Some Thoughts on Marketing's Role in Today's Depressed Economy

The economic news continues to be bleak with no upturn in sight. Layoffs are continuing. The stock market continues to decline. Every night, the network news is loaded with stories of corporate and human distress. The marketing fundamentals of our economy may be undergoing permanent change. How should your marketing team respond?

I'll start with a principle that needs to shape your marketing actions: Marketing can't make anyone do anything that they don't want to do.

So, in this economy, if most of your customers don't want to spend money right now to buy whatever it is you're selling, what should you be doing? The correct "marketing mindset" for your company should be "how can I help (not sell) my customers in the short term in order to gain even more of their business in the long term."

There are many companies that are responding to today's economic conditions with deep discounts and deals and special offers to try to get reluctant customers to buy NOW. No doubt, some customers will respond to this. But most will not. However, they will remember the special deal price and when the time comes that they are ready to buy, they will not be happy about the return of "regular" pricing. Discounting is generally a one-way street. When you set a new lower price, it usually very quickly becomes the price that your customers expect to pay from that point on. So discounting may generate a short term lift, but the long term impact on future revenue and profits will be significant. Beware!

Smarter companies are shifting their marketing tactics without resorting to cutting their prices. One interesting example is Hyundai. They are promoting a "Forgiveness" plan that promises that if you buy a new Hyundai and then find yourself in economic distress and unable to make your payments, that they will simply allow you to return the car, without all the ugliness that is normally associated with that type of situation. Hyundai could easily have been investing the same marketing resources into promotions and discounts in order to sell more Hyundais RIGHT NOW. This softer approach is much more compelling and. I bet, more effective for them.

Other companies are recognizing that their customers simply want to exercise more buying caution in these uncertain times. Caution means "slow down" and "learn more" and "be sure." So the tone and style of your marketing should reflect that. You should expect longer sales cycles and be creating marketing materials that will gently push your customers along, providing the information they need and providing it with more frequency than in the past. The information you're providing may need to be more detailed and the after-the-sale service may need to be more robust (and less expensive). You're financing options may need to be expanded, with more options offered. Your guarantees may need to be strengthened or promoted more aggressively. All of these tactics will reflect your customer's mindset and, as a result, be more effective.

Marketing is about understanding your customers and communicating with them in ways that demonstrate understanding and provide compelling information that motivates them to do business with you. If your marketing shows that you don't understand the economic realities facing your customers today, then you're not doing a smart job of marketing.

Marketing with Music - Not What It Should Be

There's rarely a TV commercial that gets produced today that doesn't use music in some way. Yet most marketers are getting far less brand impact from the music they use than they should be. Music can be so much more than an underlying soundtrack to the words and pictures of a TV ad. Music can be brand cement. It can be a marketing communication tool that enables you to plant a brand message in a viewer's head FOREVER.

Here are some great examples of branded music that many of us can probably not only remember, but most likely still sing along with.

Almond Joy/Mounds - "Sometimes You Feel Like a Nut"
Meow Mix - "Meow Meow Meow Meow"
Roto-Rooter - "Away Go Troubles Down the Drain"
US Army - "Be All You Can Be"
Alka Seltzer - "Plop Plop Fizz Fizz"
Chili's - "Baby Back Ribs"
Oscar Meyer - "I Wish I Was an Oscar Meyer Weiner"
Campbell's Soup - "M'm! M'm! Good!"
Hertz - "Let Hertz Put You in the Driver's Seat"

There's another really good way to use music and really BRAND it. That's to steal a song that's become a hit on its own and apply it to your brand in such a strong way for such a long time that it's impossible to hear the song any more without thinking of the brand it has now become associated with. Here are a couple great examples of that.

Chevy - "Like a Rock"
Heinz Ketchup - "Anticipation"
California Raisins - "I Heard It Through the Grapevine"

Another approach that also works is the short musical button that ends a spot and becomes an instantly recognizable element of the brand. Two examples of this are:

Mennen - "By Mennen"
Intel - "Intel Inside"

Today, music in marketing has essentially become a throw-away. Part of this is because so few marketers are now committing themselves to long-term campaigns, which is a requirement if you want to establish any branded music. It's a shame because music can and should be a powerful branding weapon.

Does it really make sense to pay for the rights to use the music of some hot recording artist only in one spot for only a limited period of time? Almost never! Unless you're Apple marketing the iPod, in which case using interesting new music is a big part of what the brand is all about. But exceptions like this are rare and only prove the rule. Don't invest big money in music UNLESS you're committed to making the music a big part of your brand identity for a substantial period of time - like FOREVER.

The Obligatory Super Bowl Advertising Review

It was a great game. Certainly one of the best Super Bowls ever.

One of the unique aspects of The Super Bowl is that the "day after" evaluation of the ads has become such a part of the game itself. It's one of the reasons why advertisers invest in those high-priced ads. They command the attention of everyone and the one exposure the advertiser pays for in the game itself is multiplied many times over with the "day after" exposure that each of the ads invariably receives.

By now, you'll have formed your own opinions about the ads, read what others think and probably debated the merits of the ads with relatives, friends and co-workers. Rather than bore you with just another opinion on all those ads, I'll take a slightly different approach. I'll take issue with some of the ads that most reviewers are praising and support one of the ads that most of the reviewers are criticizing.

Were These Ads Really Any Good?

1. Doritos "Office Ball": Isn't a guy getting nailed in his family jewels the oldest and stalest slapstick gag in the world? Aren't great ads supposed to be original?

2. Coke Zero "Polamalu": Ripping off the classic Mean Joe Greene ad was another example of failed creativity. The original ad generated powerful and sweet emotion. This one went for silly slapstick humor and just ended up cheapening the original.

3. Coke "Bugs": Wonderful animation, but what else was there in this spot? Using fabulous production technique does not mean that you don't still need a core selling idea. And bugs are not nearly as cute as polar bears.

4. Cash4Gold.com: Some reviewers actually liked this ad. Unbelievable! It was sad seeing winners who are now losers (Ed McMahon and MC Hammer) depicted in such chessy desperate fashion.

Was This Ad Really That Bad?

1. Heineken "Vanguard": John Turturro is a great actor and not just a pretty face. The copy was intelligent and Turturro's direct to camera reading was riveting. Was he too old and too pretentious? Maybe. But I paid attention and it was definitely distinctive from other beer ads.


I Agree That These Ads Were Terrific

1. Bridgestone "Potato Heads" and "Jump Around"
2. Budwesier "Clydesdale Plays Fetch"
3. E-trade "Babies"
4. Pepsi "Forever Young"
5. Monster.com "Moose"
6. CareerBuilder.com "It's Time"
7. Denny's "Wise Guys"

I Agree that These Ads Were Terrible

1. Bud Light "Skiier" (Drinkability MUST go!)
2. GoDaddy.com "Enhanced"
3. SoBe "Ballet"
4. Pepsi "MacGruber" (Beyond bad. Embarrassingly awful.)

The Top Dog as Talking Head

Are you a fan of those TV commercials that feature the CEO as the company's spokesperson?

Over the last few decades, there have been some notable marketing successes using this approach. The ones that come immediately to mind are Orville Redenbacher, Frank Perdue, and Dave Thomas (Wendy's). I think what made each of these campaigns work was that each spokesperson/CEO was an original. Quirky and believable and amusing. They were execs that didn't take themselves too seriously and they allowed their agencies to use them in light-hearted ways. Over time, they became rather endearing and that helped make us pay attention to their marketing messages.

In today's economic climate, CEOs are generally getting bad press. They're in the news either for laying people off, needing bail outs or posting poor results. I don't think that most Americans are predisposed to like CEOs right now, so it's a particularly dicey time to use one as the centerpiece of your marketing campaign.

Here are a few companies using their CEOs as their TV spokesman today and, without fail, I think these approaches are not working.

Sprint: We see the CEO (Dan Hesse) in dark, nearly black and white, spots as he casually strolls through various Manhattan settings and tells us how cool Sprint is and invites us to join him and his company on the mobile technology highway. Nothing charming or interesting or endearing about these spots. In fact, the CEO just comes across as an egotistical guy who seems to think he's persuasive and cool. Is anyone switching to Sprint based on this campaign? I doubt it.

Community Coffee: The young fourth generation CEO of his family tells us why Community Coffee is so good. The idea here seems to be "trust me. I'm so sincere. Buy my family's coffee." I always find myself wondering, "would this guy be the CEO if his great grandfather, grandfather and Dad hadn't just handed the company over to him?" A distracting thought that definitely gets in the way of me being persuading to buy the coffee.

Papa John's Pizza: The CEO has been their spokesperson for many years. He's always been very stiff on camera. Not a natural who looks like he actually enjoys being the spokesperson. I find the spots always awkward to watch and I'm always distracted by the poor acting ability of the CEO.

I've never been personally involved in a CEO As Spokesperson campaign, but I can imagine how awkward they must be to develop and produce. If it's the CEO's idea, how do you gracefully advise him/her against the idea and keep your job? If it's your idea and the CEO turns out to be an on-camera stiff, how do you persuade him/her to give up the newly found TV fame and return to being just the behind-the-desk CEO? Difficult issues and it's got to be hard for everyone involved to maintain objectivity and do the right thing.

My advice... unless you've got a Frank Perdue or an Orville Redenbacher as your CEO, develop your marketing campaigns without using your top dog as your talking head.

B2B Technology Marketing Blunders That Bug Me

Blunder #1: B2B Web Sites That Fail to Communicate Clearly.

Have you ever visited a technology company's web site, studied the home page, browsed around a little and still had no idea what the company does/makes or why you should do business with them?

It happens to me all the time. I'm a smart guy, but I'm definitely not a technocrat. I want to understand the technology that I'm considering buying without being dazed, confused or intimidated by it.

Most technology companies are loaded with techno-geeks who all speak the unique language of that particular technology. It's often an impenetrable argot of acronyms and arcane language that only fellow geeks in that particular technology will understand. When these people are in charge of an important marketing tool, like the company's web site, bad things start to happen. While the technocrats can communicate with each other, they leave the majority of us in the dark. This is NOT communication. It's obfuscation. That's why it's a terrible marketing blunder to let technocrats be in charge of B2B company web sites. The only time it makes any sense is if the only people who will have anything to do with buying your techno-product or service are all fellow geeks. In my experience, this is almost never the case.

The art of brilliant marketing communication is to take a product or service that is potentially complex and confusing and present it so that it seems clear and relatively simple. Most IT-oriented people simply don't understand this basic truth. They embrace technological complexity and thrive on it. They think everyone shares their desire to dive deeply into the details. Apple is an example of a technology company that has mastered the art of brilliant and eloquently simple product communication. Apple is a rare and wonderful exception in the world of technology marketing.

A former colleague once told me "the confused mind says no." "No" is not a good word when it comes to marketing or selling. If you want to get more "yeses" let your marketing people translate your technology into language that will communicate rather than obfuscate.

Blunder #2: Wasting Money on B2B TV Advertising.

I am almost always puzzled when I see a B2B ad on TV. Why do some B2B companies think it's smart to invest millions of dollars reaching tens of millions of people who will never have anything to do with purchasing their product or service?

The creative people who work in advertising agencies love to develop and produce TV ads. But how does this ever make media sense when your target audience can be so precisely defined and reached directly with much more targeted communications? I have no logical explanation for this, but I have three remedies for this foolhardiness.

First, cut the marketing budget so that all temptation to spend lavishly and wastefully will be eliminated.

Second, measure the impact and effectiveness of what you're doing and force B2B TV ads to be completely and utterly justified by rigorous ROI analysis relative to other uses of those same marketing resources.

Third, hire more outside-the-box thinkers to lead your marketing teams. Throwing money at TV ads is about the least creative marketing idea that anyone can have these days.

Following Up on Previous Blogs: Credit Card Companies, Budweiser and Dr Pepper

Hallelujah!

The Federal government has finally outlawed some of the most onerous practices of the credit card industry. I blogged (ranted) on these practices back on 11/18 and was thrilled to read yesterday that many of these practices will no longer be allowed. Starting in July 2010 (why we have to wait so long is beyond me), credit card companies will not be allowed to change the APR they are charging on existing balances. They will be allowed to raise your APR if you are late (more than 30 days) but this new APR can not be retroactively applied to existing balances. It will only apply to your new balances. WOW! Finally some fairness in financial marketing. Better late than never.

But wait a minute. How are the credit companies responding now that they have almost 18 months to get ready for this new fairer reality? You guessed it. They're going to shaft us as much as they can between now and then. Many have already started to raise their rates to squeeze their customers as hard as they can between now and when the new regulations go into effect. Boneheaded, short-sighted marketing thinking if you ask me.

Wouldn't it be cool if just one of these credit card companies finally wised up and took advantage of the situation to implement the new policies NOW - way ahead of the deadline? Imagine the marketing power of positioning your company as leading and embracing this change. It's a major opportunity for someone in the industry that has the guts to step forward and outdistance the competition. Will it happen? Probably not.


Moving on to the world of beverages......

In my blog on 11/25, I chastised Bud and Dr Pepper for wrong-headed communication strategies on two of their brands - specifically the "drinkability" strategy that Bud is trying to leverage and the "complex flavor/drink it slow" strategy that Dr Pepper is using.

Well, Bud is now on its third campaign trying to bring this weak "drinkability" strategy to life. I assume they've probably looked at dozens of others that have been rejected. What a titanic waste of time and money! Bud is normally an exceptionally savvy marketer, so this is out of character for them. I'm betting that we won't see a fourth iteration of this failed strategy and that something new will be with us by The Super Bowl, when Bud always seems to make a big splash with something new and wonderful.

Unfortunately, Dr Pepper shows no sign of wising up. The wrong-headed campaign that I want to comment on today is for Diet Dr Pepper. The gist of the strategy is that Diet Dr Pepper tastes too sweet to be called "Diet." Spots show a six pack marching down the candy aisle in a grocery store and being hailed by sugary treats as one their own. This strategy is wrong for two reasons. First "sweetness" is relative. What tastes sweet to me, may not taste sweet to you. Second, "sweetness" is not universally positive. I may like sweet things but you may not. What is "too sweet" to me is not going to be "too sweet" for you. Diet Coke broke diet soft drink tradition when it was launched over 25 years ago with a "Just for the Taste of it" brand positioning that was brilliant. It was the first "diet" soft drink that said nothing about dieting or calories in its advertising. It focussed on great taste and fun and refreshment. This Diet Dr Pepper advertising team needs to study the early work on Diet Coke. This "sweetness" strategy they're currently following is all wrong.

I predict that Bud will be back on track a lot sooner than Dr Pepper. The fact that Bud is moving from campaign to campaign shows that they know they have a problem. Dr Pepper seems oblivious.

Geico: Hit, Hit, But Now a Whiff

Geico is an interesting advertiser to watch.  

First, they created their Gecko campaign, which was a very memorable and distinctive way to capture attention, create brand recognition and get people to listen to Geico's marketing messages.  Then, Geico topped themselves with the wildly successful Caveman campaign (Geico.com:  So Simple a Caveman Could Do It).  I don't think any other advertising campaign has ever been so successful that Hollywood made a sitcom out of it.  Well-deserved congratulations are due to everyone at Geico and their agency for these two advertising home runs.

Unfortunately, Geico has just launched a third campaign that's a dud.  It's focussed on how much money you can save with Geico.  Not a bad message in this time of economic distress, but why did Geico think they needed a third campaign to deliver this message?  Couldn't the Gecko or the Cavemen have communicated this message?  Yet Geico went to the time and expense of creating a third campaign.  Not only has this cost them time and money, but it has diminished their focus on two proven campaigns.  

I'm sure the logic behind this move had something to do with Geico wanting to keep the other two campaigns' messages "pure" and feeling that they needed a new campaign to focus on what Geico must believe is a very important "value" message that's obviously extremely relevant right now.  

I could ALMOST agree with this logic if Geico's third campaign weren't so poorly executed.  It features a stack of money with some weird looking eyeball type of thing sitting on top of the pile of cash.   This money/eyeball thing shows up unexpectedly to the background tune of "Who's Watching Me" and puzzles people (including viewers in my opinion) who wonder what the heck this stack of bills with the odd peepers is all about.  That's when the Geico value message kicks in. 

On the plus side, the new campaign has the same quirky brand personality of the other two Geico campaigns.  However, it lacks the appeal and humanity of the Gecko and the Cavemen.  As viewers, we LIKE the gecko and the cavemen.  There is nothing to like about this odd stack of money with the creepy eyeballs.   The casting of the spots is equally puzzling.  The people in them aren't funny or amusing or even appealing.  They're all kind of clueless, much like I have been every time I see one of these new ads.

No one hits a home run every time.  Geico's ad and marketing people have certainly performed far better than most.  They have two campaigns to be proud of.   I think the "marketing sanity" thing to do would be to retire this new effort sooner rather than later.   I hope Geico gives us more of their two powerhouse campaigns.  More of the gecko!  More cavemen!  

I HOPE that this new effort does not signal that Geico is getting tired of their gecko or getting bored with their cavemen.  They've got two thoroughbred campaigns.  They ought to ride them until they drop.  And both still look pretty darn fresh to me.