Showing posts with label Branding. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Branding. Show all posts

Thursday, February 2, 2017

In the Market to Buy Something Daunting, Big, and/or Awkward? These Gals Got You Covered.

The female spokesperson is back!

Ok, maybe she never left. At least we can say in confidence that a new archetype is upon us!

No longer just resigned to demoing household products in the strictest, most well-worn gender roles, but provided R-A-N-G-E! Room to form a persona all their own (NOT product-related); to go off on comedic tangents, and blend the hardline task of selling a product with an almost sitcom-like quality of arbitrary storytelling.

What started as a gamble turned trend, then full-blown craze!

Note: this post is long overdue.
Our subjects have been hardworking, brand ambassadors for YEARS now. Still, a trend in advertising that shows no sign of slowing down and deserves acknowledgement.  

First came Flo

Did you know Flo has been working in Progressive’s “Superstore” since 2008? Nearly a decade now – hellbent on making the dry, mundane task of insurance shopping not only tangible but light hearted and dare I say, fun?

Played by Stephanie Courtney, the commercial break’s now iconic sweetheart has performed in more than 100 spots. And Flo’s presence extends FAR beyond the small screen. Courtney’s character can be seen on web banners, traditional print, turnpike toll booth wrappers, …so iconic, she just needs a bump of hair on billboards for pull through!

Toyota’s Jan

At the dealer reception desk for almost three years now, Jan (played by Laurel Coppock) serves to alleviate some of the stress and intimidation typically associated with buying a car. Who wouldn’t be at ease if Coppock’s character were the first person that greeted them in the showroom?

AT&T’s Lily

After cars comes phones. Growing equally as high in sales pressure (and creeping closer in price, amirite!?) is finding yourself an unwilling participant in the ongoing mobile phone wars. Never fear, Lily is here! Played by Milana Vayntrub, AT&T’s wholesome soldier of the store salesfloor. So, approachable and sweet, you’ll wanna come back for your iPhone 8, 9, and 10!  

British Invasion!

But wait, there’s a whole subset of comediennes we’d be remiss to exclude in this post!
A cadre of cross-the-pond confidants, commissioned to make the buying of all those blush-worthy, unmentionables easier. Why seek help from the UK? Something about that English accent – thought “uppity” by Americans since the days of Hamilton, when placed in dichotomy with awkward subject matter, grabs attention. Consider:

Orbit Gum

Ok, so there’s nothing awkward about gum. But when Orbit called upon the talents of Vanessa Branch to help launch lemon-lime and crystal mint back in ’06, they weren’t just talking gum but taking on bad breath – and that *is* uncouth! ‘Dirty mouths’ everywhere rejoiced and the character has stuck (pun intended) for over a decade, Orbit swapping Branch out for Farris Patton in 2010.

The PooPourri Girl

A product demo of sorts, although REEKING (again, pun intended) of hyperbole for extra impact.
Played by Bethany Woodruff, a gal after this blogger’s own heart, with her constant alliteration and sing-song rhyme schemes. We’d love to see more! Although, how much more explaining is there left to do? Don’t hold your breath (sorry, couldn’t help myself) for a product line extension.

Cottonelle’s ‘Go Commando’ Girl

She’s out to two-ply pamphlet your neighborhood with all the bum-based benefits you stand to bear with Cottonelle. Played by Cherry Healey, Kleenex’s TP is elevated out of the commodity lines with cheeky before-and-after product testimonials.
Does it work?

Let me start by saying as I googled each of our subjects, in EVERY case, [brand] + the word ‘woman’ or ‘girl’ was within the TOP THREE suggestions, often beating out actual product.

If there’s true chemistry, brand + ambassador, it’s a match made in (advertising ROI) heaven.

It works at face value, because we’re all looking for things to soften our anxiety around those daunting, big, and/or awkward purchases.

Equally important: link fantasy with reality.

These spots can’t just be red herrings, dreamt up by siloed marketing departments, but the result of big picture business plans. The execution of strategy also can’t conclude at the end of the 30 second spot; you must tether down to the real world. Now I know commercials are supposed to be idyllic exaggerations on real life. But if Flo won’t be the one answering our call – someone like Flo should be. The in-person experience should capture the spirit and achieve the same vain as the commercial spots – Toyota showrooms should feel approachable and bright. AT&T stores should feel friendly and no-pressure. Otherwise, the whole thing breaks down at the finish line; all your hard work goes to waste.

Make sure art imitates life, or at least life imitates art.


The order doesn’t matter so long as the two are fused.

Thursday, February 18, 2016

Mobile Wars: Who Has the Balls?

Remember where you were just a kid at the amusement park jumping into the big pit of musty plastic balls? Well, now you can relive that same fun-for-a-few-minutes-than-gross sensation during most any primetime commercial break, courtesy of the mobile phone carrier wars reaching a new height in laziness.

It started out well enough.

There’s no doubt Verizon’s “A better network as explained by ______” series was devised to tackle the age-old challenge of demonstrating superiority in an otherwise homogenous services industry.

Where ______ has been:
  • a door
  • an hourglass
  • an abnormally large basketball hoop
  • an expensive egg
  • a high school 'it' couple (the BEST, IMO)
  • Star Wars (...wait, what? WHY?!)

All were called upon to help make tangible the argued benefits of the Verizon network.

And then they got the balls…


Simple enough, right? The demonstration is easy to follow; the message is clear, but also, a first in the campaign to illustrate the shortcomings of rivals by comparison. Who’s gonna stand for that?

And so Sprint got the balls…


And then T-Mobile got the balls…

Not one, but TWO spots! (ONE during the Super Bowl, guest starring Steve Harvey!)

 

Sorry, AT&T doesn’t have any.

…At least at the time of publishing, but who wants blue balls anyways!? (Wink face)


Here’s Why it Doesn’t Work.

Look, the spot fits as part of the overall “Better Network as Explained by …” series. It’s a simple premise that works as part of a whole, a single chapter in a larger story.

But as the rebuttals by rivals start to stack up, the impact of each gets diluted.

Who can remember which company is claiming what based on which independent study of what sample pool, etc. anyways?!

Don’t hold us captive to a public splitting of hairs within the construct of a competitor’s campaign!

Advertising budgets are small. Why blow them on direct responses to your category leader? Your negation of Verizon’s claims should ENTERTAIN us! (Ok, the T-Mobile spot with Steve Harvey comes close. It’s self-deprecating and timely, but our minds shift to the Miss Universe flub and we forget why you’re so great).

Fine, if you simply must “set the record straight”, do it in your own style!

Kick Verizon IN the balls and cut a different comparison that feels on brand!

When you respond direct and use the same format, you are letting Verizon set the terms and parameters of the conversation. Mock the simplicity of their latest series, question their intentions behind “simplifying” mobile.

You’re all already advertising everywhere, at least look different and tell different stories.


Wednesday, November 12, 2014

Sprint’s Simply Unlimited Plan + iPhone 6 Ad: Brilliant or Bogus?


Is it bad that the first time I saw this ad I wasn’t sure if it was for or against Apple’s latest?


Maybe it’s the over-characterization of a stereotypical gaggle of clueless girlfriends screaming that put the authenticity of the ad in question.

Me, mouth hanging open: “There’s NO WAY Apple would approve this – the characters are over the top and precisely the type of demo iPhone does NOT want to be associated with.”

Halfway through and I was still scanning the deck for some super-sophisticated, ultra-annoyed female archetype friend, aggravated and eye-rolling as she thumbs her Samsung Galaxy Note Edge – punchline, PLEASE! (Don’t you know the next big thing is already here?!)

Even after the rounds of shattering glass I held out hope that maybe, just MAYBE we’d be treated to the silky-smooth vocal styling’s of Cortana of Windows phone fame ( I’m using the term ‘fame’ as lightly as humanly possible here, you’ve got to EARN fame, baby).

“So should we eat?”

That’s a wrap and my plate’s stacked full with crow.

It WAS a pro-iPhone ad!

….why?!

Is it that the standard go-to format of feature-heavy demonstrations delivering intimate moments with the ones we love has completely played out or is it that selling on price always boils creativity down to the lowest form of brain-dead entertainment?

No woman thinks she’s like these women (even those women who are TOTALLY like these women) and I’m pretty sure no straight man would ever want to be within earshot of this boisterous BB-Q so who the heck is the ad trying to attract?

I’m out.

And speaking of being out...sorry for the long (unintended) sabbatical! 
I've been off solving all the world's biggest problems, or something like that.
Now that it is once again the most WONDERFUL time of the year, let's see if I can't be more diligent in spreading (read: sparing) the marketing holiday cheer! -DS :)

Thursday, May 15, 2014

The Michael Sam Kiss: Opportunities Met and Made

When Michael Sam was selected by the St. Louis Rams in the seventh round of the 2014 NFL Draft, he made history as the first openly gay player to be admitted to the league.

Moments later, he made history again, when upon receiving ‘the call’, Sam’s celebratory kiss with his boyfriend was broadcast live as part of ESPN’s continued coverage of the Draft.

[I don’t have to include a photo of the moment here, right? Y’all don’t live under rocks.
You know what, fine. Here. Take it.]

Now almost a week later and the pro-vs-against battle rages on.

Our more conservative constituents – (that’s the “anti-kiss” side of the equation) – are calling ESPN’s decision to broadcast the tender moment a blatant opportunity to generate buzz and make news.

They’re absolutely right.

I can agree with the claim, even from the liberal side of the equation (and when am I not?).

I’m pro-kiss.

Heck, I’m give-me-more, why not show-me-some-tongue, pro-kiss!

But I can still agree that ESPN saw the potential for personal gain in broadcasting the moment.

And that’s great.

You want to know why?

Because if ESPN thinks gay = gain, and we all know in business that gain = good, what ESPN is really saying is gay = good (and THAT’S good).

It means that another organization (a traditionally macho one at that) sees the up-side of “coming out” as pro-gay (or at least gay-tolerant).

That’s HUGE.

It says to me that ESPN has checked the pulse of an ever-changing world and made account for the gradual but persistent trend in tolerance when it comes to sexuality.

They are making a (business) choice to include homosexuality as part of the mainstream.

Sure, the cynical side of me can say “they’re using our way of life to get attention/boost ratings.”

True, the short-term benefits belong to brand – replays and shares, posts and news topics.

[Note: I had to shake a similar notion when I first saw the Honey Maid “
This is Wholesome” and “Love” ads – how else could they get THIS MANY PEOPLE talking about crackers?]

But with more and more brands coming on board, those types of self-serving benefits will wane.

The long-term benefits belong to the greater good!

Increased exposure adapts the mind for a new definition of “acceptable behavior.”

Our Conservative counterparts call this FORCING the homosexual agenda (their phrase, not mine). Look, we’re never going to get EVERYONE on board. Right and wrong are deeply entrenched in our being, a summation part enculturation and part intuition.

I don’t need everyone to be OK with me, but I’m grateful to see that big chunk in the middle softening on the issue and widening their perspective on “normal”.

Talk isn't cheap.
We owe a huge debt of gratitude to the brands that make room in their broadcast.
-DS

~//~

PS: Sorry it has been so long! What can I say, duty calls -- there's real work to be done! I will try to better manage my time and schedule in a few more rants per month. Appreciate your attention, as always.

Monday, February 3, 2014

Nothing new at this year’s Super Bowl

Building hype for commercials – what an age we live in!

For the last few years, advertisers have used social media teasers in hopes of cultivating additional interest and intrigue for impeding Game Day ads.

From obscure behind-the-scenes photos or video to full-blown commercial-length preview spots, advertisers who committed to the Big Game made sure you stayed glued to the screen for their 30-seconds of fame.

But this year, previewing the WHOLE commercial spot!?

Tebow for T-Mobile, a Full House reunion over spilled Oikos, a Cheerios first, Clydesdale puppy-love, and Audi’s Doberhuahua. (Just to name a few)

I was browsing YouTube last Friday and the Volkswagen ‘Wings’ spot even popped up as a rollover.

At $4 million per 30-seconds, you’d think advertisers would want to keep things under wraps as long as possible. You know, really get their monies worth!

There is plenty of time to “go viral” POST game day! Seriously, why spend so much cash on a creative repeat?

Why advertise during the Super Bowl at all?!

Enter the brilliance of Newcastle Brown Ale.

So the promotion of Super Bowl advertising is evolving…fast.

If everyone’s Game Day ad is going to run BEFORE Game Day, there’s gotta be a way to capture similar hype and just skip the placement (and GYNORMOUS cost) all together.

And that’s precisely what Newcastle did.

First of all, ever heard of ‘em? I hadn’t, but again, NOT a beer drinker.

Their “If We Made It” campaign is pure genius.

The whole premise was built around the notion that Newcastle had every intention of producing a spot for the Super Bowl, but then didn’t. It was too expensive, the story concepting process was mismanaged, (never mind that Budweiser basically owns the Super Bowl).

Popping up nearly a week in advance, the campaign’s hub, www.ifwemadeit.com, is self-deprecating humor at its best.

Video testimonials by:


But they didn’t stop there.

On Super Bowl Sunday, Newcastle watched the actual ads along with us, ‘recreating’ a selection of them via storyboard animation. Selected ads that Newcastle made more ‘MEGA HUGE’ included Wonderful Pistachio, Chobani and GoDaddy (twice), just to name a few.

Brilliant.

Seriously, when you consider it costs $4 million for 30 seconds. And that’s just placement, never mind all the costs associated with the spot’s production…

Newcastle spent less, built MORE and, by most estimates, stole a huge handful of exposure and acclaim at this year’s Super Bowl.

…without actually producing a spot FOR the Super Bowl.

Hats off, Newcastle! Can we expect a Part 2 in 2015?

Happy Monday,
-Daniel :)


Afterthought: What’s next in the Super Bowl Advertising Evolution?

If everything is previewed in advance, how will marketers in the next 3-5 to 10 years REALLY secure (actual) Game Day impact?

Answer: Total Shock and Awe

Think mega-huge giveaways, a total change in brand or positioning – no previews or warnings, no hints whatsoever we’re talking Beyoncé surprise-album-dropping-at-midnight hysteria here.
Brands have dabbled with it already. Denny’s Free Grand Slam breakfast in 2012. Really two this year: U2’s “Invisible”, given for free in support of (RED) and eSurance’s $1.5M post-game spot savings giveaway.

Every brand, each more shocking then the last (all, no doubt, with paths into social-share). But wouldn’t that make for a thrilling night of TV? Almost like watching a high-stakes sporting event, or something!

Can’t wait. :)

Friday, January 31, 2014

The 'real winner' at the Grammys was Arby's?!



Give me a break.

I can’t stand how news outlets feel the need to sensationalize everything.

Case in point: this week’s marketing/social media pubs.
Subject: An Arby’s tweet out to singer/song-writer Pharrell Williams.

In case you missed it:
Cute, right?

Sure. But Arby’s was by no means the 'real winner' at the Grammys simply because they tweeted about a hat. They didn't 'slay' anything! (Yea, those are how some of the headlines are phrasing it).

It was a reasonable association between brand and fashion statement.
It was on-point, cute, comical, and timely. I’ll give them that.

But, oh wow – the interaction went exactly as you’d hope one in twitter would.

Let’s be honest. Brands can be a PAIN to follow. Always talking about themselves – what’s new in THEIR world, why THEY’RE the greatest. Sort of like the worst humans you follow, right?

And try as they might to be cute and creative (some undoubtedly doing better than others), it all eventually boils back to self-promotion.

Because that’s what BUSINESSES (have to) do.

Arby’s is (still) just a fast food enterprise. 

Are we supposed to tip our hats to Arby’s (pun INTENDED) because in this particular instance, their aim was not directly business related or self-promotional?

…Because it felt human?

Why not just follow more humans!?

I wonder,
  • How many new followers did it provide Arby’s? 
  • What will happen with retention when they go back to non-stop product pitching? 
  • And most importantly, how many more Beef ‘n Chedds did it sell?

You’re thinking, “Alright, grandpa – you are WAY too young to be this cynical about brands interacting on social media!”

Right?

OK, maybe I am being a bit too harsh.

We’re all marketers, learning to walk the social media tightrope together. The exposure cost seconds to place and pennies to craft, so who can argue with opportunity cost?

It’s just that so many other brands have done it before – they’ve broken character, provided modest laughs, we all move on.

It’s not a new tactic, just Arby’s turn to hit the tenderly-tossed softball!

And just to be clear, I’m not against brands getting cheeky with customers online.

Tweets from businesses can be casual and conversational. They can be cynical, callous, or coy. They just have to jive with the brand they represent.

Of all communication channels, social media is the most anthropomorphic. It should be your brand, PERSONIFIED!

But just like the best characters in literature, movies, and TV, I expect solid, thought-out, consistent (twitter) character development!

Not loose comedy, once in a million tweets.

Ya with me!?

TGIF
-Daniel :)

 PS: and pubs, don’t give me that bull about it being a “slow news week” – we’re DAYS away from Marketing’s biggest stage! (rants and raves on Super Bowl strategies to come)

Monday, January 27, 2014

Happy 100! Morton gets a new look.



It’s a milestone year for Morton Salt – the organization is celebrating its centennial with a brand refresh.

And like the best in baking, ‘a pinch’ is enough.
When you’re the market leader in something as basic as salt – (actually table salt is neither basic nor acidic, it’s neutral, but ‘basic’ in terms of product marketing) – it’s best not to rock the boat on brand.

The new mark is practically indistinguishable against its 46 year-old predecessor. Really, blink and you might miss it.
The girl has cleaner lines, her yellow dress and hair really *POP* now without the overkill of shadowing. And a stronger fall of rain calls for a healthier pour of salt! Both happenings are better emphasized in the new iteration.

The typeface is sturdier, with the “R” having a more playful swagger and kick not unlike the salt-touting girl herself.

One of America’s “10 best-known symbols” (Post-Tribune, September 1989), the logo and heavily optioned tagline “when it rains, it pours” was originally crafted as a method of promotion that Morton salt remained free-flowing even in rainy weather, thanks to unique, ultra-absorbing agents. #nowyouknow

I guess easy does it!

Haven’t had enough of one of America’s favorite blondes? The company has an entire website built to promote the centennial.