ethanbeute

Marketing | Environment | Culture

Tag: brand (Page 2 of 3)

U.S. Postal Service: Are You Emotionally Attached?

October 14, 2010 /

They don’t seem to care much about customer service or performance.  You’ve probably got a complaint or six about them.  They expect to lose $7,000,000,000 of our money this year.

But when NewMediaMetrics surveyed 3,500 Americans ages 13-54 with annual income of at least $35,000 earlier this year, they beat the following brands, among many others.

  • Car makers: Mercedes-Benz, Audi, Jeep, BMW, VW, Toyota
  • Big boxes: Walmart, Target
  • Tech: Microsoft, Sony, Samsung
  • Iconic: Nike, Coca Cola, M&Ms
  • Various: Victoria’s Secret, Visa, Hershey’s Milk Chocolate, Sea World, Southwest Airlines

Look who rounds out the top 15 of the Leap (Leveraging Emotional Attachment for Profit) Index this year.  Beating out loads of heavy-hitting brands … it’s your United States Postal Service!

Consumers Brand Ranking NewMediaMetrics

Leap Index: Top 15 Brands Consumers Are Most Attached To

This 9/10 list ranks brands based on how many people are most unwilling to give up the brand, ranking it a 9 or a 10 on a 0 to 10 scale.  That’s some love … for the USPS.

The United States Postal Service is the same operation that delivers mail to my home any time between 5 and 8pm most nights.

The U.S. Postal Service is the same operation that set up deliveringtrust.com to teach people about preventing mail fraud when they deliver other people’s mail to my home, including “Important Tax Documents” and what look like bank statements, at least once a week.  Yes, they’re handing over to me other people’s sensitive information (which I either take to their house or drop back into a nearby mailbox).

The USPS is the same operation that could not deliver a piece of mail addressed 100% correctly to my wife from a store that’s less than 3 miles from our house – even though they tried twice.

Undelivered undeliverable fail failed address

Though addressed 100% correctly, this letter could not make it less than 3 miles from its source to its destination on either of two attempts. Instead, it was picked up in-store a month later. Blue marks made by me in Photoshop to conceal partially the address for public posting here.

I like to receive mail.  I read many magazines brought to my front door by the mail carrier.  I pay many bills by mail.  We still physically exchange our Netflix DVDs by mail.

I like attachment.  I want to feel attached to our USPS.  The problem is that they consistently give me reasons not to like them.  (TWO WEEK UPDATE: my wife’s been sending packages to a friend in the military overseas requiring two customs forms each time and says our local office has been very helpful and friendly.  Still not attached, though.)

Are you “emotionally attached” to the United States Postal Service?  Positively or negatively?

Do you have a USPS love or hate story you’d like to share here?  Please do!

Links

2010 Leap Index Top 100 as PDF

Ad Age article about 2010 Leap Index

Toyota: Finding Its Compass

September 10, 2010 /

Nearly two months ago to the day (July 9), I posted about Toyota’s incredible run on “safety” as a campaign message.

That post, “Toyota: Lost in the Wilderness?,” is right here.

Its thrust: given all the recalls and problems, are they already done with this “safety” push?  It seems so, given some new social media-oriented, reliability-themed spots I’ve seen.  Just as I was noticing how blatant the safety sell was, both in print and on-air, some fun, story-based spots started showing up in the ad mix.  I found it problematic – a premature watering-down of the critical “safety” theme.

This is a company whose entire brand was built on reliability.  Since November, though, it’s recalled more than 10,000,000 cars in the United States.  The brand name repeatedly made headlines about sticky gas pedals and sudden acceleration.  They made a brief, hard run at “safety,” but seemed to be flitting off in other directions after just a couple months.

Toyota Safety Reliability Durability Message Ad Advertising Message Campaign Perception Reality

Toyota Commits to the Safety Message

This morning, I was flipping through a recent issue of Advertising Age and read this headline:  “Toyota to Push Safety in Ad Blitz.”  I thought I was reading a back issue, but no … it’s dated September 6, 2010.  The story’s a bit longer online than in print and can be read here.

Basically, Saatchi Los Angeles is building more creative elements to support the safety message – with an emphasis on the STAR Safety System.  The campaign will run “well into 2011.”  The renewed push is likely spurred by horrific August sales figures.

Sounds like they’ve found their compass.

PBR in China: The Power of Positioning

August 4, 2010 /

Like water into wine, Pabst Blue Ribbon went seriously upscale for its product launch in China, demonstrating the power of positioning.  Though the dynamic of consumers’ definitions of who you are and how you relate to competitors is always a factor, opportunities arise for brands to make that definition and claim that mental space for themselves.  The jury’s still out since this story’s only a couple weeks old, but I’m anxious to know how this works out for PBR.

A brief history of Pabst Blue Ribbon in America from my perspective:

  • born in the late 1800’s in the upper midwest
  • a blue collar beer for most of my lifetime
  • sales peak in 1977 then fall off dramatically
  • enjoying a resurgence among urban hipsters who can’t resist the great taste of irony
  • overall a decent brand for its overlord, Miller Brewing
PBR, Pabst

As if from water into wine, PBR goes luxury for China launch.

A brief introduction of Pabst Blue Ribbon in China:

  • now called “Blue Ribbon 1844” (reference to Pabst founding date)
  • now a luxury brand, a “world famous spirit”
  • now sells for $44 per bottle (720-ml bottle, more detailed brew)
Pabst, Pabst Blue Ribbon, China, launch, branding, positioning, 1844

Pabst launches "Blue Ribbon 1844" in China

What a clever way to take advantage of a huge, new market – completely re-position the brand for introduction to an audience largely ignorant of PBR’s unpretentious past.

As noted above, this isn’t simply a repackaging of the same product.  The March 5 edition of Modern Brewery Age describes the person and process nicely.  They hired Alan Kornhauser, of Jos. Huber, Anchor Brewing, Portland Brewing, August Schell and others, to work in China six months of the year.  “We just produced China’s first real specialty beer, an all-malt, reddish brown strong (15.7 plato) ale, dry hopped with Cascade (38 IBU) and aged in new uncharred American whiskey barrels,” MBA quotes him.  They’re only selling Blue Ribbon 1844 in China.

So they’ve re-positioned the Pabst Blue Ribbon brand in an honest and meaningful way.  That’s even better than clever.

Toyota: Lost in the Wilderness?

July 9, 2010 /

What a great ad. What a great message. What a great brand.

I loved where Toyota was with this:

The automotive branding textbook example is “Volvo = Safety.”

A runner up: “Toyota = Reliability.”

Once the darling of the automotive world for its efficient production, fantastic sales and extreme reliability, however, Toyota‘s taken quite a hit over the past year.

3.8 million cars. 8,000 trucks. 600,000 minivans.  270,000 luxury vehicles just last week.  That’s a lot of recalls (and that little recall rundown’s far from complete!).

Reliability ratings have fallen, too.

Result: a hard tack away from reliability toward …

Wow!  That’s a ton of “safety.”  A quick count has them at seven mentions per :30 spot – nearly one time every four seconds!

On the upside: message is loud and clear, yet casual and clean.  Also, safety is not wholly separate from reliability; I consider the two concepts quite compatible.  It’s also timely and topical, if not a little bold given the state of all things Toyota.

On the downside: if you’re a Toyota owner (which I’ve never been), you may not buy the message – especially if the recalls have been particularly inconvenient.  This “safety” onslaught (I’ve seen several full-page print ads to match these spots) is not even fresh on the heels of the safety and reliability problems – it’s amid them.  I feel strongly, though, that something often enough repeated comes to be believed (for better and for worse).

I feel like this direction could really work … but they’re already giving up on it.

“They’re Already Giving Up” Exhibit A:

In short: “smart, young go-getter gets a helping hand from a good corporate citizen.”  Two notes: “Erica” does say the word “reliable” and it’s the same voice as the safety campaign.

The “safety” sell, though, seems to have expired.  They must have research that suggests their problems with perceived safety and reliability are over – or that those perception/imaging problems were never too deep.

If not, I’m considering Toyota lost in the wilderness.

Disclaimer: Toyota is obviously a highly sophisticated marketer.  My observations are based strictly in mainstream television and magazine messages.  I expect fully that they’ve got many targeted, niche campaigns striking exactly where needed that are beyond my view.

He Loves to Fly … and It Shows!

April 15, 2010 /

I saw a remarkable piece in the Wall Street Journal yesterday.

Headline:  Abercrombie Pays Its CEO To Jet Less

Right off the top:

  • Any company can compensate its employees any way it sees fit
  • I don’t begrudge a person for using what’s made available to him or her
  • A publicly held company should be held accountable by its stockholders
  • I have no stake in this company

Now to the story:

Michael Jeffries, A&F chief executive since the 90’s, received a $4,000,000 payment in exchange for limiting his “personal use of the corporate jet.”  He’s now limited to just $200,000 of personal use per year.

That’s limiting?  OK, what did “unlimited” look like?

From 2006-2008, “he booked an average of about $850,000 a year worth of personal travel time on the corporate jet.”  In 2008 alone, he racked up $1,100,000 of use.

Let’s break that down in a hypothetical scenario:

  • Let’s use $1,000,000 as the annual use – it’s not too far off the 3-year average, it’s under the 2008 total and it’s easily divisible.
  • Let’s say he uses the jet every single weekend of the year … except for six.
  • Let’s say over those six other weekends, he’s actually on four longer vacations.
  • So: 50 trips total.
  • That’s $20,000 per trip.
  • Wow.

Honestly, I’ve never shopped for personal or chartered use of a jet.  I will say that $20,000 per trip seems a bit high.  Also, my proposed annual schedule of every weekend, plus four longer vacations is a pretty aggressive recreational schedule for the CEO of a company with $3.5B in annual sales; it seems like Jeffries might be more busy than my hypothetical scenario suggests.

In short: he loves to fly – on what must be a luxurious corporate jet – for personal use – a lot.

CEO Abercrombie & Fitch

A&F CEO Michael Jeffries loves to fly ... and it shows!

Brief background:

Abercrombie & Fitch has more than 350 stores, most of them in the US (3 in Canada and 1 each in London, Milan and Tokyo).  You might recognize A&F as the clothing store in the mall in which the male models don’t wear any shirts, the female models are half naked and none of them are minorities.  They also own the Hollister, RUEHL and Gilly Hicks brands and operate more than 1,100 total stores.  They also sell direct by web.  They sell apparel primarily targeted to people under 30.

The A&F brand has been alive since the 60’s and today is rooted in “East Coast traditions and Ivy League heritage” and taps into the “essence of privilege and casual luxury” (seriously, you have to read their self-description in the open of their latest annual report).  It’s been owned by The Limited since 1988.  Here’s a look at their 10-year stock performance:

stock performance, 10 year, A&F, ANF

Abercrombie & Fitch (ANF) 10-year Stock Price Performance

Jeffries has presided over a very nice growth story.  If you want to call $1M/yr in personal use of the corporate jet excessive, at least acknowledge that his use peaked during years in which his company was performing.

Today, however, times are tough.  Here’s a brand approach to their problems from Brandchannel.  Here’s an image and financial approach to the situation from MSNBC’s “The Big Money.”

Naturally, then, they’re looking to reduce costs – hence the $4M buyout of Jeffries’ unlimited personal flying privileges.

Questions:

Would a CEO who really cares about the fate of his company accept a $4,000,000 buyout in exchange for dropping his personal use of the corporate jet down to $200,ooo/year?  Why would he not of his own volition simply agree to a cut back?

When you identify unlimited personal flying as a costly sinkhole for your ailing company, do you take your observation to the legal department to start structuring a deal or do you take it straight to the CEO?

Does your in-house legal team put this deal together or do you hire it out?  Do A&F and Jeffries have separate representatives in the negotiation?  Was it contentious (as in “No way!  $3M is insufficient compensation for limiting my client’s personal use of the corporate jet.  That’s less than the value of his next 3 years of personal use of the corporate jet.” | “OK, how about $4M?” | “Deal!”)?  What were the total legal fees incurred?

What would you make of this whole thing  as a stockholder?  Would there be any way a stockholder would even know about such extensive personal use of the jet?

Bottom Line:

This isn’t some populist rant about CEO’s running out of control.  As mentioned off the top, I find the whole scenario perfectly acceptable, though fascinating in its outrageousness.  I also find it a little offensive from a potential shareholder’s standpoint.

The Reconstruction Begins: Tiger Woods & Nike

April 8, 2010 /

I’m as tired of the Tiger Woods story as you are.  Really.

However, I’ve seen a ton of nonsense about the first Tiger Woods ad to appear since the revelation of his extensive sexual indiscretions.

Two main categories of nonsense:

  • The ad is an expression of greed by Tiger Woods and Nike
  • The ad is a personal message from Tiger Woods himself

First: of course it’s greed!  The primary reason any athlete signs an endorsement deal and the primary reason any company extends one is, not surprisingly, profit motive on mutually acceptable terms.  The athlete provides associations the brand, product or company wants in order to increase sales.  The brand, product or company provides the athlete money in exchange.  It’s really that simple, so I won’t go any further with this ridiculously easy criticism of the ad and its existence.

Second: an agency (Wieden+Kenney) carefully created this message on behalf of Nike and Tiger Woods.  It’s not a personal message to you from Tiger Woods; do not accept it as such, narcissist.  It’s not a public acknowledgment of indiscretion by Tiger Woods – he’s provided one (sadly, by force).  It’s not a public apology by Tiger Woods – he’s already provided this, too.

So what is it?  It’s polarizing.  It’s talked-about.  It’s the beginning of the reconstruction of Tiger Woods’ image by a brand that stuck with him through the debacle.

Most of the negative remarks are the rightful result of Tiger-fatigue, so nonsense gets a pass.

Here’s the ad:

Here’s a transcription:  “Tiger … I am more prone to be inquisitive … to promote discussion.  I want to find out what your thinking was.  I want to find out what your feelings are.  And did you learn anything.”

Though it would have been the safest option, the absence of a Tiger Woods ad altogether during The Masters would have been quite conspicuous.

Since Nike decided instead to be present, their agency was presented a serious creative challenge.  Nike needs to turn back on as soon as possible the Tiger Woods cash machine they’ve built over the past decade or so.  The challenge: where and how does the reconstruction of the TW personal and brand images begin!?

A few thoughts about this execution:

  • Took the situation head on (did not gloss over it, ignore it or jump past it)
  • Visually simple and clean (no amazing shots, cheering crowds, triumphant victories)
  • Audibly simple and clean (no music, a couple bird chirps, dad’s voice)
  • Dad-as-conscience device works (no one wants to hear from Tiger or generic voiceguy)
  • Message is vague, curious and sensitive (no bold statements or declarations)
  • White logos over black vest and cap absolutely jump off (clearly present with being in your face)
  • All things considered, an above-average starting point (where would you have started!?)

I personally abhor Woods’ selfish and unfaithful behavior.  Though I know nothing about the science behind it, “sexual addiction” strikes me as a weak excuse for weak-minded, shameful behavior.  Climbing down off my moral high horse, as too few are wont to do, I accept this commercial message as the start of the reconstruction.

The commercial doesn’t “speak” to me.  It does not feel to me significant, impressive or provocative in any way.  It does feel a bit human, which is a good start.

Bottom line: Tiger Woods is a living case study that will eventually be published in formal marketing texts.  I don’t know how it will read or how I will feel about this commercial a year or two from now, but today it feels OK.  Nike’s got to fire back up that cash machine slowly and carefully.

Related: I’m quite curious about the original context of the recording, as Earl Woods passed away in 2006.

Also related: considering the financial stakes, “Brand Tiger Woods” moved far too slowly as the PR crisis rolled out and built up.  They had no control over public perception as more and more women emerged with allegations.  The online, print and television tabloids went burned wildly with the story.  To control the flames, it’s always best to be first and to be honest and to in times of crisis.

« Older posts Newer posts »

Posts by Category

© 2024 ethanbeute

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑