Showing posts with label Verizon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Verizon. Show all posts

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.


Thursday, January 10, 2013

Who, What, and Why, T-Mobile?



Happy New Year, y’all.

Personally speaking, 2012 was one of the best years I’ve come across in a while; leaving some big shoes for 2013 to fill. The arrival of January always puts me in a bit of a funk – how is it only the 10th?! I swear this year is off to an especially slow start. It’s been like trudging through thick, ankle-deep mud.

It goes without saying that I’ve been a bit uninspired as of late. In the world of Marketing and Advertising, nothing has really caught my attention.

And so I’ll pick on T-Mobile’s domestic strategy.

It's been bothering me for at least 6 months. I just don’t get it.

How did we go from this…

…to this?
And more importantly why?

The old ads were kitschy and cute; T-Mobile was the anti-establishment of mobile phone companies. Bright, fun, and non-threatening – if you were sick of dealing with the big guys T-Mobile was for you!

Speaking chronologically, I know it happened shortly after the merger with AT&T fell apart.

Maybe marketing at T-Mobile went on auto-pilot during the review process (I mean, you can’t rally against the big guys if you’ll soon be part of them, now can you?).

But speaking strategically!?

When AT&T-Mobile was found out not to be, T went back to the drawing board and kicked campaigning into high gear (literally).
This commercial is perhaps the worst of them all. That chant will get in your head and grate on your soul, I promise.

What’s the point of touting 4-G coverage when you can’t claim superiority over the competition?

"Largest." Do they just assume consumers naïve enough to ignore Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint’s take on 4-G? The new campaigns feel as though T-Mobile is the damaged ex-girlfriend, hell bent on showing the world she’s better off alone. She’s stronger, faster and out for mobile domination.

But how can you be out for blood when you’ve the least robust coverage and worst line up of smart phones? (STILL T-Mobile’s retail shelves sit hungry for iPhone).

Is the new attitude supposed to resonate with men?

Each commercial does feel like an animated spread for some G-rated version of Maxim magazine. But what macho guy wants to be caught walking into a store dripping in that hot, magenta pink?

Is the new attitude supposed to resonate with women?

Trading her simple pink dresses for black leather cat suits, something tells me our favorite T-Mobile heroine isn’t motivating any more of her lady brethren with motorcycle racing and dark alley strut-abouts.

Will someone clear the fog for me?

Who is T-Mobile trying to attract?
What is T-Mobile selling?
And Why is it a smart business move?


BONUS: In doing my (minimal) research, I re-discovered this gem from December 2011. It might just be my obsession with Christmas cheer, but THIS is the T-Mobile I loved. It just felt more genuine:
 
 

Friday, December 28, 2012

Our 2013 New Logo Wish List

We saw a lot of brand revisions over the last 12 months.

Some good, some not-so-good.
Nearly all following a trend in “less is more/K.I.S.S.” marketing design.

But while many brands decided to go under the knife this year, there’s many more that did not, but should have.

And so, without further ado, here’s just a  short list of the brands we’d like to see transformed in 2013.

In alphabetical order:
Bed Bath & Beyond
I almost always mistakenly say Bath & Body Works. Anyone else? Talk about a lack of brand equity!
Bed. Bath. And Beyond. The name itself is an alliteration of 3 B-words of public domain. How about Boring Bland and Bloated? And speaking of bloated, the word “BEYOND.”  I get what they’re trying to do here; intimate their store carries EVERYTHING. But it just looks lazy and out of date.

They need something that’s more compact, even when stacked. The words themselves are uninspired, so BB&B should work to build some sort of brand personality out of the font/character style and colors they choose. Partner the name with a mascot even? It couldn’t hurt.

Buick
I’ll never understand why GM would give the ax to Pontiac only to leave Buick standing. Pontiac drove excitement, what’s Buick drive? Grandmas and grandpas to church, that’s what. And not very fast.
I’m guessing that I’m not Buick’s target market. But really, I want to know where GM sees this nameplate within its brand ecosystem. While Cadillac is old luxury, is Buick the other 99%? Our grandparents loved them, but that was 20+ years ago. As our parents take their place in the family tree they’re not just going to concede themselves to driving mom and dad’s car. And so, a new Buick for a new generation of Buick owners! That’s what we need.

The circle + 3 bands of armor could be completely reimagined. Maybe it’s a rectangle with a tighter crop on the shields? Maybe in includes a new palate of color? Maybe the word “Buick” comes back in dropped casing? How to get there is up to you. Just get there.

Burger King
I'm pretty sure my Burger King Kids Club (BKKC) membership documents boasted the same corporate seal back in 1992.
The primary blue + red + yellow just feels greasy and chock full of saturated fat. Use brand revision as an opportunity to more clearly articulate your position in the face of competition. It doesn’t have to be drastic like Wendy’s Q1 forecasted change (ick). Maybe, like Arby’s, it’s just a matter of growing up a bit.

Instead of basic, garish color, opt for a silver, almost-metallic finish? Or maybe rich earth tones? Down play “Burger King” for an abbreviated “BK” in a stately new font. Finally put a crown on the thing (subtle, yet kitschy).
 
Neiman Marcus
Is it too early to call the Target-Neiman holiday partnership a flop? It was a decent attempt at meeting next-gen luxury buyers where they are today, but with store shelves still stocked, year-end mark downs were imminent. It might be time to take brand redefinition a new direction.
50% off and STILL not moving?
A quick stroll down Chicago’s Michigan Ave this time of year will help size up the competition. For Saks, it’s a simple-stoic Christmas, classic luxury. Nordstrom is warm charming eclectic (oh, and obsessed with birds). Then on the other end of the spectrum, Bloomingdales hosts a bright and boisterous, high-energy holiday. These auras transcend the stores’ holiday motifs into everyday branding. And so I ask again, who is Neiman-Marcus?
Neiman’s is taupe walls and tan dated marble floors. Neiman’s is your rich (great) aunt’s store – where she can still buy loose knit sweaters with sparkles and extra-high shoulder pads. It’s stuffy with heavy perfume and always at least 10 degrees too hot.

I realize for heritage retail brands it's a giant leap of faith to stray on logo. But there's no equity in ultra-80's squiggle fonts. It looks like it should be spelling out “you can do it!” on the wall of a jazzercise class. You’re on your own with this one, guys – but there’s got to be something you can do to breathe some new life into NM.

Pizza Hut
I know, we loved the 90's too, but they aren't coming back. Actually, the clothes might, but let’s not wait up, OK?
The font feels like it belongs to a Mexican fast-casual restaurant. And seriously, what’s with the squirt of yellow mustard at the bottom? And the jalapeño pepper dotted “i?” Do you even have jalapeño peppers? The iconic roofline has been reduced to a misshapen mess that even the most agreeable Red Hat Society gal would refuse to wear.

Put simply, the logo is sloppy and doesn’t compute well in the age of digital. Cleaner lines, less scribbles. As the menu expands, maybe consider dropping to “The Hut?”

Verizon Wireless
I suppose they’re too busy ruling the air to come down to earth for a brand tune up. The logo is not half bad. It’s just over-exposed.
We see it daily; across every advertising channel imaginable. 34(ish)% of us see it every time we go to return a text. Sprint refreshed when it purchased Nextel and AT&T recently refined casing and their globe. So maybe it’s just that Verizon seems to be the only one still using last generation’s logo. If there’s any industry where you want to feel young, hip, and cutting edge, it’s mobile telecom. And yet, every time I see the Verizon logo, I think of my first cell phone, the Qualcomm Kyocera (circa 2000).

It was cool on flip phones. Now what do you got for smart phones?

So there you have it. 6 brands on my new logo wish list for 2013.

Do you have any others to add?
Please, share with us!

….and Happy New Year everyone!
Cheers,
Daniel