We talk a lot more about culture and context in branding these days. And while a few very special brands have created cultures in their own right (BMW MINI, Brand Jordan) it is getting harder and harder to do it because consumers don’t really need new brands. (although they still want new experiences)
Existing brands are starting to dig deeper into culture to find human truths and connect with an existing culture. For example, I started seeing this ad for Toyota around the time of the Super Bowl. Looks like fun right, Big Wheels down a crazy hill? The nice part about it though, is that it actually happens. The spot doesn’t rely on creating a made up scenario but rather about figuring out what is already going on in the world that appropriately reflects the brand culture and attitude.
Love this work for capturing the competitive spirit of Nike and making me want to be an athlete again. Besides, I can’t get that bloody song out of my head but funny enough I don’t mind.
Am I the only one who thinks these ads are awfully similar? It’s not like Wieden didn’t win a Gold Lion for the Honda work and AKQA didn’t notice. Moreover, at least W+K’s work for Honda had to do with the product, what does this spot for AKQA have to do with beyond some nice visual effects?
The original Honda Ad from W+K:
Pot Noodle from AKQA:
Additionally, Ad Age is becoming worse than its brethren Ad Weak when it comes to honoring creative. And yes, I say that both because they like this ad from AKQA as well as the pro-leprocy/violence Skittles work from Chiat.
The U.S. Air Force has a new campaign out focusing on their Cyber Command unit. An interesting move away from the Top Gun/Tom Cruise image of the Air Force and toward the tech savvy world of national security. Strategically, I like it. National security through cyber command instead of the flyover bombing of towns? All good. But my question is …do they really wear their camouflage uniforms in the command center? I mean, I get the uniform thing but if they’re going to be in camouflage shouldn’t they at least be disguised to look like a computer so they can blend into the Cyber Command Center?
Note: they should also work on their website. If they’re going to run ads on the Cyber Command Center then we should be able to type in Cyber Command on their site and get a result. It’s always the little things of integration that get overlooked.
Strategy interviews are hard to conduct and to read. How do you keep from hiring a candidate simply based on personality? How do you ensure that strategists think strategically? Here’s one of the questions that I like to ask:
If you were the manager of a salad bar, how would you organize it to create relevance and differentiation while maximizing revenue?
As with most strategy questions, being right isn’t enough, rather it’s about how you think through and structure the problems.
I’ve stayed at a dozen or so different W’s in my professional career which have ranged from the amazing (Mexico City) to the run down (Atlanta) to the downright not trying anymore (NYC midtown) which I’m staying at now on what has become a recurring bi-weekly trip to NY. The disparity between properties is alarming and even more so in light of further expansion plans for the brand into places as far flung as Africa and New Jersey.
I’ll admit that I was originally charmed by the W brand. Modern, metropolitan, design-oriented hotels built with the creative class in mind… but where did those brand attributes go? Early on I started to see chips in the dark wood desks which seemed to allude to the veneer that surrounded the brand. It wasn’t a deep brand, it wasn’t substantive– but that was okay, I wasn’t going to let a couple dings get in the way of a great hotel experience. Besides, they along with Schrager helped to create the bar-as-living room concept and how much time was I really going to spend in my room anyway?
Well, now I’m at the hotel on Lex and 49th which is going through a renovation that will change out the dirty carpet (ever notice how hotels dim the hallway lighting as the carpets get soiled?) and hopefully replace the chipped desk but the chance to wow me with their famous service has passed.
Rooms haven’t added amenities but they have added adjectives. I was pleasantly surprised to get an upgrade from a “wonderful” room to a “spectacular” room but it only made the let down bigger when I got to my shabby shoebox.
And a note about the Starwood points thing: I get the fact that you want people to book through the W site in order to get points. The fact that I saved $100 a night over a 5 day stay may be annoying to you, but I’m a Gold member and I’ve been Platinum in the past so evidently I do go out of my way to stay at Starwood properties. One indication of such “loyalty,” perhaps, was how I paid for the first night with an exhorbatant 20,000 points. So please don’t get surly with me and say that if I wanted points I should have booked through your site instead of Orbitz (“because it’s a loyalty program”) when I ask if you have my Starwood number linked to my reservation. If it were a loyalty program you would bother to note that I’m still choosing to pay more to stay at a Starwood property– but it’s more truthfully a marketing program, isn’t it?
And I guess that’s what the root of my issues come down to. W is trying to gloss over their brand issues with slick marketing, adjective-laced naming and dim lighting. The big problems are in the service and facilities though, not in the marketing, and that’s what they need to understand if they really want my loyalty.
I’m not sure I have ever seen a more unappealing ad for candy, seriously. I’m sure it was funny when everyone was high during the concepting phase but it just grosses me out.
(I am not the target. I am not the target. [gentle rocking of the body] I am not the target.)
NBC, Bravo, Fox and other reality TV shillers could learn a thing or two from the entertainment value Brought to You By a few hundred prisoners in the Philippines. The guys in the orange jumpsuits who first earned international fame through their incredible ability to enact both choreographed dance moves to “Thriller” and heinous crimes against the community are back at it again. This time with Soulja Boy and MC Hammer. And no, you can’t touch that.
So, I got this email a couple of minutes ago from Synovate, a reputable firm, who is working on an online survey with Wells Fargo. I got the whole, “we are going to donate to charity on your behalf” thing. Which is sort of like the fake Christmas presents that say someone donated to X charity on your behalf, also known to recipient as “the giver doesn’t give a crap about you but wants to look good” gifts.
But why is Wells Fargo doing it? Are they simply planning to pocket the non-profit donation and write it off against their taxes? Do they have such a small budget for the project that they thought giving people $5 would look too cheap but giving it to someone else would be okay? Why the altruism? (Can’t be for altruism’s sake.)
Yes, maybe I’m a bit cynical and over-intellectualizing this, I’ll cop to that. Read it yourself and see what you think. I quothe:
Dear Wells Fargo Customer,
In an effort to improve products and services, Wells Fargo is inviting a select group of customers to participate in a survey. Synovate, an independent market research firm, is administering the survey on behalf of Wells Fargo.
In appreciation of your time, Wells Fargo will make a $5 charitable donation for each completed survey, up to a maximum of $15,000. Later in the survey, you will be asked for your choice of one of six charities where you would like your donation to be allocated. Thank you in advance for your time and feedback.
About this survey:
The survey will take about 15 minutes to complete.
blah, blah, blah
Sometimes I wish I were still working for an ad agency because I’d really love to help out Bose. They have phenomenal products but the sad tendency to market them in magazine versions of infomercials. And while they’re still able to attract customers through their 1950’s style product advertisements, I think they could do so much more business by bringing their marketing into this decade.
I’m not suggesting they need to be flashy, that’s not what Bose is about. They’re an engineering brand full of audio scientists making the best stuff on earth (or so they seem). But adding a little bit of relevance would be nice.
… just so long as it involves nudity. Drumroll please… Abercrombie and Fitch has lauched Gilly Hicks of Sydney, an underwear company complete with an Austrailan sun-drenched backstory. It’s sort of like Abbie Winters, but for perfect people. There’s some debate around whether it is a real brand launch and that they’ll later actually sell things, or whether their design is solely to get attention and put some sexy in Abercromie since they can’t have their models ride horses in the nude anymore. Which, by the way, the horses never liked.
Frankly, I don’t care either way but I like the approach purely for marketing purposes. You build a backstory, enhance the brand with imagery, continue to sell teenage fantasy. Of course, some argue that it isn’t teenage fantasy but rather fantasy about teenagers — and they may have a point here. But I still like the move and the video made me want to move to Australia.
Agency Spy is stronger than I am in resisting cheap, senseless jokes about aging rock stars. Be that as it may, Leather Face is the new face of Louis Vuitton, who has decided that they might just be a little too glamour-bling for the changing recessionary times.
While that may be true, I’m not sure that an aging Keith Richards is what the brand needs right now. He lacks the sophistication and relevance to bring younger customers to the venerable brand and I’m not convinced that he’s going to make the older ones consider returning to the store with freshly minted money. And while I’m in an area of complete conjecture I’ll go ahead and question his International appeal, one segment that is still clicking for Louis Vuitton.
But a strange thing does happen sometimes when formulating a brand strategy. You look at all your deficits, your attributes and your values and realize that a gradual shift won’t do the brand any good because it will be too incremental for anyone to notice. You realize that what your brand needs is a bit of seismic change. So you decide to swing wildly to the other side of the spectrum with the foregone conclusion that you’ll pull the brand back to the middle ground within 6 months to a year. The press notices, blogs notice and if you’re lucky your customers notice. You’re able to bring it back to the center before your successful consumer conversation transforms itself into alienation. Maybe that’s the thought here. Maybe.
A client pointed me to Firefly tonics on Thursday, and I still haven’t gotten over them and their cool looking website over at fireflytonics.com. I can’t quite pinpoint all of their references at this early hour, but it appears there’s a dash of Jones Soda’s user generated photos, a bit of Glaceau’s trademark functionality and maybe some Izze mixed in with a nice enhanced backstory of adventure and experimentation. Coming soon to a store near you– a whole lot sooner if you live in the UK.
First of all, I need someone to do a voiceover for my life. Everything just seems that much more important and dramatic when told by a booming voice over a subtle soundtrack. Secondly, whatever happened to “American Design?” Does the term still exist in any form outside the walls of Chevrolet? As we’ve all become citizens of the world and extra-American products are considered better, is there still a core aesthetic, and if so what is it?
It’s a timely get-back-to-heritage announcement given sales and the success of PINK, Victoria’s Secret’s college sub-brand which is likely putting pressure on the brand from the bottom…so to speak. So the strategy is sound, but how will they execute it?
Communications and product nomenclature is likely the first step but I doubt it will really sink in until the stores are redesigned to bring a bit of the sensuality back into the brand.
The green trend and the recession trend seem to be on a collision course and something is going to have to give. It’s no secret that brands have been pushing green as a way to appease customers as well as clean up their corporate image, but what will happen in a down market?
All the research that I’ve seen says the predictable. Customers want to buy green products and they want corporations to be green as long as they don’t have to pay more for the product itself. We’ve been calling this “values added” marketing but it could just as well be called “holy shit.” Now you have corporations who are pushing green, most without maintaining a price point, and you have customers who are becoming increasingly mindful of their pocketbooks.
My prediction is that green will continue to move in upscale categories and categories like automotive where there is a bottom line benefit for customers. In the mid and lower markets it will move back to corporate image and away from products since customers don’t typically cough up the money right away to help a corporate image. Longer term the future of the trend is anyone’s guess. Make yours in the comment section below.
I hereby submit into evidence: Monocle magazine. A beautifully produced, edited – nay, curated - magazine of cultural artifacts that makes you feel slightly better traveled, more experienced and a generally superior human being after a good cover-to-cover read. Monocle is to 2000 and 8 what WallPaper was to the 90’s, that is if you believe deep culture is the new veneer.
Moreover, Monocle is expanding into a beautiful array of products including the custom-designed city bike (damn I wish I didn’t live in San Francisco), fragrances and bags. Check it out.
Sunday’s New York Times broke the Lone Star, the new 18-wheeler from NaviStar and the latest product category to bring design to the forefront as a competitive advantage. Not only does it look great, taking vintage styling from the 1930’s D Series trucks, but I dare say it also brings a little bit of Airstream comfort to the road in an effort to lure a new generation of truckers who buy their hats from Diesel rather than the truck stop.
