In case you ever wondered how bad ads get that way, you may want to check out this film. It's a cross between Truth in Advertising and Nine Ways to Improve an Ad. If there were no stop signs this is how they would be developed by a company and their ad agency.
Well it's June and that mean tines for the annual pilgrimage to the South of France. If you will be at the Cannes Lions next week let's meet up. I'll be there all week with colleagues from The Duffy Agency and the Transworld Advertising Agency Network (TAAN).
I'll be representing The Duffy Agency if you want to talk agency biz. I'll also be representing our advertising agency network, TAAN if you want to talk about the group. And I'll be representing myself in case you'd like to stop talking shop and just have a couple of beers.
Established in New York in 1936, TAAN is a global group of about 50 independent ad agencies from all over the world. We’re always interested in talking to new agencies who might be interested in applying for membership. If you are from an independent agency please give me a shout.
It seems it will be quieter at Cannes this year compared to years past. Look on the bright side: more room at the Gutter Bar!
Today I received a package from my sister who lives in Boston. Inside was something I haven’t seen since I was twelve: a box of Quisp breakfast cereal. That's because its producer, Quaker Oats, stopped selling the brand in the mid 1970's. Thirty years later it seems Quaker Oats have had a change of heart (assuming that my box of Quisp is new and not some relic my sister found on E-Bay).
A company returning one of its retired brands to the market can be effective at promoting a sense of nostalgia. But I suspect the reasons for reviving lost brands today is less about sentiment and more about dollars and cents. All this makes the practice more relevant today than ever. The implications of Quisp’s return provide a lesson in brand equity management that could yield a nice windfall for companies who have a backlog of retired brands.
Brim is another case in point. Brim Coffee from General Foods was once a household name in America. That was until General Foods was merged into the same conglomerate as Kraft Foods who owned the Maxwell House brand. Brim was made redundant and quietly sidelined in the 90's. In 2007 a company called River West Brands in Chicago did some research and discovered that among people over the age of 25, Brim had 92 percent aided awareness. With that awareness come perceptions, mostly positive and grown somewhat sweeter, I'd imagine, in the sepia-glow of nostalgia.
Quisp and Brim are just the beginning. There are hundreds of has-been brands around the world that have been removed from the market often for no fault of their own. Each of these brands houses latent awareness and perception, not to mention a warm and fuzzy sense of nostalgia.
Think of it: A company like General Foods or Quaker Oats invest hundreds of millions burning a brand name in the the minds of every man, woman and child in America. Later, due to mergers or mismanagement, the brand fall out of favor and disappears. Where does the brand equity go? Nowhere, it stays where it has always been - with consumers.
Even though the product has disappeared from the shelves, the brand awareness and brand perceptions will live on for a generation. That's because the real equity was built up and accumulated in the brains of all the people who knew the brand. And it remains there ready to be tapped as long as those people are alive.
Why were so many companies so willing to ditch these brands are why is repurposing brands becoming more relevant today? Because these brands were built before the long tail, before TiVo and before the media market was shattered into thousands of tiny specialized shards. A slide shown at last years CGAM conference in Los Angeles summed it up best "In the 1960's an advertiser could reach 80% of U.S. women with a spot aired simultaneously on CBS, NBC and ABC. Today an ad would have to run on 100 TV channels to have a prayer at duplicating that feat. ... Monolithic blocks of eyeballs are gone." (Forrester Research)
An article in the New York Times tells the story of how P&G, owner of the Charmin toilet paper brand, abandoned the somewhat less popular White Cloud toilet paper brand. An entrepreneur snatched up the brand and resumed production selling exclusively to WallMart. WallMart’s customers probably have no clue the brand ever traded hands. As a result P&G finds itself competing against a brand P&G created. The article relates a similar story of how the defunct ibuprofen brand Nuprin was revived and sold to US drugstore giant CVS to serve as a premium-priced house brand (it has since been discontinued by CVS).
Brands from the 20th century were built when awareness was relatively cheap. Today the cost of building brand awareness has risen more sharply than sweet crude. So its only natural that the idea of extracting the awareness from retired brands would be a viable option. In fact retired brands have emerged on financial radar screens as a new asset category. A pioneer in bringing these assets to light has been River West Brands. In fact they have build their entire business around the idea. Its an ingenious business model.
"We recognized the opportunity presented by dormant brands in 2001, and have been working to systematically transform these brands from orphans into valuable assets ever since. We are the first company ever to successfully acquire and exploit brands in this new emerging asset class." - River West Brands
They are working on resuscitating a number of brands that you may recognize, but probably haven’t thought about in years.
Its not as if these brands are carrying a lot of baggage. These brands did not fail catastrophically. In most cases they just failed to hold our interest and faded away. The first time we notice they are gone is when we hear they are returning.
On the other hand, not all brands are fit for revival. Had these brands failed catastrophically, they would probably not be worth reviving no matter how much awareness they have. I don't think Enron, Arthur Andersen, or Lehman Brothers will be making a comeback anytime soon. That is unless they were to reinvent themselves in a completely different category like the line of chic watches that revived the Nixon brand from the category of failed presidencies to that of hip fashion accessory.
Of course, healthy brand awareness and fond memories alone will not guarantee success in a competitive market. But it can go a long way towards mitigating the risk of launch and speeding uptake. So if you have any old brands kicking around in your corporate closet, now might be a good time to dust them off and see what they’re worth. If you need inspiration, consider that the Volkswagen Beetle was once a dead brand too.
See Also:
For all your dead brand needs and a great list of 101 dead brands check out J. Garland Pollard IV's Brand Land USA Blog.
Kindle: an elegant union of strategy, tech and environment
A couple of weeks ago I was in Boston on my way to have lunch with a marketing strategist who's blog I read on occasion. As I was on my way out the door my business partner phoned. I told him my lunch plans and he asked if I had read the strategist's book. "I didn't know he had a book" was my reply. Three minutes later I had the book in my Kindle and was able to skim enough of it in a 20-minute cab ride to extract a few discussion points. And that's just one of the reason's I am in awe of the Kindle.
In fact, Amazon's Kindle gets my vote for the most ingenious marketing innovation of the decade (the operative word being "marketing" innovation not "technical" innovation). It is not technology for technology's sake, it is technology for marketing's sake. Rarely do customer, company and environmental benefits meet so elegantly under one marketing strategy as in this wireless reading device.
Kindle is truly a win-win-win product. A win for readers because it makes it possible to carry hundreds of books and periodicals with you and easily search them, add notes, etc. It also makes it infinitely easier to purchase a book. This is great for the consumer but an even bigger win for Amazon. With Kindle in hand, books now become an impulse purchase. And at $9.99 or less per book, the price is right. The third "win" is for the environment. Books delivered digitally thorough Kindle Whispernet require no paper or printing and no CO2 for transport. I got my Kindle2 last Christmas and it is still my favorite work tool.
Amazon is posturing Kindle to be for writing what the iPod is for music. But just as Amazon started in books and then expanded beyond, the Kindle seems poised to offer readers more than the latest John Grisham novel. The main menu includes an "Experimental" section which includes basic web surfing capabilities, MP3 player and the legally debated text-to-speech feature. I believe these beta-functions are foreshadowing the future direction of the device which I bet will include full-color touch screen, web browsing all in addition to books and periodicals via Whispernet.
One recent development is the ability to subscribe to blogs, including Brand Rants, for $0.99 a month. Why pay for something that's free online? I don't know, but I suppose the answer has something to do with the convenience (and coolness) of having it effortlessly delivered to your Kindle. Convinced? Sign up here.
I think we all have a lot to learn form Jeff Bezos when it comes to using technology to enhance our marketing. I would advise any marketer to study the Kindle case as an example of how a smart marketing strategy can best put technology to work. We've only seen the first few chapters of the Kindle story, so far its a real page-turner.
See Also:
Amazon Puts Any Blog on the Kindle, for a Price
I received the following questions from a student at the University of Oregon. She is looking into the history of pharmaceutical marketing and the tactics they use to reach their customers. Thanks to Emilee for the questions. My history with pharma only dates back to 1993 and is based solely my first-hand observations working with them. I hope these answers help.
Have the drug companies taken over the Internet yet? Not at all. They are cautiously dipping their toes in the water. Pharma companies are risk-aversive when it comes to marketing in general. They need to be. Their marketing activities are highly regulated by government bodies like the FDA in the US. Their collective reticence also stems from the fact that pharma has no real marketing tradition. Their traditional approach is based on a door-to-door B-to-B sales model. In recent years I have noticed some real pockets of marketing excellence inside big pharma, however, on average most pharma companies still have stronger sales forces than marketing departments.
What have they done online so far?
Their list of achievements with regard to social media and Web 2.0 is meager but they are eager to catch up and are making progress. Most of the highlights can be found in this AdAge article: Big Pharma Finally Taking Big Steps to Reach Patients With Digital Media (note: AdAge moves articles to their members only area after about a week). Also check of the Dose of Digital Pharma Social Media Wiki. Companies like GSK and J&J seem to be leading the way and creating precedent for others to follow. The fact that pharma companies around the world seem to be cutting back the number sales reps they employ can only place more focus on the web.
What are you doing for them?
My company provides both consulting and creative services to pharma. We have helped several pharma and medical companies transition from sales-oriented to market-oriented organizations (admittedly with varying degrees of success). That means helping them understand what brands are, how they are developed and how they can profit from them. It also means helping them transition their operational routines from a sales-only mentality to a more market-oriented mind set.
We are helping several pharma and medical companies create a social media presence in Europe, the Americas and beyond. This usually involves developing a web-based marketing strategy and tactical plan and then creating web assets for them. We aim to help companies not only optimize their web sites but to optimize their presence across the web as a whole. We call this web presence optimization or WebPOP™ for short.
Right now we are also conducting a survey of social media activity among pharma companies and certain indications across Europe. We find that what little activity exists in Europe is usually being instigated by pharma employees and patients acting on their own. European regulations concerning pharma marketing are far more restrictive than the FDA’s regulations in the States.
Since we also work in traditional media we encourage our pharma clients to develop integrated campaigns. Next week I’ll be posting a newsletter which features a case study for an OTC product we promoted for GSK that leveraged both social and traditional media to produce a great outcome.
And what is the future looking like for pharmaceutical marketing?
Bright, particularly in contrast to it's lackluster past. As I said pharma has been poor at marketing communication for decades. They took for granted that if they produced a pill they could push it out into the market through their sales force.
As a result of their dependence on sales tactics, their marketing muscles never developed. It has made more sense for them to walk away from marketing challenges than to compete. For instance, when the patent on a drug runs out historically they abandon the product and let the “generics” take their business. Unless they have a guaranteed monopoly with inflated margins - they won’t play. Its a wasteful approach to business but it has worked for them. In recent years pharma has started to understand the power of brands. For example I don’t think Pfizer will walk away from Viagra when the patent expires.
Since its inception, big pharma has made a lot of money using their door-to-door salesman model to push their drugs into the market. Historically, they have done this without employing the strategic marketing or brand development tactics one would typically employ to generate pull from professionals or good will from the public. While this has done wonders for their balance sheet it has has the opposite effect on public sentiment. Today, the pharma industry is mistrusted by most and despised by many. It ranks near oil and tobacco with regard to consumer trust. And they can only blame themselves.
I never got the feeling that pharma execs worried much about consumer sentiment. That isn’t to say they were up to no good or had anything to hide. To the contrary, they do a lot of good. I've found our pharma clients to be among the most ethical professionals I have worked with. But cultivating public sentiment hasn't been a priority. The only sentiments they focused on were those of investors and financial analysts. Several months ago we did a survey of big pharma web sites. Of the top ten pharma companies, nine (J&J was the exception) featured their stock market performance as the main feature of their landing page. What does this say to patients? ““Love to help you ... but first let’s talk about me and how much money I make”. Thankfully, I believe that too is changing - albeit slowly.
We see a trend for pharma to become better at marketing and brand development. A central part of that will be developing a mastery of web marketing and social media. My personal goal is to encourage more pharma companies to develop sustainable brands based on transparency, facilitation and participation (see my post Ethics, honesty and advertising ). Deep down inside most pharma companies are good and have nothing to hide, they just have to realize that they can profit from letting people see that.
Kindle now offers its users the opportunity to subscribe to their favorite blogs via their Kindle. New posts are automatically delivered to the hand-held device for a subscription fee of $0.99 per month. Learn more here.
The following is a reply posted in Ad Age in response to the article Big Pharma Finally Taking Big Steps to Reach Patients With Digital Media
I've always found it ironic that an industry that saves millions of lives each year is among the most mistrusted and despised by the public. But the pharma industry has only itself to blame.
In the past silence was the preferred strategy for pharma. It generated massive amounts of resentment towards the pharma industry, but heck, they still sold their pills. Today pharma is realizing that there is also profit in having strong brands (corporate and product) and silence is no longer a viable strategy. One reason is because if they do not tell their story there is a resentful public who is more than willing to tell it for them.
Most pharma companies do a lot of good and would benefit from more
transparency. As jbernoff points out fear factor is one of the biggest
obstacles pharma is dealing with. A tradition of silence, and in many
cases corporate arrogance, is hard to break. I agree with Loreen
Babcock. Pharma needs social media and those companies who embrace it
will benefit as will their shareholders.
OPENING REMARKS TO THE TAAN 2009 GLOBAL SUMMIT IN COPENHAGEN
I’d like to thank you all for being here for the 2009 TAAN Global summit. I know most of you traveled great distances to join us here in Copenhagen. You represent agencies and perspectives from five continents, so I’m sure the exchange over the next three days will be fruitful.
We began planing the program for this meeting last June at the Cannes Lions. Many of the talks at last year’s ad festival focused on all the changes happening around Web 2.0 and social media. Chuck Porter (Crispin Porter + Bogusky) brilliantly summed up 7 days of lectures in one sentence "Everything is changing and you are so screwed." And this was before the global financial crisis kicked in.
Cannes got us thinking. Is everything really changing? And are we really screwed?
To the first point, yes, things are changing. The way ad agencies are organized, the skill sets required to service clients, the way we are paid, the media landscape, the number of channels we have to deliver our message, the technology surrounding those channels, the competitors we face and the demands placed upon us by the economy, employees and our clients - all these things are certainly in a state of flux.
No doubt, these issues are important and need to be resolved. But in developing a theme for this meeting we wondered if all this financial crisis and change might not be distracting us from our core business as ad agencies — the reason many of us got involved in advertising and marketing in the first place.
Do you believe new revenue models and web 2.0 alone will save our agencies? Moreover will these factors build the next great ad agency? We don’t think so. In that sense, maybe we are screwed.
At the center of this whirlwind of change we see two constants. They are the core competencies around which all great agencies are built:
These are the basics and without them all the Twitter followers, Facebook friends and Google juice in cyberspace won’t be enough to help your agency or the brands you represent.
So we decided that this still point, the basic skills of our craft, would be an apt theme for this meeting. I propose that over the next three days we collectively get back to basics and address these 3 questions:
As part of that we have instigated the first ever TAAN creative awards called the Titan Awards. We first proposed this four years ago and were met with a lukewarm response. Given that and the short notice we figured we would get about 50 entrees. We got 420. And if you look around the room at the short-listed entrees, I think you will be pleasantly surprised at the quality of work your network is producing. So thanks to everyone who participated. We’ll be having our first ever Titan Award Gala on Saturday evening. And if you haven’t been there yet, I’d encourage you to visit the Titan Award web site. You can link off the www.taan.org site.
So again, on behalf of everyone at The Duffy Agency, thanks for being here and for helping the group get get back to basics over the next three days and beyond.
If you enjoyed this post, please copy and paste the text below into Twitter, Facebook or your favorite social media site.
Back to Basics: Ad Agencies adapting to a Web 2.0 world http://bit.ly/j7VKg
WHY ITS A GOOD TIME TO GET BACK TO BASICS
Today you have more options for marketing your brand than ever. Tomorrow you'll have even more. And that’s the problem. To read Ad Age or Campaign one would think that everything in our industry — from media to research to consumers to the agency model — is in a radical state of flux. It probably is. But in a world where so many aspects of our business are changing right out from under us, I think many marketing practitioners have lost sight of the two things that have not changed at all: the core functions of uncovering insights and telling compelling stories around them. Without these two things all the Twitter followers, Facebook friends and widget downloads will not help your brand.
If you are on the client-side you should demand these skills of any company or social media guru who tries to sell you on their ability to help your marketing program. If you are on the agency-side you should make sure that in your efforts to keep up with all this change you do not neglect them.
To help our TAAN agencies in this regard we have build our global meeting in Copenhagen around this theme with the title “Back to Basics”. For those on the client-side and others I will include some “Back to Basics” posts in the months to come where I will explore the often-overlooked basics of good marketing and how they apply to today’s rapidly evolving marketing environment.
Post to Twitter
