago I worked in a book store and often would peruse the business section and wonder if my future would entail reading any of the titles analyzing the business world. Some of which were Godin’s novels, I now realize. 
Seth’s point however, rings true for a lot of my life (and probably many others). Although I may have browsed the titles of countless business books, never did I pick one up and buy. I didn’t take action.
The question is, how do we break through this barrier? How do we change the most observers into buyers, especially when we’re selling something more important than toothpaste? How about when we are selling world changing ideas? I have a feeling Seth Godin knows some of the answers. Perhaps I should read one of his books.
I don’t know about you, but when it comes to something as important as my eyes, I don’t just ignore extensive lists of horrible sounding ingredients in mascara that are supposed to work. In response to Jane Park’s blog post regarding the lies of mascara marketing and how the sold image and purchased results do not correlate, I would like to pose a comment further about mascara advertising. Why isn’t anyone advertising natural mascara, rather than pumping us with more broken promises that are enhanced with chemicals? Most advertising campaigns use fake eyelashes on their models anyways! (Falseeyelashes.com)
Do you know the effects of the chemicals such as parabens that reside in mascara bottles? Even if you don’t, read the list of ingredients on your mascara package one day, and you’ll be unpleasantly surprised that you cannot pronounce 80% of the words on the list.
There are SOME natural products available, however, as listed by TheGoodHuman.com. Yet, I have never seen such brands advertised. I had to go out of my way at my local drug store and ask a representative for their natural mascara collection only to find that they carried only one brand that I had never heard of before. I would like to see more alternatives introduced by popular companies using sustainability marketing, or other brands should expand their product marketing further. These natural brands have an opportunity, due to current natural health trends, to implement enhanced marketing practices, distribute their products with more marketing intermediaries and indulge in a growing target market. I think spending more on marketing is a risk some of these smaller, natural products should be willing to take, as they really do have a competitive advantage over most mascara brands.
“Fisher-Price is recalling more than 10 million tricycles, toys and high chairs over safety concerns.” Apparently the items are being recalled due to proof of child injury. “In the recall of about seven million Fisher-Price Trikes and Tough Trikes toddler tricycles, the agency is aware of 10 reports of children being hurt. Six required medical attention.” This creates negative marketing and reduces brand quality in the eyes of consumers. It is necessary that fisher-price retains consumer views that their products are safe for their children, otherwise they will lose sales. There are other items being recalled by the company as well. Children, world wide, have obtained injury, and parents are undoubtedly upset. “Fisher-Price is also recalling more than one million Healthy Care, Easy Clean and Close to Me High Chairs, after 14 reports of problems. Seven children needed stitches, the commission said.” “So far the recalls leading to about 7 million Fisher-Price products is the largest for toys since Congress passed a law two years ago beefing up the product safety regulator’s powers.” There are many injuries that have even been described as “genital bleeding.” It will be interesting to see how Fisher Price attempts to bounce back from this incredulous error. They should really apologize and explain the issue publicly.
Source 1: http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2010/09/30/fisher-price-recall.html#ixzz11PdRLvvc
Source 2: http://www.keenobservers.com/4568/fisher-price-recalls-2010-given-list-of-toys-for-kids-recalled-and-affected/
As a sales associate, would you use the iPad? Katrodia, who sells appliances, actually does. He finds it more useful compared to information sheets, and flyers. When assisting customers he just whips out his iPad, like a clipboard, to show his customers details on products. Not only that, he can easily access the internet and compare his appliances to the direct competition. This also seems to reduce the consumption of paper products, therefore saving a few more trees and our environment as well. This technological leap for sales people is very creative. “Katrodia has ditched paper brochures in favour of his iPad, which he uses to show up-to-date PDF versions of brochures as well as to access manufacturer websites, print invoices, set up deliveries, create quotes and access his company’s systems.” You also can’t forget the wide range of opportunities this presents in the world of applications as well. I can predict new applications consisting of business, sales, and marketing oriented assistants. Technology is truly shaping the retail world as we know it. Just for example, I use touch screen technology, where I work, at Chapters. It allows me to quickly access inventory, and help customers search for specific books. Now the iPad is making advancements. What comes next?
Source: CBC Small Business
Early adoption gives Canadian businesses competitive edge
“Federal investigators are searching social media sites for fraudulent and deceptive advertising.” This is very interesting, since most internet users have seen the fraudulent advertisements, and pop-ups that bombard us every day. Have you ever wondered how many innocent people are scammed by marketing and advertising artists, online? I know I have. It seems that the growing deception online has led Canada’s Competition Bureau to crack down on abusers. Just because it is online doesn’t mean it doesn’t have to pass codes of conduct. Many companies are getting away with trickery and fraud through the means of online ads, and its not fair to the many users of the internet. Canada’s Competition Bureau has now made a sweep of certain advertisement sites and is going to try to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate ads. This may lead to a cleaner and safer environment for online browsing, but it might not make much of an effect at all. The internet is still a highly uncontrolled environment open to the entire world, and one Canadian Competition Bureau might not have the effect it initially set out to make. However, “The agency has asked that anyone who believes they have been a victim of deceptive practices by an online advertiser to call 1-800-348-5358.” This may be the innovative beginning of a more regulated internet world, compared to what we are used to.
Source: CBC News
Twitter, as we all know, is an extremely large and rapidly growing social media site. A lot of people are using it, including large corporations, and important members of society. Even Mr. Obama and his wife are on twitter, or at least someone is tweeting for them. It turns out that twitter had a hole in its security and there was a widespread of links being indirectly passed from person to person through the means of third parties. The victims did nothing more than scroll over the link before they were directed to new sites and advertisements. This issue, of course, is very scary. Even though twitter patched the issue within hours, it breaches confidentiality. One should think twice before posting their information on the world wide web, and realize the risk they are taking in using media websites such as Twitter. As technology advances in intelligence, so do the evil villains of the internet world. Additionally, the links that were being inadvertently accessed by unsuspecting users could have been rigged with viral codes and other serious attacks. What would have happened if these viruses effected the computer of the white house? The effects could have been way worse than the inconveniently placed pop-up, spam or pornographic image. I wouldn’t put much more than a minimum amount of trust in twitter’s privacy policy after this intimidating event.
Information Source: The Christian Science Monitor
Lady Gaga is a leader in the music industry, and creates a lot of different interest due to her originality and style. Lately, however, she has represented herself with unusual attire, a meat dress! According to Globe and Mail’s Zosia Bielski, “Lady Gaga’s “meat dress” was real and made of beef,” revealed by the designer after the MTV awards. Unfortunately, this spectacle of marketing created a lot of negative feedback. The ethical value of Gaga’s clothing decision is obviously questionable. The Globe and Mail did include that Gaga, “meant “no disrespect to anyone that is vegan or vegetarian,” insisting it was a human-rights statement of sorts.” It does create complication, however, in terms of animal treatment and hygiene. Despite the fact she wanted this spectacle to be a human-rights statement, she must realize how her outfit was perceived. The meat she wore is offensive to viewers because it was disrespectful to the animals involved, as well as to vegetarians. Since when is it proper to play with our food before we eat it, Gaga?
