Video

Beats ‘Color’ reminiscent of iPod branding

11 Jan

Beats has created quite a superb brand since its inception just six years ago which allows it to charge an astronomical premium on audio equipment. Of course it’s easier to build a brand if you have a front man like Andre Young aka Dr Dre – who let’s face it, is hands down the coolest man in hip hop – and shareholders like will.i.am.

But Beats’ marketing campaigns are snappy, clever and engaging and also helped create the brand. Perhaps one of the best was its Olympic ambush marketing campaign. Beats seeded headphones with high profile athletes which resulted in them indirectly endorsing the brand – either via their social media channels or wearing the products ahead of their events. The Guardian reported ‘Beats headphones have been almost ubiquitous in the Aquatics Centre with swimmers including Michael Phelps using them to block background noise before races.’ This was a beautifully brilliant tactic to gain celebrity association and mass exposure of the brand.

The latest campaign from Beats appeared in the run-up to Christmas which featured a mix of musicians such as will.i.am, Nicole Scherzinger, Lil Wayne and Ellie Goulding, along with an assortment of other figures such as Robin Van Persie and ‘ordinary’ folk who won a competition to feature in the advert. It’s a nice piece of communication (included below) which helps to show the youthful vibrancy and personality of the brand.

However, it strikes a strong similarity to Apple iPod and iTunes advertising (a large selection can be seen here). Apple too used celebrities, vibrant colours, the latest music and fast-paced dancing to showcase the products. One such spot for the iPod Nano which appeared in 2009 is embedded below. This particular advert both wonderfully builds the iPod and Apple brand but it also communicates the new video feature in a beautifully simple and engaging way.

Of course, they are both consumer musical electronic products aimed at similar demographics – young folk with a natural interest in music – so you would expect a fair amount of creative crossover. But the spots are terribly similar in their style – fast-paced, music at the heart of the story, people focused with the individuals embracing the product and a colourful connection between product and the user.

Beats has got itself a quality brand and it is no shame to take creative guidance / inspiration from old school iPod communication.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Every word matters

7 Jul

Every word that is written and spoken by people in a position of power or responsibility is re-read, scrutinised and critiqued. And with the growing global reach of the internet and social media enabling the mass ability to share opinion it has never been more crucial that words are chosen carefully.

I came across an article in the London Evening Standard which demonstrates the importance of selecting the right words. Lewisham Council regeneration supremo Nigel Adams is commenting on various development plans in the London borough. He’s quoted saying: ‘However, the regeneration is being achieved with private money as well as public cash.’ The section of the article is  pictured below:

At first you might think there isn’t anything wrong with a single word in this short statement. But read it and re-read it, then think about the final word ‘cash.’ It’s informal, flippant even, and with public finances under such a squeeze public officials have to be seen to be treating public finances with utmost respect. A formal word such as finances or money would have been more suitable in this situation.

Those tasked with representing their organisation in public mediums have to realise that every single word needs to be considered carefully before releasing it into the wild. And the media and public can be savage if  a stance is not positioned in the right way and the most effective words used.

Tags: , , ,

How social media sold OMGPOP to Zynga

17 May

Image

Until late March, OMGPOP was a little known game developer limping along and was running desperately low on money. This was until it created Draw Something. The game became an overnight sensation, catapulting the company into the mainstream and leading to its $180 million purchase by Zynga. The game’s addictive fun got people hooked but it was social media that generated mass awareness and spread the product virally.

OMGPOP hadn’t advertised or undertaken traditional PR but it became hugely successful within a matter of weeks. People shared their sketches, talked about the game and challenged their friends to play through their online social networks. The game quickly gained popularity as celebrities tweeting about the game – such as Stephen Fry and Jimmy Fallon – created a huge amount of additional buzz. The rise of OMGPOP demonstrates perfectly the evolution of brand communication. The ability of social media to spread publicity and corporate messages means it’s now arguably more powerful now than traditional media.

Social media has changed the way that products are marketed and brands are built. Previously companies had to funnel their message through the media. This either involved brands earning placement in news or feature articles or paying for the privilege to appear. While these more traditional methods are still important and are an effective way for brands to reach their audiences as part of an integrated comms approach, social media offers a bigger opportunity to reach more people and create more buzz. The Guardian.co.uk, as an example, has daily unique visits of just over four million (March 2012) while Facebook had 483 million daily active users on average in December 2011 and 1.36 million visited Pintrest per day in March. Social media also enables brands to create campaigns that are highly targeted and reach the right audience. This shows the scale of social media and the opportunity brands have to reach a large audience but also the right one.

Despite there being a potential huge audience in the hundreds of millions, brands won’t get noticed if they don’t capture people’s attention. So what underpins any social media strategy is content that forces people to read, watch or listen and then share it round their network. This is why Draw Something exploded in popularity. The sketches that people drew and the game itself were the content that captured people’s attention and made them share around their social media sites. So while social is the platform, it’s great content that engages people and creates the buzz.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Nike, digital and its relationship with customers

12 May

Who does digital and who does it well?

There are many companies proclaiming they do digital. Only some have actually done intelligent things in digital. Then there’s even fewer that are actually doing intelligent things on a regular basis. While only the very few have incorporated it into the wider business and its becoming part of who the company is. However, of all the companies who actually do digital, there’s perhaps none better than Nike.

Nike has embraced digital communications and realise its value of creating, building and enhancing relationships with its customers. Whether it’s NikePlus, mobile apps or social media content that begs to be watched and shared (as per the below video which was part of the FuelBand campaign), you have to appreciate the brilliance of Nike’s digital strategy.

Nike used to rely on the mass media to convince customers to buy its products. However, Nike now uses digital to create a more lasting and intelligent edge to its marketing and brand building. As Stefan Orlander, VP Digital Sport, Nike, said at the launch of his co-authored book Velocity: “Once you have established a direct relationship with a consumer, you don’t need to advertise to them.” Therefore Nike has used its digital services in order to latch onto customers in order to develop a deeper and more meaningful relationship. And once this relationship has been created and nurtured, the customer will be more inclined to buy Nike and also advocate on behalf of the brand.

The below video (via the link) of Stefan speaking at the WIRED Business Conference is definitely worth a watch. In it he discusses the thinking behind some of Nike’s digital initiatives including the FuelBand, NikePlus and sharing data with its customers.

Nike on digital at WIRED Business Conference

Tags: , , , , , ,

Brand exclusivity perfected by German techno

29 Mar

Image

The abandoned power station situated on the former border of West and East Berlin can only be described as an institution. People queue for hours to get in even on a sub-zero morning in March. We joined the back of the line, fully aware of the daunting prospect that lay ahead. The base rang louder as we slowly snaked through the queue caged in by a metal cattle gate. We were eventually greeted by a troll of a man, half his face coloured with tattoos and studded with piercings. Not even glancing at us, he extended his arm towards the exit and growled ‘nein’. It was a swift rejection after a lengthy wait.

We were not alone in our rejection. There is no apparent reason why we and around half the people who try are turned away from Berghain. The club is not a place you wander across by accident. The people slowly flowing in the queue are there because they’ve researched Berlin’s nightlife or they’ve heard others preach about the club. People are fully aware about the challenge of getting in and the potential for a set back to the night but still take the risk because of its reputation. The story of the strict and apparent random door policy has added to Berghain’s prestige and brand. It’s simple really – if you know something has an air of exclusivity, it makes it all the more alluring.

This is also the same for marketing. If brands can create an air of exclusivity about them, they will ultimately create demand and a higher value. One example is of course luxury brands – whether champagne, a member’s club or car – which are aimed at the few and are exclusive due to high cost. Brands like Dior, Moet and Armani have perfected their image However, it’s not just cost that can create an unreasonable desire. Limited offers, the specific targeting at a demographic and invite only will also entice and fuel a craving for people to belong. Exclusivity is perhaps the easiest part to achieve as brands can limit who they sell to. But it is a far greater challenge for brands to create the desire for people to yearn to be part of the exclusive experience.

Berghain has perfected it. Would I queue up again, in the cold, with a high chance of rejection? Of course I would, without a second thought.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Brands need to get social with TV

5 Feb

Social networks have changed the way we watch TV. Now instead of our attention squarely focused on the content which is being broadcast, people are increasingly using their laptops, tablets and smartphones to engage with it as well. But the TV is not being left out in the cold when people ‘dual-screen’ as they’re also usually interacting with the programme online.

People will be posting their opinion about the show on Facebook and Twitter and even Googling it. Savvy production companies are getting in on the act by creating interactive online experiences to keep people within properties they own. Tellybug, develops apps that accompanies popular TV shows. They developed the ‘tap-to-clap’ app for The X Factor which allows people to cheer or boo contestants. Programmes such as The Bank Job encourage people to play online. And to play, Channel 4 makes them hand over personal information which can be sold to advertisers to create more targeted advertising.

The bringing together of the offline and online worlds has mutual benefits. For the programme, viewing figures are likely to be boosted. If people’s social feeds are lit up about a show, they are likely to be intrigued and tune in themselves. However, there are bucket loads of opportunities for marketers, the majority of which have not been exploited. The biggest opportunity lies in using people’s passion for the show and the talkability it generates.

Marketers have only been able to show any kind of affinity to a show and the surrounding brand by sponsorship or advertising that merely annoys people. Brands need to throw themselves into the online debate surrounding a show, in doing so will forge a deeper bond with a show’s audience. They can do this by buying search engine keywords or sponsored trends or hashtags on Twitter to make sure when people search online they find the brand. They can also post content about the show which their fans and followers want to share are their social network. What brands essentially need is a strong digital footprint and engaging content which complements the TV content people are watching.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Facebook is a $100 billion company

29 Jan

There’s a frenzy from Silicon Valley to Wall Street as Facebook gears up for its IPO that’s expected to raise $10 billion and value the eight-year-old company at $100 billion. If as expected, Facebook files next week, it’ll be the hottest tech flotation since Google in 2004. Analysts, bankers, tech executives and the media have been lining up to question Facebook’s lofty valuation. Many say that a value of $100 billion for a business that reportedly rakes in under $4 billion in revenue is insane. However, if we look back at recent history the valuation seems spot on.

Google and Facebook may serve different purposes but they have many similarities. They are both businesses funded almost entirely by pay-per-click advertising and to ultimately succeed they need to court the attention of marketers. They are also quite frankly worldwide phenomenons and companies that fundamentally changed the internet. When Google filed in 2004, it raised $1.67 billion with a valuation of $23 billion, this was on revenue of just under $1 billion. The valuation was around 23 times its revenue. It seemed high to many, but now Google reports revenues of $37.9 billion and its shares have grown 435 per cent since 2004. If one bought shares at Google’s initial public offering, it would be fair to say it was a shrewd investment.

If we look at Facebook’s figures they are already impressive and there’s the potential for high-growth. A $100 billion valuation would be roughly 25 times the current revenue of the company. This mirrors Google’s situation in 2004. But the real statistics investors should be looking at are the 800 million active users; the 50 per cent who log on daily; the 900 million objects people interact with; the seven million apps and websites tied to Facebook; and the 350 million active users who currently access Facebook through their mobile devices. Facebook has a large, engaged user base, a strong presence on mobile and ever growing insight into everyone on the site. This personal information is a valuable commodity for marketers as they crave more intelligent, targeted advertising. Facebook has made a lot of friends among advertisers who have poured billions into the company. Brands and marketing agencies will continue to pour billions more into Facebook as its user base grows, more apps and websites marry to its social graph and it continues to mature as a service. And this is why Facebook is a $100 billion company.

Tags: , , , , ,

Google: This time, it’s personal

13 Jan

Google’s mission is to ‘organise the world’s information’ and it has done a fine job over the past decade or so by bringing order to the web’s trillion+ pages. But the web has changed since Google was incorporated in 1998. The web is no longer static and the content that makes up the internet has been democratised. Instead of a minority updating the internet, now everyone in the world can impact the make-up of the web. The web has gone social.

So Google has launched Search plus Your World to make its search results more personal in response to the rise of the social web. It wants to do this to make sure the best and most relevant results are returned. The search giant will now include social data from its fledgling social network Google+ to complement search results, complete with information from people’s social graph. Now if someone wants to find information about a car, they will not only get links to pages of car manufacturers, but also comments, pictures and other content about cars from their Google+ network at the top of the page.

There are critics of Google’s move and many say it’s twisting search results in order to boost the profile of its own social network. Twitter’s general counsel Alex Macgillivray has been vocal and said it’s a “bad day for the internet”. Twitter expects that its own content will be sidelined and that Google+ will be given undue prominence in search results. But Google says it cannot index content from Facebook and Twitter as the networks do not allow it to crawl their pages for data.

For many, Google is the gateway to the internet and how they find information aboutevents, their passions and products. So for brands, social search will be important because it adds another factor to the way Google ranks pages for different keywords. We might see some brands being forced to reconsider the importance of Google+ as a social network to reach out to their target audience – because Google has played its trump card to make it significant: search.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Facebook vs Google: Let battle commence

2 Nov

A multi-billion war is raging as internet businesses battle to gain control over two of the most important commodities in today’s economy – time and data. Google, so long the darling of the internet is being steadily supplanted by Facebook, the new superpower. Google created its business by connecting people to the web’s resources, while Facebook has created one of the most exciting and fastest growing companies by connecting people to each other. However, Facebook, with the announcement at F8, has set a new course from not just connecting people to each other, but also to things, ideas and media. Facebook has introduced a range of features over the past few years in order to give people a reason to log in and stay inside its empire. And with the ability to read the news on The Guardian, listen to music on Spotify, or watch a film on Netflix, all within its walls, Facebook is trying to become a social entertainment hub. In doing so, it is encouraging people to view Facebook as the first destination on the internet and then give them no reason to browse anywhere else.

 

Facebook’s growing popularity is a big problem for Google. Facebook is a walled garden which effectively means that Google cannot index any of the content on the site. Google makes billions organising the web, but if it cannot index a large and growing section of that audience, its business is going to suffer. Google is obviously very concerned and its chief internet evangelist Vint Cerf made a rather bold statement saying Facebook must open up or it would suffer the same fate as AOL. Google has also responded to the rise of Facebook by trying to create its own social experience. So far, Google has failed: Wave was scrapped; Google+, despite an initial growth spurt, looks like it’s confined to the technology community; while Google’s only real social success is YouTube, which it acquired.

 

Facebook’s F8 announcements are so significant because they will attract people to the site, keep them there for longer and arm Facebook with greater insight into them. You log into Facebook, tell it who you are, where you’ve been, what you like to watch, listen to and read. While you are doing this, Facebook is getting a 360-degree picture of who you are and the type of things that will catch your attention. This data is the kind of information that advertisers crave, as brands seek a more sophisticated approach to advertising. For decades advertisers adopted a scattergun approach – firing campaigns at a mass audience in hope that their messages would potentially hit the right people. Facebook is now offering access to a mass audience, but it’s also offering advertisers access to the right audience. If Facebook can offer up adverts on your profile which are crafted especially for you, there’s a greater chance you’ll click on it and therefore earn money for the company and its advertising network partners.

 

Oil is one of the most valuable commodities in the world; companies go to the ends of the earth to get it and countries have gone to war for it. It has been said that data is the new oil, and Google and Facebook have squared up to drill for as much information about people in the world as they can. If these businesses can attract you to their online properties, they get your time and data. Both of these are essential to sell to advertisers. The war these two internet giants are fighting is one of the biggest battles in business today. The company which can mine the most data will ultimately succeed and will win a huge slice of the multi-billion pound internet advertising market.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Can jazzy colours conquer the iPad?

15 Apr

Packard Bell will be the latest computer hardware manufacturer to enter into the tablet fray when it launches an offering in June.

Packard hope to stand out, in what is increasingly an extremely crowded market, be selling their tablets in a range of colours. At first it seems like a weak strategy to take on the might of Apple, but it may turn out to be an interesting tactic.

As the majority of tablets which aren’t from Apple all run an Android OS, Packard Bell could be giving themselves an opportunity to differentiate themselves by offering colour customisation.

It also signals an interesting shift at who tablets are being postioned towards. As with most new technologies tablets were scooped up by the early adopters – the kind of technology geeks that wait for hours outside Apple stores to get the latest product first.

However it appears tablets are starting to be aimed at a wider consumer audience. It will be interesting over the coming months to see whether we begin to see a change in how tablets are publicised by PR agencies and marketing departments. It may herald a shift away from articles about technical specifications and a move towards stories which have lighter and fluffier angles.

Tags: , , , ,

What answers does Facebook Questions give to marketers?

6 Apr

Facebook has continued its conquest on the whole of social media by officially launching ‘Facebook Questions’. The service allows users to post questions and have them answered by their friends and their friends’ network; this helps to spread the Q&A in a viral like way. It basically means people can get answers and responses to their burning questions from their trusted network.

Brands have already recognised the huge potential of marketing on Facebook and many have developed a dedicated Facebook presence (for a consumer facing brand a Facebook page is now essential). There have been some fantastic ways in which brands have engaged with the Facebook fraternity. Skittles asked Facebookers to bury a man in the sweets, every new ‘Like’ meant sugary treats were poured onto the man.

Now Facebook Questions gives brands a genuinely exciting way to engage their followers and potential followers in a two way conversation they actually want to be a part of. The potential is huge, as now brands can not only reach their Facebook fans but also their fans’ friends. This essentially gives brands a chance to get their message to a new audience. The service will allow brands to gauge opinion, conduct market research or crowd source for inspiration  in an extremely effective and almost instant way from their audience.

However, there are a number of potential pitfalls that brands could face when using Facebook Questions. Kia invested heavily in its social media strategy and after experimenting has developed some nice engagement. Kia UK’s digital marketing manager, John Bache, quickly realised that the brand received less interest in posts if they try to sell to people. He recently told Marketing Week: “One thing we have noticed is that if we ask people to watch a video, or try to push product related messages to them, interaction with those posts is a lot less than if we ask for user generated content, such as ‘where did you take your Kia this weekend?’”

This anecdotal evidence of marketing on Facebook just goes to show that if Facebook Questions is used incorrectly, brands will struggle to engage fans with the service. Just using Facebook Questions in an obvious way – trying to sell to people or shouting corporate ,messaging at them – will not work effectively. People log onto Facebook to socialise and not to be advertised at, so marketing on Facebook needs to talk to people in an interesting and genuine way.  If companies talk at people and don’t engage them in a conversation, people will show their disapproval by disliking the brand on Facebook and in the real world as well.

Tags: , , , ,

Lucozade needs to refocus its marketing energy

19 Mar

When you think of Lucozade you immediately think of sport. So Lucozade’s ties with the Premier League and its high-energy sports association works and makes sense.

However Lucozade has partnered with Spotify for the months of March and May to offer drinkers a chance to win free access to Spotify’s Premium service. It seems a bit of a bizarre partnership considering music lovers are a world apart from Lucozade’s traditional core market.

If Lucozade are trying to tap into a new audience then this type of promotion is perhaps a sensible way to do it. But the Lucozade/Spotify deal only lasts until the end of May – and two months to win over a new market is simply not long enough.

Also with Gatorade – the goliath of the sports drink market in America – planning on a marketing push in the UK this summer, positioning it as the ‘resource for athletes and amateur fitness fans’, it may be a wiser strategy for Lucozade to focus its energy on defending their current market position.

Tags: , ,

Online retailers earn loyalty at a cost

2 Jan

A host of online retailers took the brave decision to stop taking Christmas orders because of a delivery backlog caused by the bad weather in December. Amazon normally guarantees delivery in time for Christmas on the 23rd, but stopped accepting Christmas orders a few days earlier. It was also joined by others including John Lewis and Argos. While Firebox and Debenhams said they could not deliver to certain areas of the county due to the weather.

Now you can see their thinking – they didn’t want thousands of angry people creating negative noise online and also ringing customer service departments on Christmas Eve and demanding to know where their presents were. Perhaps a sensible approach, but in doing this they lost out on bundles of cash, which may have been scooped up by their rivals.

Geoff Galat, Worldwide VP of Marketing at Tealeaf, posted an interesting article on Econsultancy discussing brand loyalty for online shoppers. He argues people’s loyalty towards retailers has diminished as they turn to the internet to shop. This is no doubt due to the ease in which people can browse and shop around online compared to the high street.

So retailers could have taken the short-term view that people will not be loyal anyway, so they may as well take their cash and renegade on their customer service commitments. But the majority took the long-term view and are trying to build a good relationship with their customers in order to earn their loyalty. Galat goes onto argue that if retailers get their customer service right, they’ll build a loyal customer base. And because of social media these people may become an advocate of the brand.

It was of course the correct decision by these brands to stop taking orders for Christmas. Online retailers have very few differentiators, they offer the same products, at the generally the same price, with the same delivery timescales. But what can set them apart is customer service. There would be nothing worse than disappointing thousands of people for Christmas and it would diminish all hope of building a positive relationship. By being open and honest with their customers, online retailers took a positive step to creating brand loyalty by building trust.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Sir Sorrell supports data for more scientific communication

21 Dec

When Martin Sorrell speaks people listen. So a few ears perked up after he gave an interview to the Telegraph suggesting the Coalition’s austerity programme is the envy of our American cousins.

But what caught my attention was that the man in charge of communications behemoth WPP said that data is the thing that excites him most. I agree with him (not just because he heads up a company which owns a huge chunk of the industry which I hope to progress in and he’s pretty much always right anyway) because more scientific and logical thinking creates better communication.

Companies have always craved a greater understanding of consumers. Account planning in advertising was developed to give creative work more of a scientific basis. The practice is the brainchild of legendary adman Stanley Pollitt, who felt his clients deserved advertising that was less reliant on gut feeling and more on logical insights.

The use of data can be effectively used across marketing to great effect, if you know how people tick, you know how to communicate to them. Tesco’s Clubcard loyalty programme is a great example of how data about consumers can be used to obtain a detailed understanding of their behaviour. Although Tesco harvests a vast amount of data there have been very few concerns raised about privacy, this is down to the fact that the scheme is opt-in. People want to be part of the scheme and can see its benefits due to useful vouchers being sent to them.

Just as Tesco uses its data to ensure it only sends relevant vouchers to its Clubcard members, there has been a growing trend of marketers who want targeted communication. Alexia Quadrani, who covers the advertising industry for JP Morgan Chase in New York, rightly says: “To do that effectively you need the data.”

As technology has developed it has made it easier to get data, Tesco were on able to launch the Clubcard scheme after magnetic strips on cards made it cost effective to track individual’s behaviour. The Internet is now an essential part of many of our lives and it has meant there are more opportunities for our likes, dislikes and behaviour to be tracked and ana

lysed.

But this lust from marketers to gather data also raises serious concerns about privacy. Facebook has got in a world of trouble about its privacy issues. Mark Zuckerberg, in what turned out to be a massive PR gaffe, famously said ‘the age of privacy is over’. However the data from its users’ profiles is exactly the kind of stuff advertisers crave. That’s why advertising on Facebook is so powerful, as it uses people’s profile information such as their age/gender/location/likes to ensure only relevant ads are shown on people’s pages. On my Facebook page adverts include those about football, poker and things to do in London. All fairly accurate and things that would catch my attention, therefore I would be more likely to click on them. Although people have freely entered information on Facebook, there have still been various complaints about the way Facebook uses the data to sell to advertisers, many saying it is a gross invasion of privacy.

Also as more and more people get smartphones and as apps are widely downloaded and used, there has been concerns raised about how some developers are using their apps to mine consumer data. The Wall Street Journal recently broke a story about how various apps have been sending personal data – such as location, age, gender and other personal details – in order to gain a detailed analysis of people in order to sell onto marketers. The more that is known about a person the more revenue that can be generated, for example ads targeted by location bring in two to five times as much money as untargeted ads.

Marketers like targeted advertising as instead of using a megaphone tactic, shouting their message at a crowd and hoping it’ll be heard by at least some relevant people, they are getting targeted, sophisticated and their message to the right audience. Also because it’s targeted they are willing to pay for more for it, so there is a big market out there for companies that can provide information about people and their behaviour.

Some find it creepy and invasive they are receiving advertising that’s targeted and personal to them, personally I find it useful as I am increasingly seeing things that interest me. There is no point advertising a Venus razor at me – because although the lady showcasing the Greek goddess type qualities may catch my attention – as there’s no way I’ll ever buy one.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Ladies: does boohoo speak to you?

10 Dec

Boohoo.com's first poster in their advertising campaign

When I first saw the advert for online shopping website boohoo.com on a giant poster in London, I smiled. It was a great piece of communication, beautifully simple, yet wonderfully powerful.

The advert spoke to its audience so well. The clothes look wonderful, the language used (OMG) is the language that would be common in their lives, and the first model who was used (picture above) looked like the kind of girl girls want to be friends with. The clothes pictured and named in the copy (playsuit, clutch, jumpsuit) are only things that the target audience will know about, so the ad creates a sense that they are ‘in’ on the message of the advertising.

But what makes this advertising really work is the model, her expression captures you attention, draws you in and it reinforces the message. It communicates that boohoo provides the shopping experience that women crave – that they should fall in love with their clothes and they should excite them.

However the follow up spots disappointed me (one of them is below). They had the same copy, the same style, the same feel but they were wrong. This was all because of the model. Not only do they look far less friendly, like the kind of girl who would say she liked a friend’s new clutch but then bitch about it behind her back and then no doubt try and seduce her boyfriend round the back of a club by some bins. Also their faces have a strange expression and does not paint a picture of shock or excitement.

One of the follow up spots for boohoo.com

For advertising to make a full impact every little detail has to be perfect. In the case of boohoo.com the first in the series was spot on, but the follow ups, although near identical, were not as effective. The models were not effectively communicating boohoo’s brand values that were pouring out from the first spot.

Tags: , ,

Creative marketing needs creative marketing

5 Dec

Adidas’ miCoach app was launched a while agi with a bit of a bang through a high-profile advertising campaign featuring a string of the brand’s star athletes. According to the company spiel, the app allows people with smartphones to turn their device into a personal trainer. The award-winning miCoach app is itself a piece of marketing for Adidas, but no doubt the aim of the advertising campaign was to create an online buzz through Twitter and YouTube and help the video go viral, much in the same way Nike’s World Cup advert did earlier this year.

The online buzz which the Adidas spot was intended to create would have helped drive people to Adidas’ website and towards the iPhone application. Even with so many stars crammed into a one minute spot the advert was far from epic despite the potential, in fact it only generated just over 200,000 views compared to Nike’s effort which was seen well over 20 million times

Adidas also managed to get a couple of decent hits in some top publications through a bit of PR work. There were stories featuring Adidas’ sponsored athletes including Chris Hoy on the Daily Mail Online, Andy Murray in the Sun, and David Davies (swimmer) on Skysport.co.uk. Now some nice hits, but the miCoach is not the narrative of the story, it merely gets a scant mention at the end. The launch of the app also managed to generate a bit of coverage in the marketing, tech and some high-profile titles, and it also continues to be mentioned in various fitness related articles in the press.

Don’t get me wrong the app is a fantastic idea and a great way for a sports brand to connect with its market and build brand loyalty. However the whole communication plan for the app has been below par compared to the amount of potential the app presents; therefore the app would be best promoted through a digital campaign.

The campaign is all about using the app to reach the top of your game and becoming the best you can be. The advertising implies that these top athletes are helped in their quest for excellence by the miCoach app and therefore indirectly by Adidas. In order for the marketing potential for the app to be reached I would launch the miCoach challenge through a digital campaign.

The focus of the campaign would be a mission to turn ordinary people into the best athletes they can be. Adidas would find people with average fitness around the country and then over a course of three/four months these people would use the miCoach app to train with the aim of improving their fitness. People from different areas of the country would be chosen who compete in different sports. The variance in gender, geography, and sports would help engage a wide audience throughout the UK.

The central focus of the campaign would be a microsite with interactive features, such as blogs and vlogs from the competitors who could talk about their training with a personal slant. People could comment on the blogs/vlogs and offer encouragement and ask questions. Addidas’ sponsored athletes could also be filmed training with the competitors and the videos put on the site. The athletes could answer questions and host webcasts from the public sent in through Twitter, email and text.

Various social media applications can be embedded into the site including Twitter and Flickr, where the competitors could engage with their followers. Adidas’ sports scientists would track the progress of the competitors throughout the period the campaign is taking place, and the winner would be the person who has improved their fitness the most. As a follow up challenge they could all participate in the London Marathon and the person who finished first would be crowned the ultimate champion. The marathon lends itself to a great digital campaign as the competitors could be fitted with GPS in order to track their progress throughout the marathon.

The microsite would help build a community around the miCoach app and help allow it to become the focus of the marketing campaign instead of in the background. People are bombarded with so much marketing that is becoming easier to ignore, so therefore brands need to think creatively in order to connect with their audiences.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Should brands ignore their bad press?

22 Nov

News broke earlier this month that Amazon were selling a how to guide for paedophiles on its online bookstore, however after receiving a bit of a backlash in the media and on Twitter the book was promptly removed. Various journos were looking for comment but were faced by an Amazon media blackout. Claudine Beaumont of the Telegraph displayed her displeasure, she Tweeted ‘Utterly hacked off at Amazon press office. They’ve stonewalled journalists all day on this ebook story. Why bother employing PRs?’ Rory Cellan-Jones of the BBC responded by Tweeting: ‘totally agree re Amazon…but bet they’ll be on the phone about an e-Christmas any minute…’.

It’s not particularly surprising that journalists were ignored, as this is a controversial story and Amazon’s higher ups were no doubt concerned that by responding they could make the situation worse. By not commenting they may have also hoped to take the sting out of the story and push it down the news agenda.

Amazon’s communications team have to assess whether ignoring the journos and the story would do more damage than responding to the story. But as the festive season is fast approaching Amazon needs to get as much media coverage as possible in order to drive sales. But by angering the media they will be doing themselves no favours among within media circles  and may find it tough to sell in their news to these journalists.

Now, it’s sometimes a PR’s role in a crisis to make sure nothing is said to make sure a situation doesn’t become worse, and fair play to Amazon’s communication team if this was the plan, as they did it pretty well. But now as the media has moved online and social media has exploded is it not better to be involved in the bad news debate about your own brand, rather than ignoring it and hoping it goes away? Is the silence worse than wading in and potentially saying something that could do damage to the brand?

Tags: , , , , ,

Is the X Factor sacrificing the public’s trust for ratings?

8 Nov

As she fell to the floor of the X Factor stage and had a hissy fit, the hopes of the nation rose – could this be the week Katie ‘The Weasel’ Waissel finally got knocked out of the competition. But alas it was not to be, the most hated girl in Britain lives to sing another week.

But although it all kicked off on Twitter/Facebook/Blogs and in the mainstream media, it should not come as a surprise to anyone why the judges chose to save Waissel. PR is more important to the X Factor than real talent will ever be. Waissel is a controversial kooky character, who generates publicity for the show, which helps keep viewing figures high and in turn generates more revenue. Despite spelling her name in a daft way, Treyc Cohen, is like watching beige paint dry, she is frankly boring and as such has not received the same attention and media coverage as other contestants.

Some in our industry say all publicity is good publicity. Yes, the scandal of the judges keeping Waissel in the show may keep people interested for a short while, but it will do serious long term damage to X Factor’s brand. We are told the X Factor is about finding a new singing sensation, and as the less talented but media friendly acts are spared at the expense of the talented, people may begin to feel they are being manipulated and lose faith in the X Factor brand.

It is the same for any brand who are operating across any sector, trust is so important. If organisations begin to sacrifice their principles for desperate attempts to get in the media it will affect their long term credibility among their audiences and markets.

Tags: , , , , , ,

How to pass the buck in the media

28 Oct

The longer I work in the communication biz I cannot look at a story without thinking who has placed it and the reason it is in the media. So when I saw an interesting story in the BBC earlier titled ‘Local Councils in England have £14bn in reserve’ it got me thinking.

The BBC ‘learned’ about the information so it has obviously been leaked to them, but for what reason and by who?

So you have to ask, what will the people reading the story think when they read it, also who benefits from this story and what they are trying to achieve by placing it?

We only have to go back a week and to the Coalition’s Comprehensive Spending Review. Now there were a lot of cuts that were announced by George Osborne, but the deepest of the cuts will fall on the local government budget at almost 30% over four years. With these deep cuts in the local government budget the Coalition’s strategy was to pass the tough decisions onto local councils, and as such help divert public resentment away from themselves.

However the Coalition has got a lot of bad media coverage nationally and locally about their decision to cut local government spending by so much. The BBC story is an attempt to deflect responsibility back onto local councils. By saying they have money in reserve and implying their coffers are bulging, the strategy behind this story is to once again put responsibility back on local government and show the public that any cuts are their own decisions and not that of the Coalition Government.

So this gives a reason why this story is in the media and also demonstrates that someone from within the government has given the BBC this information.

Tags: , , , ,

Waitrose gambles premium brand to attract price conscious shoppers

2 Oct

On the surface of it Waitrose’s latest marketing plan to match Tesco on 1000 branded goods seem a little bit strange.

The scheme has been backed up with a heavy TV, press, outdoor and email advertising campaign,  and the launch of the price match has also received a number of mentions in the media.

Waitrose has carved itself a lovely niche in the market by offering quality premium goods, which is different from the low cost strategy of Tesco and Asda.  It seems strange Waitrose wants to try and compete with the bargain supermarkets as it is already an extremely competitive end of the market; and an end that seems to demand a constant slew of the advertising in order to keep market share intact.

The timing of the price match is also bizarre. Why launch it now when the economy has recovered and not during the recession when value for money was high on the agenda? Also the thrust of this campaign is that they will match the price of Tesco, not beat it, not undercut them, not actually save anyone any money, so they are offering no unique benefit for people. It also does not match of the other several branded products that supermarkets offer.

A Waitrose shopper has been willing to pay a bit more for their weekly shop in a trade of for quality, they are the Marks and Spencer yummy mummy who are doing their big weekly shop.

So trying to position the supermarket in the same bracket as Tesco, one that is competitive on price, may also damage the brand’s reputation of quality.

However I think this campaign will work. It helps reassure existing customers they are not being ripped off by paying over the odds for the same items, and it will also help to draw in new customers as well. I can imagine this campaign has been launched after a lot of research in which the main finding was that people are intrigued by Waitrose but are put off because of the perceived high price of their goods.

But 19 years ago my mother, a regular Asda shopper, thought she would give Tesco a whirl after hearing it was a little bit better than Asda and just as cheap. So off to Tesco she went to do her regular weekly shop and to her horror she discovered that it had cost her over £10 more. She agreed that some of the goods were better, but she has never been back to Tesco to do her main shop since that day.

So the price match may work in dragging extra people in Waitrose, but once they discover that their shopping costs more the majority will soon revert back to their normal cheaper supermarket.

But a few may enjoy the experience and the food within Waitrose that they may decide to keep on shopping there. So I think this bold strategy will work for the company as it tries to snatch more market share in the ultra-competitive world of supermarket retail.

Tags: , , , ,

Ed’s union backing will strike a chord with Tory spin

26 Sep

The media are running with the line that Ed Miliband was elected as Labour leader - and the Conservatives are bound to pick up on this and run with it – is because of the support of the unions. As Nick Robinson on his BBC blog said: ‘ His brother David won the first three rounds of voting and won more support amongst MPs and MEPs and ordinary party members. What clinched the contest was the votes of union members – a fact that will be deployed ruthlessly by his political enemies.’

Now the Tories have the perfect attack on Ed Miliband and therefore the Labour Party. We have already seen a number of protests and strikes from unionised workers and as we all know major cuts will be coming in October, this will lead to more industrial action.

It gives the Tories a narrative to attack Labour and it gives the media a story. It is an extremely powerful message and one that is already no doubt being fleshed out by Tory strategists.

The Tories can paint Ed M as being indebted to the unions. It will be an extremely powerful line, one that will almost certainly be picked up by a media that is sympathetic to the government, and a message is likely the resonate with the pubic. Instead of people such as Bob Crow (head of the RMT union) becoming the cause of annoyance and figures of hate, it will become Ed Miliband and as such the Labour Party.

Although people will be angry at cuts to their services, they also get angry when their lives are disrupted. Look at the recent strikes by RMT workers that put a stop to large sections of the London Underground. People do not care about whether ticket offices remain open, what they do care about is that their journeying around London was disrupted. If the action of unionised members affect people’s lives the Tories will try to get Miliband to denounce them, if he does not they will say it is because they got him elected. This is not a new strategy, but it will be more powerful on Ed and will be more powerful because of the cuts that will be coming. It may help deflect some of the public anger away that is coming the Tories’ way and shift it onto Labour.

So how does Ed Miliband and Labour combat this forthcoming attack? Simple it needs to tell a story why the unions are striking and link it back to direct decisions the government has made.

Labour has to get across that they support the unionised members because they are ordinary hard-working people who are merely opposed to vicious cuts imposed by the coalition. Another powerful counter is that members are not striking to save their jobs but to protect the services that everyone in our country  rely upon. That they do not strike because of some dogma, they strike to try to save the services that people need, unlike Tory cuts which are driven by a party doctrine.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Coca-Cola has branding problem with Rooney

14 Sep

Wayne Rooney is the face of 'Bloke' Coke Zero

Wayne Rooney may be dropped by Coca-Cola after his alleged liaisons with hookers, according to reports in the press.

Coke’s top bods in Atlanta are apparently pushing the top bods in London to drop Rooney as they are worried it will hurt the brand’s family-friendly image.

If he is dropped he would lose a huge chunk out of endorsement deals – his deal with the drinks manufacturer is reportedly worth £600,000 a year.

It is a tough spot for Coca-Cola, as either keeping Rooney or dropping him could have consequences for the business, as its different brands appeal to different consumers.

Coleen Rooney is a role-model to young women in the UK and as such a role-model to the core market of Diet Coke. If Rooney is kept on it may turn women off the brand. Also Coca-Cola has positioned itself as a family-friendly brand. Women tend to do the shopping for households, if Coke continues to support Rooney it may turn mothers away from the brand and they may be less inclined to buy Coke’s products when doing the family shop.

However Coca-Cola’s other brands may suffer if Rooney is dropped. Rooney is paid by the company to represent their PowerAde and Coke Zero brands, both of these are geared towards a young male market. In fact Zero is often referred to as ‘Bloke Coke’ and PowerAde is pretty much wholly consumed by young men in the 18- to 30-year-old demographic.

They are unlikely to be particularly upset by Rooney’s infidelity (compared to women), as it is viewed as the laddish behaviour that is to be expected of a footballer and an ordinary bloke. A source (probably one of Coke’s London execs) hit home on this point, they said: “Americans cannot fathom the laddish culture that surrounds football.’’

And if Coke drops an icon for young lads/men this may also have an adverse affect on sales of Coca-Cola’s brand geared towards this end of the market.

The company is in a very tricky position as whatever it decision it makes on Rooney’s sponsorship deal it could have damaging effects on its overall brand, its individual brands and its sales.

Tags: , , , , ,

Will women walk if Nike continues to support sponsored athletes like Rooney and Woods?

11 Sep

Legendary Romanian tennis player Ilie Năstase had just won his second Grand Slam, triumphing over Nikola Pilić in straight sets at Roland Garros to win the 1973 French Open. He won the US Open the previous year and was now the World’s number one tennis player. So he seemed like an obvious choice to be paid to wear Blue Ribbon Sports’ new tennis shoe.

He was the first person the company endorsed and he would be the first in a long line of winners and champions that the company would align itself with. But Năstase was also a notorious womaniser, he was named by Maxim magazine in its top ten “Living Sex Legends” list, reportedly having slept with over 2,500 women. This was a sign of things to come for the company, as he would be first in a long line of their winners and champions who would cause sexual scandals. When Năstase’s career petered out in the late 70s Blue Ribbon Sports turned to a new tennis star. The company signed up John McEnroe in 1978 and in the same year renamed itself Nike Inc.

Sponsoring the world’s greatest athletes is a massive part of Nike’s marketing strategy and they now have sponsorship deals with thousands of sports stars and sports team around the world. And just like Ilie Năstase did, a raft of Nike’s sponsored athletes have caused scandal recently with lurid tales of their private lives.

A string of Nike’s athletes have been involved in murky sexual dealings recently. Wayne Rooney reportedly slept with vice girls, Tiger Woods cheated on his wife with a string of women, Christiano Ronaldo fathered a love child, Ashley Cole is now divorced after bedding a number of women, and Frank Ribery solicited sex from an underage prostitute.

But what happens to the public’s perception of Nike when their athletes go bad, does it adversely affect Nike’s brand and reputation and have a knock on effect on their sales?

Nike seem bullish about their long term sales prospects, they reckon by 2015 its revenue will have risen by 40% to $27 billion. But in the short term there has been a massive hit on one of their brands, sales of its Woods branded golf merchandise has slumped, this come at a time when golf apparel sales overall are on the up. But is this sales slide due to Woods’ infidelity or the fact he has not been playing as much golf, and when he has been playing he has not been winning?

So there seems to be a short term hit on one of Nike’s brands but what is the long term damage? Nike has stood by their athletes, generally releasing statements saying it is a private matter for the stars. But by standing by their athletes – and effectively not condoning their behaviour – is the company doing serious damage to its brand in the eyes of the public and specifically women?

We look at the actions of Rooney and Cole who have allegedly wronged their other halves, Coleen Rooney and Cheryl Cole, who are both role models and are viewed very positively by women in the UK. Would Nike supporting athletes such as Cole and Rooney have more of an effect on whether women choose Nike over its rivals, or does Nike’s association with top women athletes have more of an effect? What would be the stronger influence in the mind of women when choosing a sporting goods brand, is it positive role models the brand associates itself with or the brand not condoning the sleazy antics of its male athletes?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

How the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ has been positioned

24 Aug

'Ground Zero Mosque' protesters

There is a right old kick off in America about a muslim community centre and mosque planning to be built a few blocks away from the site of the World Trade Centre.

As Charlie Brooker puts it:
Millions are hopping mad over the news that a bunch of triumphalist Muslim extremists are about to build a “victory mosque” slap bang in the middle of Ground Zero.

The planned “ultra-mosque” will be a staggering 5,600ft tall – more than five times higher than the tallest building on Earth – and will be capped with an immense dome of highly-polished solid gold, carefully positioned to bounce sunlight directly toward the pavement, where it will blind pedestrians and fry small dogs. The main structure will be delimited by 600 minarets, each shaped like an upraised middle finger, and housing a powerful amplifier: when synchronised, their combined sonic might will be capable of relaying the muezzin’s call to prayer at such deafening volume, it will be clearly audible in the Afghan mountains, where thousands of terrorists are poised to celebrate by running around with scarves over their faces, firing AK-47s into the sky and yelling whatever the foreign word for “victory” is.”

The way the development has been framed by its opponents has been a fantastic piece of PR positioning. The term ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ provides a media friendly soundbite that sticks in people’s minds. It is a term that creates a powerful picture and one that stirs up emotion and controversy. Although the building is not really a mosque  and will not be built at Ground Zero. In fact it will be built nearly 200m away and will be community centre which will include a swimming pool, gym, theatre and various sports facilities.

Now the media has run with this story because it provides a fantastic narrative for them, it is controversial and there are two very vocal opposing sides of the debate.

Tags: , ,

How many adverts between Camberwell & Old Street?

25 Jul

I was exposed to the most advertising while in the Underground

Apparently we live in an over advertised world and it is claimed we are exposed to an ever increasing amount of advertising. There is no place in the UK where you are more likely to see a marketing message than in London.

In fact it is said that in one 45-minute journey, the average London commuter is exposed to more than 130 adverts, featuring more than 80 different products. And in an entire day, we’re likely to see 3,500 marketing messages.

So I thought I would do a little test of my own to see how many adverts passed me by and how many I could remember at the end of my journey.

I travelled from Camberwell to Old Street by catching a bus, travelling on the Underground and finally walking to my destination. It took me 34 minutes and I reckon I saw a total of 127 adverts.

How many adverts between Camberwell & Old Street?

The Numbers

I was on the bus for 13 minutes and saw 27 adverts

I was in the Underground for 14 minutes and saw 89 adverts

And I was walking for 7 minutes and saw 11 adverts

I could only recall 6 adverts, and of those adverts I could only remember the message of 3 adverts

The adverts I recalled

Of all the 127 adverts I saw on the side of buses, plastered on phone boxes and bus stops, pasted onto the walls of Underground stations, placed inside Underground trains and put onto billboards, I could only remember 6. They were:

* A Specsavers ad featuring a handsome chap which offered me 2 for 1 on designer specs.

* A wonderful Nando’s spot on the tube which was promoting Peri-Peri sauce. It was a lovely poster that stuck in my head as it made me smile. It basically asked to introduce a fellow passenger to Peri-Peri sauce and as thanks they would be so grateful they name their children after you (an arrow points down to a seat, where hopefully someone is sat).

* A Carling ad telling us the beer now has a great tasting brew that is locked in the can

* Lucozade  - all I remember was a swoosh of Lucozade

* Toy Story 3

* BT and random footballers

Of all the adverts the Nando’s spot was the only one that had an effect on me. This spot reinforced my belief that Nando’s has great tasting food, provides an experience that people will remember and it is a fun and quirky brand.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

← Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 516 other followers

%d bloggers like this: