If you run a small retail store, you need to know that you are not Walmart. Your restaurant is not McDonalds. Unless of course you are one of these, or another major national chain, you shouldn't plan your marketing like they do. Too often, when a business owner wants to attract customers, they turn to the methods they see most, television, radio, print, billboards, etc. These are all effective methods of advertising, for the right business. These are major budget-breakers if they are reaching out to people who are not potential customers.
Take some time to identify your target customers, and how many customers you can actually serve. Then market to them, not everyone.
Showing posts with label advertising. Show all posts
Showing posts with label advertising. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
What's that noise?
Several years ago, while living in Las Vegas, I was standing outside and having a chat with my neighbor. Suddenly, something didn't sound right. We both stopped talking, and looked at each other with a concerned look. We both knew something was wrong, but couldn't put a finger on it. It was unsettling, unfamiliar, and mysterious.
Moments later, his wife came outside and announced that the power was out inside, and that answered the question we both couldn't answer. You see, it was July, which means the outdoor temperature is somewhere between 110-120 degrees. To make life possible, every house is equipped with an air conditioner, and from May-October these are running almost 24 hours a day. When you have hundreds of air conditioners running in a very close proximity, there is a constant hum in the air from the motors. The mysterious sound that we couldn't figure out was silence.
Noise doesn't just come from motors, and regardless of the source, if it is consistent we learn to ignore it, especially when there is nothing we need to hear. Think about the programming on many TV stations, the commercials, your marketing messages, even your blog. Does your message sound like something everyone has heard many times before? Are you saying something new, or communicating simply for the sake of putting your noise out there?
When we hear the same commercial repeatedly, we learn to ignore it. Billboards along our commute just become part of the backdrop. The bank talking about free checking? It's just noise to us. When I see someone blog, tweet, or otherwise talk about the top 10 SEO tips/tricks/mistakes, I shut down. It's been said, it's been repeated, and now it's just noise.
Think about your message, is it really a unique thought, or a break-through message? Are you finding a new way to tell a story? Or are you blogging, advertising, writing, or broadcasting simply because it's time to do so? Remember what happens when we can count on the noise. It just gets lost as part of the background.
Labels:
advertising,
communication,
marketing,
newspapers,
noise,
social marketing
Thursday, January 28, 2010
It's the Cola
Pepsi is a very successful company in its own right, however their pursuit of Coca-Cola can be compared to one thing.

Wile E. Coyote keeps ordering new tools, trying new tactics, and continually fails to catch the Roadrunner. The only winner in Wile's incessant attempts is the Acme Company who continues to profit off of him.
Do you really want to catch the roadrunner, or should you set your sights on something different? Why spend all that money to make Mr. Acme rich?
Back in the better days, Pepsi was the choice of a new generation. Their advertising had a fun and youthful feel that still applied to everyone (remember, no matter how old we are, we want to be thought of as young). Though Coca-Cola has always been number 1, Pepsi wasn't too far behind. It was this threatening market position, and the results of the Pepsi Challenge that led Coca-Cola to make the colossal mistake of introducing New Coke.
Coke reversed their mistake, and for the most part kept their message strong. Meanwhile, Pepsi continued to chase them by using every celebrity and package redesign possible. In 2002, sales of Pepsi were 35% behind Coca-Cola in sales. The slogan was "Think young. Drink young." Then they abandoned the new generation. 2003 brought "The joy of Pepsi." 2004, "It's the cola." Now they are attempting to "Refresh Everything."
Notice anything about the new slogans? They're all head-on attacks against Coke. Joy, refreshment, and all about being "The Real Thing" are brand essences of Coca-Cola. The Acme Company was selling Pepsi countless logo revisions while their advertising messages were making people think about Coke. Today, they sit 41% behind the real thing.
When it comes to your business, do you want to be Wile E. Coyote, and constantly chase the Roadrunner? Or would you rather set a goal that won't have you always the one to have the anvil drop on you?
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
The meaning of life, the universe, and everything
I hope everyone knows that the answer is 42.
Whether you learned this watching the BBC series many years ago, just learned about it from the adventures of Mos Def & Sam Rockwell, or actually read the iconic books by Douglas Adams, there's a message in there that is of great importance in life and market research.
You must know the right question to get the answer you want.
It's all about asking the right questions. Surveys and feedback can often mislead the direction of a company. Too many times I have seen companies invest in product development because a customer said they liked the idea, only to find their intentions were quite different when there was a price tag on that new product.
What good is knowing what people like, what channels they watch, and what websites they are viewing, if you do not know what will motivate them to support your business? Spend more time thinking about the questions you ask, the extra time is worth the wait.
Labels:
advertising,
business,
communication,
marketing,
research
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Keep your fans & subscribers
Every day we see or hear ads from companies that want us to sign up to receive emails, SMS alerts, facebook updates, tweets, and more. But what does the consumer get in return? Sales pitches, irrelevant updates, and repeated messages from their many methods of advertising.
The value exchange is out of balance. The advertisers get what they want, but too often the consumers don't often get anything of significant value in exchange for the opt-in. Companies assume that when people opt-in, that they want to hear everything from that brand. This may not always be the case, which results in unsubscribes and consumers who just ignore and delete.
When a customer opts-in, this is not traditional advertising where you broadcast the same message everywhere and hope for a small percentage to act on it. This is your time to show these customers you truly value them. Offer your text-message subscribers something more than the general public will receive. Give your "fans" a reason to follow your facebook updates. Most importantly, encourage these opt-in customers to talk about you and share with their friends.
It's about building business, right? So make these fans of your business fanatics. Don't just buy your time with them until they give up on you.
Labels:
advertising,
brand engagement,
commercial,
email,
facebook,
media,
mobile,
social marketing,
social media,
twitter
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Domino's is rolling the dice
Domino's Pizza is taking a couple of big risks. First, the chain will change the recipe of its pizza from the crust up. Second, it will promote the change by gathering bloggers and others who have criticized the taste of their product, asking their opinion in a live tasting.
Can a major chain change the recipe of their product? According to Russell Weiner, marketing chief at Domino's, "We weren't winning against everyone at taste." One consultant cautioned, "It's like McDonald's changing the ingredients in the Big Mac. Risks are akin to Coca-Cola's change — undone after a fan revolt — in Coke's taste." While Coca-Cola failed to understand there is more to a brand than blind-taste-test preference, this assumption implies that Domino's customers are primarily concerned with the taste of the product.
Domino's ranks first in convenience and price. The delivery pizza industry has declined 6% over the past year, and Domino's feels the crunch. While some may believe that a recipe change is admitting that what the brand stood for was wrong, would you rather ride a sinking ship until you've drowned, or get that boat to dock and make repairs? The essence of Domino's brand is hot, convenient, and affordable. Why wouldn't they make an effort to add delicious to their brand?
The only risk I foresee is their challenge to get reaction from their critics. Asking for live feedback does have a chance of backfire. The bloggers could taste the new recipe, claim it's still not great. Honestly, what do they have to lose? The people who have a poor perception of the brand will have not changed, but if Domino's is confident with their recipe they could get those very people who advocate against their brand to give it a nod of endorsement. Sure, it's a bold chance they're taking, but one which could pay off for them.
It's not unprecedented for a chain to make recipe changes. Adding enhancements to your product helps gain new customers, and satisfy existing customers to keep them longer. Domino's enhanced their brand to include hot with the introduction of their heat-wave bags. No one will complain when their convenient, affordable pizza arrives hotter and more tasty.
Labels:
advertising,
brand,
brand engagement,
online,
pricing,
product,
research,
social media
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Clarification of "viral"
Since the Utah Flash fiasco continues to get as much media attention as a Tiger Woods family crisis, I thought I'd take a little more time on the concept of viral and the natural spread of word of mouth.
In a blog post apology, Brandt Anderson states, The assumption in this entire situation was that viral=good. They believed that getting people talking about the team would be good, even if it was talking about a hoax.
"off the court we are going to embrace the fact we are a minor league team, and therefore do crazy fun promotion in the hope to get people talking about the team... If you were offended by the stunt I sincerely apologize. Good or bad I hope it got you talking."
In a statement to ESPN, he further stated:
"We wanted to test the strength and effectiveness of viral media by putting him (the impersonator) out in Provo with bodyguards, and some hype," he said. "I always assumed it would be uncovered very quickly that it was a hoax. I'm tremendously sorry for the way it came off. It was never intended to play out the way that it did"
How about we ask Motrin how awesome having an ad go "viral" can be? The "Motrin Moms" debacle caused a lot of pain for the company, and certainly did not leave a good taste in anyone's mouth.
How about Mel Gibson's famous rant? The video of his drunken rant went viral, and how has that worked for his career?
There is bad publicity. You don't want it for your business. If the general consensus of your target market is that you have done something wrong, then you have done something wrong. This is not a shock-factor marketing tactic like heavy-metal artists use to excite their target audience. When Marilyn Manson pisses off the Christian Coalition he is not trying to sell albums to them, he is selling albums to those who want to rebel against the moral majority.
A good viral campaign is when people are sharing their positive experience with others. A funny ad shown on TV or online that appeals enough to make people want to share it. A new product launched which finds evangelists telling everyone how much they love it. Viral is not planning a hoax or asking people to talk about something. That is fraud.
Motrin did not mean to upset thousands of mommy-bloggers. They stumbled accidentally into a bad situation. The Flash created this bad situation for themselves. Perhaps they hadn't considered the backlash, but it could have been easily avoided, and should have.
So what now? Continue to reach out the olive-branch to the public, apologize profusely, and mean it. Do not tangle at all with anything that could fuel the fire. Brandt Anderson has been openly accepting comments on his blog, and has addressed some of the concerns. Some of the comments may need to be moderated, and it's not the ones you may be thinking. It sometimes is better to delete those "defender" posts, the people who are supporting Anderson and calling the negative commenters idiots. Whether they are or not (and I am certainly not making the accusation) the public will believe these are shill comments from those involved with the organization.
Never, never, never, never post fake comments or reviews to attack criticism and bad publicity! Commenters who are taking your side are often more damaging than saying nothing at all. Once people suspect a shill there is very little that any official word from the organization can fix.
Stay classy, listen to your customers, and learn from your mistakes. Bad publicity is a virus, not a happy viral campaign.
Labels:
advertising,
brand,
commercial,
marketing,
media,
product,
social media,
sports,
word-of-mouth
No such thing as bad publicity?
I have sat in many meetings, having laughs about ideas that seem hysterical when proposed. These times are great for building teams, generating ideas, and loosening up everyone's stress levels. However, the ideas that have everyone laughing often need to die in the meeting.
We want our customers to be entertained, but we don't want them to be offended.
Now I am not one to avoid all risks, and there are situations when reaching your target audience may result in upsetting people outside of your target. Not in a blatant way, but messages cannot be perfectly safe for everyone. What I am talking about is sending out a message to customers that will back-fire. The old adage "there's no such thing as bad publicity" is a lie. Bad publicity can destroy a business.
Today's example comes from the Utah Flash, a professional development league basketball team who has a very enthusiastic owner. Looking at some of the activity he has been up to shows someone who is willing to take some risks and think outside of the box. More sports teams need to be like this. It is not a great time to be a sports-owner, as many markets simply cannot afford the big dollars to sell out stadiums at premium prices. I am not poking fun at the situation, rather showing how good intentions and enthusiastic marketing can lead us to bad decisions.
It all started with Bryon Russell calling out Michael Jordan, challenging him to a one-on-one match to show who was the better player. Sports commentators have been mocking this suggestion for months, but Utah Flash owner Brandt Anderson decided to capitalize on this media spectacle. They put a challenge to the hall of fame basketball player, and told fans of the plan to have a Jordan vs. Russell half-time show at the season opener.
While there were no definitive promises that Mr. Jordan would be there, the game sold out. There was also a staged "sighting" of the legendary player in the Provo area, where a look-a-like was dining with Men-In-Black security entourage by his side. At half-time it became obvious that there was to be no real Michael Jordan appearance, and many fans walked out.
Mr. Anderson posted an apology on his blog that evening, stating that the "challenge didn't go like any of us hoped." By Tuesday morning, there were 55 comments to the post, most critical of the stunt, and many demanding refunds. In reading the comments, it is apparent that many negative comments were deleted. Likely profanity-laden, and I do not condone Mr. Anderson for deleting that type of content from his blog, I would likely do the same in his position. The point is, this upset people. It did exactly the opposite of what a marketing person is responsible for doing. Just because something was risky, does not make it brilliant.
Scorecard:
Great idea to propose the challenge. Get your name out there, participate in the world of sports entertainment. Had you approached Michael and he turned you down, you're not out anything for trying.
Great job of posting your blog apology. You didn't want thousands of angry fans. As you said, you wanted a season of fun. It was a bold move, that could have worked had there not been the outright deception.
Bad ideas: getting peoples' hopes up. You knew there would be no MJ, which is evident by the phony sighting. Think of this like any product, you can tell people about the attributes of your product, how it tastes, what it contains, what it can really do for customers. You cannot and should not imply something that is not going to happen. It is illegal. While there was not implicit promises that MJ would be there, and therefore you're not likely to be fined, sued, or otherwise punished, it is a bad road to walk along using deception.
Another bad idea: calling this "viral" marketing. Rather than the positive buzz-word that viral has become, people will be talking about this like it is a virus no one wants. You do not just want people talking about your product, you want to connect good-feelings with your product. No one ever got rich by selling the product no one wants.
My message to Brandt, please keep taking risks, be bold, and put the fun into sports. But get someone on your team who is a seasoned veteran at making people happy. My offer stands, I will take on the Utah Flash as a pro-bono client. No bait & switch, no strings, no hoax, and no imitators.
Labels:
advertising,
brand,
social marketing,
social media,
sports,
twitter,
word-of-mouth
Friday, December 4, 2009
Freebie Friday: Not the Droids you're looking for
AT&T & Apple need to strike back at Verizon. As you may have gathered from my previous post, I don't believe the Wireless Wars will be won with vicious attacks but with smarter tactics to entertain and make people feel good. So how does a company go about fighting smarter? Who fights smarter than the Jedi?
My free advice for AT&T: Call George Lucas today to negotiate terms for an ad campaign using the most iconic sci-fi characters of all time.
Commercial 1: A group of storm troopers walk into a Verizon store. They survey the phones available, shake their heads disappointed. A Verizon employee approaches them to offer assistance.
"These are not the droids we're looking for."
Close with storm-troopers carrying iPhones, using various applications to locate the right droids, communicate with the Empire, and view tweets of the rebel alliance.
Commercial 2: A customer walks into a Verizon store which is entirely staffed with Sith lords. A customer is looking at a Motorolla Droid, explaining that he/she wants a phone that is effortless and provides thousands of reliable apps. The customer mentions wanting an app store that recommends apps based on interests and is easy to use. After a short discussion about what he/she wants from a phone, a Jedi knight approaches and waves his hand "these are not the droids you're looking for" and presents the customer with an iPhone.
That's my free ad campaign idea for you, AT&T. But feel free to send a check as a sign of thanks.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
You've built a monster, please don't feed it
This is my open letter to Ted Gilvar - CMO of Monster.
You've already built a monster, please don't feed it anymore.
As someone who has frequently utilized Monster and many other job search boards, we hate them. For the most part, job boards are just a necessary evil that we endure. Painfully gnashing our teeth and cringing as we type every letter of the URL. To be fair, Monster is infinitely better than CareerBuilder, and I do prefer it over HotJobs. But no one is getting excited to use your site.
We don't need any more advertising. We don't need clever promotions. We don't need banner ads, search ads, a social media presence, or interface updates. We don't need a logo redesign, website refresh, or anything like that. We need a brand we can trust.
Why does a marketing executive of over 10 years get search results for a "home health nurse," "finance & accounting manager," or "administrative assistant," all of which could be disastrous. But even worse, there are somewhere around 2,000 ways to say "door-to-door commission salesperson who will never earn $1" and you have them all wonderfully camouflaged as legitimate job listings that we have to sift through to find something that may even be remotely relevant to us.
I understand that you don't create the jobs, and there is a natural urge to not turn down money from advertisers. But a bit of quality control and categorization to help users find relevant jobs would make you the uncontested number one job site and make your brand the one and only household name anyone would ever think about using when they need a job. It is time to improve your product. It's called brand management. Make a product that people won't stop talking about. If every user was able to upload their resume, fill in a profile, and see nothing but relevant opportunities, hiring managers and candidates alike would love you forever.
You've got $250 million to spend. Certainly it would take a lot less than that to make it happen, and you'd never need to advertise again. It is time to improve the product in a big way. It's not as if we don't know what Monster is, we just don't want to use it.
Labels:
advertising,
brand,
brand engagement,
commercial,
design,
internet,
marketing,
online,
product
Are consumers gaining power?
A report from the Chief Marketing Officer Council states that out of the 91% of consumers who opt-out or unsubscribe from email marketing, 46% are driven to brand defection because the messages simply are not relevant. Don't worry about those who unsubscribe? Perhaps you should be a bit concerned about those people who hit the unsubscribe button. They may be opting-in to your competition permanently.
A blog post from Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg, provides additional interesting insight into the future if you read between the lines. Facebook originally created networks by region and school. While the community was small, this worked to achieve what people wanted. It connected those students who wanted a way to connect and communicate to others around them. Now that seemingly everyone is on Facebook, people do not necessarily want to share their information with their bosses, family, and advertisers. The connection of living in the same region is not necessarily relevant to all consumers.
What do these things have in common? Consumers exercising their voice to make real changes in new media. This is not a new concept, it is likely that consumers have been defecting due to irrelevant messages since the first time a cobbler hammered an advertisement on a lamp post. This puts some information in our hands that we need to use in communicating.
Traditional wisdom was to create a message and broadcast it to the largest number of people possible. It was known that not every person would react positively (make a purchase) to the communication, and only in the event of accidentally insulting people would that communication result in negative reactions. What this information shows is that a very large number of consumers may actually gain a preference for the competing brand if they feel your communications are irrelevant.
Putting it all together now. Facebook is an example that shows people want to communicate and belong to a community. They are willing to become "fans" of their favorite brands, join in discussion groups about products and services, but that does not mean they want to connect to everything. Consumers who actually opt-in to communications from a brand they use, then defect to a competitor because of irrelevant communications shows that what we say and do can have positive and negative effects. Even if the communication was simply an offer that was not relevant to that consumer.
What you say matters. A lot. It is not safe to assume that you can bombard people's inboxes, television sets, Facebook pages, Twitter streams, etc. with any message, as often as you want. People watching may not just unsubscribe or change the channel. You may be sending them right into the arms of your competition.
Every time you communicate with your customers, think carefully about what you want to say. Make an offer that people will appreciate. Be relevant.
Labels:
advertising,
brand,
brand engagement,
commercial,
demographics,
email,
facebook,
internet,
marketing,
media,
online,
product,
social marketing,
social media,
spam,
twitter
Monday, November 30, 2009
Now with more juicy bits of orange
Several years ago I ran across a selection of orange juices. There was a pulp-free variety, one with added calcium, and a variety with "some pulp." All were priced the same, except for one that had the following label:
"Now with more juicy bits of orange!"
That variety was 75 cents more per gallon. Someone successfully was charging more for doing less because they took a negative sounding word and made it delicious. The word pulp is not pleasant sounding. But juicy bits of orange are downright tasty. Certainly most people would understand that juicy bits of orange are what they know as pulp, and those who are anti-pulp would avoid this variety, but there are people who like this product and they want something that sounds good.
Take a look at your products. What attributes are there that people enjoy, but you are selling short or failing to highlight at all? Shouldn't you get noticed for those benefits before your competitor comes along and sells the same attribute but gets more attention?
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
It's all about making money
Car rides can be quite interesting with the children. Sing-a-longs, fighting about who is sitting too close, begging for Slurpees, and talking marketing. Today's revelation from my 6 year old daughter showed more insight than many professionals in the workplace.
"There is more commercial time on the radio because it is getting close to Christmas, and they need to sell more things to make money."
Yes, at 6 years old she was able to identify that commercial time is ramped up for the holiday season. Not an earth-shattering thought, but unique for someone that age to identify. But then it got really deep and interesting.
"I think the Shane Company sells fake diamonds, and that is how they are cheaper than other jewelry stores. Except for Walmart, but those are fake too."
You have been successful at getting attention, but has your advertising been too good to be true? I have bought from the Shane Company a couple of times, and was quite pleased with the overall experience. Low prices, friendly service, and honesty. I never felt pressured or looked down on for wanting to buy something less expensive. I wondered, if it is so pleasant to shop here, how do other jewelry stores exist in the face of this tremendous competition?
Quality jewelry at low prices is something we are trained to believe does not exist. The other jewelers I have experienced are masters of reinforcing that belief. High-pressure, poor service, and a feeling that you do not belong if you are trying to be frugal. The message sent by the industry is that you must spend several months of your income to make a decent gift.
I won't get involved in any debate over actual merits of jewelry, but my point is that a 6 year old can identify the purpose and effectivity of advertising. Your target customer is likely much more experienced than a child at making consumer decisions. Perhaps your advertising may be saying the wrong thing to potential customers, be it too pushy of frequency, or unbelievable claims that cause people to doubt your product.
Need help to communicate effectively? Drop a message for me, I'll even throw in a 6 year-olds advice for free.
Labels:
advertising,
brand,
commercial,
jewelry,
marketing,
media,
pricing,
product
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
We don't want to hear from you
Companies have been communicating via e-mail for over a decade, so why do customers get so excited when they are contacted via twitter? Why do we crave companies with a social media presence? Because we are not used to getting a response, and we have been trained to believe email is a one-way street from companies.
One simple mistake: Do-not-reply@CompanyWhoWillNotAnswer.com
First things first, if you email customers you need to dump the "Do not reply" addresses. Also, you must make it easy for customers to contact you, and you need to reply to them.
When a company has an active Twitter account or Facebook fan page, it makes them approachable and customers like to feel like they are on even ground with the company they do business with. When they see Do Not Reply in every email, the message they receive is "we want to talk at you, but will not listen if you have anything to say."
With that said, if your social media plan is just to "build a Facebook fan page" or get on twitter, please don't. Your plan should be how you plan to communicate with your customers. Not just set a page, and forget it. Customers will either learn that you don't listen there either, or they will just forget you are there.
Just like with all advertising and marketing, why spend money telling people about your company if your potential customers will just feel disappointed once they find you.
Labels:
advertising,
brand engagement,
commercial,
email,
facebook,
internet,
media,
social marketing,
social media,
twitter,
word-of-mouth
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Shhh, we're trying to get publicity
If you want people to talk about your business, you need to give them something to talk about. Seems pretty simple. However, some do not seem to understand this.
A recent example of this was seen on Twitter when Steve Murphy began his @Twakeup_Now campaign. On October 23 we began seeing tweets telling us to get ready to Twakeup on October 27. The tweets were coming from users around the country who were asked to help lead their community to this event. However, they were sworn to secrecy as to what the event was. Of course, this led to followers of these individuals to comment that they are tired of being spammed with Twakeup tweets.
No details and no hints as to the topic. When visiting the website www.twakeup.com only revealed a list of the people tweeting about Twakeup, called pod leaders. It may have created interest among some people, but many of the replies I saw were just of annoyance and questioning the "pod leader" what they were talking about.
Remember, spam is something unwanted by the reader. Twitter followers will always find topics they know nothing about to be spam, especially if there is no method to find out what is being talked about.
Four days later, it is revealed that Twakeup is a fundraiser for Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Great cause, but a few fatal flaws in this campaign. The biggest, if your intent is to raise money for a charitable cause, why not just reveal that on October 23 when the Twitter account is created and website put up? Even if the infrastructure had not been created to accept donation on the website, you will get more attention if you tell people what to expect.
Most would not call a awareness to support cancer research spam, but when they do not know what @Twakeup_Now is, it is just spam.
Keeping the intent quiet for four days simply does the opposite of what is desired. Instead of getting people excited for the event and making the general public want to be a part of it, these individuals frustrated their followers and failed to capitalize on building word of mouth. People will talk about your product, if you tell them what it is. Keeping secrets from the public will not help build momentum.
By the end of the first day, they tweeted that they were almost to $1000. Four days later, the tweets revealed that bigger donations were coming in and they were up to $5000. Had Mr. Murphy been up-front to the public about the intentions of Twakeup_Now, that first day may have brought in bigger donations and they would not have had to wait for four days to get to $5000. The potential was there, but he stunted the potential to make Twakeup even more effective. Lesson here, if you want people to be aware of your product, get it out there as soon as possible. Don't keep it a secret and hope people will become interested in mystery meat.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Demographics, useless to marketers?
As we gain more insight into consumers we find that many of the age-related assumptions we made in the past are incorrect. Apparently there are people in their 60s who love candy, just like those who are only 6 years old. Just as there are bloggers and Facebook users who are in their teens, as well as those who are grandparents to teens.
There is value to knowing who your consumers are, but the typical "demographics" research typically falls short of drawing important correlation to who consumers are, and what motivates them to buy. Does being 32 lead someone to purchase Crest toothpaste versus Colgate? Moreover, some demographic categorizations do not even make sense. 18-49 is often used to describe a consumer group. Aside from "people who most likely have jobs" this age range has very little in common simply because they are within an age group. Of course you will find 18 year olds who buy the same products at the same store of 49 year olds. How does that help you better position your product?
There are times when an age group is an important factor to consider. The important thing to remember is to question those demographics rather than jumping to a conclusion and alienating your customers because someone showed you a statistic.
Labels:
advertising,
brand,
commercial,
demographics,
facebook,
internet,
marketing,
product,
research
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Small business doesn't get social media
Small business does not find value in social media. Does this mean there's no value, or simply that many small business owners (or large businesses for that matter) just don't understand how to use it?
According to a recent poll by Citibank / GfK Roper survey of 500 small business executives across the United States, 76% have not found social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn to be helpful in generating business leads or for expanding their business during the last year, while 86% say they have not used social networking sites to get business advice or information. Maria Veltre, Executive Vice President of Citi's Small Business Segment, concludes "... small business owners are still feeling their way into social media... many... may not have the manpower or the time required take advantage of them." This is the bottom line, it is about the time and manpower rather than a reflection of the media.
If a business bought television advertisements at 3 am, and did not see a return, does that mean TV advertising is worthless?
What if an advertisement was run in print newspapers and magazines, but the company forgot to put contact information in the ad? Does that make print ineffective?
These examples may seem obvious to many, but that is because this media has been around for a long time and we have gotten used to what works and what does not.
Social media is something that takes time to understand, and most small businesses do not have a lot of time to devote to learning and connecting in this user-generated media. There is value, it will just take some education on the media, and time to connect with your community. Furthermore, if small businesses turn to social media for advice they are connecting with the people who matter most: the customer. This is why so many businesses fail, they are trying to interpret business advice from Forbes magazine rather than connecting with the people who will keep them in business. You will never find the secret to success published in a book, magazine, or newspaper. The secret to success is listening to your consumers.
Nothing just happens for free, that's why it is called work.
Labels:
advertising,
facebook,
internet,
marketing,
media,
newspapers,
online,
social marketing,
social media
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Hitting where it hurts, there's an app for that
Part of me wanted to applaud the new ad campaign by Verizon Wireless, "There's a map for that" but then I saw the end of the commercial. The part that has prompted a lawsuit by AT&T, in which they show a map of AT&T's 3G coverage. The graphical display of the two providers' 3G coverage area is shocking, and although Verizon states that it represents AT&T's 3G areas specifically, AT&T feels that customers believe there is no wireless coverage in the white area.

The lawsuit requests an emergency injunction to stop the ads and claims significant losses of market share and goodwill, prohibiting them from competing. It is true that customers can be easily confused with the technical differences between having 3G coverage, and having slower wireless coverage. What matters is what the public believes, and AT&T polled many customers who were indeed under the impression that there was no coverage.
The Verizon commercial was upbeat and positive, and sold benefits of their available smartphones and superior 3G coverage. It should have left it at that. While Verizon technically did nothing wrong, it is an accurate map, directly attacking their rival was not a necessary maneuver and could cause problems for them. It is usually wise to keep your hits above the belt, even when you have a knock-out punch ready to deliver. In business, your competitor can hit back with the legal system.
The bigger the company, the bigger the blunder
Toyota stumbled into a mess with a launch of their new 4-Runner website. (I imagine this site link will soon be broken, since they're going to need to rectify the situation). To set the mood of wildlife for their SUV brand, they looked to photographers on Flickr to provide photography for the microsite. They found several great photographs which were used, unfortunately they never asked the photographers for permission.
Michael Calanan (a talented photographer & friend) posted his concern on Twitter the evening of Tuesday, November 3. The conversation towards @Toyota must have got their attention, as they promptly tweeted Wednesday morning to the photographers involved.

This is why your company needs an experienced marketer on staff. Real marketing directors have an understanding of intellectual property laws. Photographs, fonts, illustrations, and other design elements found online are not free for you to use, especially for commercial purposes. Further, marketing personnel are meant to understand consumers. First and foremost, the responsibility of marketing is to know what motivates people, and how they will react. Not knowing that professional photographers would certainly notice the increased traffic on their Flickr pages, and be upset about someone using their work without contacting them is a fatal mistake. If they fail to understand this, do they understand what Toyota customers actually want from their vehicle? There may not be a correlation, but it begs to be asked.
If I was to guess, I would say it was not malicious intent of Toyota to steal these photographer's work, but was a lack of intellectual property understanding. That does not excuse what they have done. Ignorance of the law is not a valid defense. Whether you are a multi-billion dollar company, or a small boutique, you need to respect the property rights of others. If you are unsure of what you can or cannot do, ask for help from a real expert.
Labels:
advertising,
brand,
commercial,
design,
font,
internet,
marketing,
media,
online,
social marketing,
social media,
twitter
Monday, October 26, 2009
Will you pay for an online newspaper subscription?
I am actually not going to enter the debate over whether newspapers should or should not charge for access to their online material. In the end, some will, while others will not.
Online subscriptions will provide revenue for some newspaper companies. The restriction of access will cause some newspapers financial grief.
What I will say is this, if the management of a newspaper company is too preoccupied with this decision of whether to charge or not, they will fail.
Why will people pay for information from one source versus another? Content and reputation. Otherwise known as their brand. If we know the brand of the news source represents the very best information, and what they provide enhances our lives, we will pay. But if your paper is just kicking out basic information that was covered by a dozen other sources, you lose.
Rather than debating "do we charge, or don't we," it is time to evaluate how your media source is different and what value can you provide the readers that they cannot get elsewhere. When you have a valuable, trusted brand, you can more easily find your income.
Labels:
advertising,
brand,
brand engagement,
internet,
media,
newspapers,
online,
pricing,
product,
social media
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)