Thursday, July 16, 2015

This is a ridiculous criticism of a good spot


No, not this this. This this.

Nature Valley, makers of granola bars of some sort, produced this video that points out a  real difference in the way the youngest generation today passes the time and the way previous generations did.

The reviewer - for my money clearly a member of the nose-in-a-smart phone set - absolutely trashed it, characterizing it as a "three-minute technology hate-on."

Check it out and see what you see. Here's the link again. I mean, I really want you to see it.
I'll wait here.


Got it? So here's what I think. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Rebecca Cullers, who wrote the review, is so full of shit her eyes are brown, as we used to say when we were little.

In her snarky review she pretty much missed the whole fucking point point.

Nobody said "in my day." Nobody harshed on the kids who are so committed to smart phones and tablets. And nobody told anybody to get off their lawn. But the fact that Nature Valley (who clearly wants to associate themselves with All Things Natural and Wholesome and Perhaps Even Outdoors) pointed out that little kids are missing one hell of a lot of cool stuff by marrying their tablet, smart phone or computer seems to have really touched  a nerve with Cullers.

She seems personally offended that anybody would dare to suggest that perhaps there is a world out there that don't run on a battery. WTF?

My guess is that she is one of those you see walking down the sidewalk or across the street with her attention focused on the phone in her hand instead of the world around her or even where she is going.

I always thought each of us ought to get to bump one of those people with our car. Just once.

Friday, July 10, 2015

God, that's a beautiful logo. So what?


An award-winning logo never brought anybody any business.

Neither has a really cool color palette or set of identity guidelines.

Those are all part of Branding – usually the domain of design studios and often confused with "Brand." Not the same thing. And in all honesty, it kind of honks me (me, Woody Hinkle) that design studios often seem content to let the distinction go unnoticed by clients.

If you've read anything on our web site or know anything about us, you know that the two things we do are Brand Development and Creative. We're not a design studio and don't seek out that kind of work. Oh, we can design a logo or web site and produce a corporate identity guide. And Frank (that would be ace art director Frank Salonek) can come up with a color palette with the best of them.

But we tend to try to avoid doing that stuff if the client doesn't have a clear Brand or until we've helped them develop one. What the hell good does it do to have a beautiful logo on a snazzy brochure if your marketing materials aren't telling anybody why the hell they ought to do business with you?

And I'm here to tell you right now in no uncertain terms that people don't do business with you because of your logo. We can go out back and fight about it if you want, but it's the truth.

People will do business with you because of what you offer that the Next Guy doesn't. Or you offer it in a way that's more appealing than the Next Guy. That differentiation is what you have to clarify first. Then, you can make sure your Branding – the logo, ad campaign, tag line and all the rest (which we can and will produce very well for you thankyouverymuch) – follow your Brand.

While I realize that I can't paint everybody with such a broad brush, it has been my experience that design studios and PR firms often have one thing in common: They are focused on tactical things – what the logo looks like, what type face works best, what hot-diggity-dog cool stuff they can put in the web site, or what the message ought to be in the next press release.

And none of that stuff matters at all, if they aren’t working off a single Brand strategy

Because your Brand is, well, it's the reason why anybody should give a damn what the hell you're selling.

The old joke about clients often revolves around "make the logo bigger." I'd say, make the logo second.


Do the Brand first.

Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Once again I find myself scratching my head


And once again it has something to do with GEICO
Clearly, I have no freaking idea what I am doing and am a complete moron and should just get out of the advertising business for the good of the country.
I simply do not understand why the GEICO pre-roll ads that I find so annoying won a Gold Lion at Cannes. Hailed for putting a "hilarious twist on the typically boring genre" and breaking the rules of advertising, these spots just bother the hell out of me.
The VO tells you that you can't skip the ad because it's already over, and then  - at least on some web sites - it proceeds to just sit there while wow-that's-so-fucking-funny things like the dog jumping on the table and a guy's foot catches fire and you can't skip it.
Great idea if it's just short and over before you know it after having made the point, but it doesn't work that way. At least not that I've seen. 
I must not be the target and, as we all know, I'm an idiot anyway. I can only assume that the target audience is made up of the same people who find the jokes that go on too long on Family Guy funny.
I may come home tonight to a mob of advertising freaks on my lawn with pitchforks and torches, but I just have to say that an awful lot of stuff that Martin does these days - certainly what they do for GEICO - comes across as self-indulgent.
But they're a big agency with a warehouse full of awards and we're a boutique agency with a shelf full of awards, so they must be doing something right.
I just can't figure out what the hell it is.


Monday, June 29, 2015

The herd mentality and marketing to Millennials (and others)


There's a reason for this image. 

And we'll get to it in a minute.

But first, there's this. Much of the ad and marketing world is abuzz these days with Millennials and How to Reach Them. (Millennials being defined as 18-35 years old, although the 35 upper limit seems a bit high to me.)

Anyway, the latest to court this group is Marriott. They are determined to snag Millennial business and hired a consulting firm that specializes in communicating with Millennials.

Never mind that some of the Rules of Engagement that firm came up with seem either pretentious or obvious. (Millennials needs to be convinced of the value of a product through storytelling, or millennials value companies that have a powerful vision.) The assault on Millennials isn't necessarily right for everybody. Hillary Stout in a terrific article in the New York Times on June 21 said it this way: "Some analysts and consumers have begun to ask, what about the rest of us?"

Good question.

There is no question that Millennials are a good target, but as the market research firm Forrester said in their report The Kids Are Overrated. Don't Worry About Millennials, "that while some companies have to target Millennials because of the nature of their products, most don't need to."

Here are a few things to consider:

 - The Millennial generation has less wealth and more debt than other generations did at the same age. (Hello, student loan debt.)

- Baby boomers are bigger spenders than most, "unhip though they may be."

- Older shoppers make up a larger segment of the population than ever before.

- Boomers have more discretionary income and more free time in which to spend it.

Here's a link to a good article on the topic and, if you subscribe to the New York Times online, you can search "Oh, To Be Young Millennial And Oh So Wanted By Marketers" by Hillary Stout.

Look, there are good arguments for targeting any particular segment, and I'm not suggesting that this is an either/or kinda thing. What I am suggesting is that running headlong after Millennials may or may not be a good idea. It kind of depends on what you're selling.

Are Millennials good targets for things like Cadillacs, high-end vacation resorts, wealth management, Brooke Brothers suits or Dockers?. Maybe. But maybe not.

 . . . and this brings me to the image above.

It's from that great Emerald City Sequence in The Wiz. First the residents all "want to be seen green." That is, until The Wiz (Richard Prior) tells them all that "Green is dead. 'Til I change my mind, the color's red." And they all celebrate red. That is, until he comes back on the PA and says "The ultimate yellow brick is gold. That's the new color children." And everybody scurries to embrace gold.

That sequence always comes to my mind when the herd mentality takes over in the advertising and marketing arena. Green becomes red becomes gold and everybody jumps on board. Millennials are the only target worth having and everybody jumps on board.

The voices telling us this are a lot of the same voices that who told us that the only thing worth having in your marketing mix was a web site. Then told us all that worked was digital advertising and everything else was dead. Then they let us know that only re-targeting worked and then only Google search words. What's next?

They are probably all channeling the people who said print was dead when radio came out, radio was dead when television came out and on and on. Whatever happened to integrated marketing?

I don't want to sound like some sort of old get-off-my-lawn coot, but this follow-the-leader mentality just honks me no end. It seems to be the antithesis to everything I thought advertising was about. Which is to say, creativity and original thought . . .

 . . .  and not just pursuing that Shiny New Thing because everybody else is. Didn't your mother ever ask you "Well if Johnny jumped off a cliff, would you jump off a cliff?"

We have a lot of target markets available to us these days and we're able to hone in pretty closely to the ones that suit our product or service best. We also have a lot of tools at our disposal with which to do it.

We should use 'em.





Tuesday, December 9, 2014

12.9.14

Talking the talk is way different from walking the walk.


I'm back.

Today, we sent out a self-promotional e-mail. If you didn't get it, you can see it here.
It's about the fact that companies ought to put more effort into developing their product or service or discovering what is truly unique about their product or service than telling people how wonderful they are.
We had a client not long ago (they and their industry will remain nameless here) that was a new entry into a crowded arena - an arena full of disgruntled customers.
This, we said, right at the beginning, is a tremendous opportunity. It's an opportunity to delivery a genuinely better product and genuinely better customer service than the competition. And believe me, the bar here was pretty low, so pretty much all these guys had to do was not hate their customers and they'd have stood out.
Note the use of past tense.
We had a lot of ideas for ways they could deliver a better product, but every one was met with a deaf ear. Now, maybe every single one of them sucked. That's a possibility. I don't buy into it, but it's possible. But the fact was, these guys weren't inclined to do anything better or different to distinguish themselves.
Wait, I'm wrong there. They were more than happy to say they were all about making this industry pleasant to use and saying that they believed in, as their marketing director said, in delivering their service in a "fun, creative and innovative approach." He used to want us to include copy about their "legendary customer service" in ads. Legendary. For a startup.
Anyway, this client is gone now. We tried our best, but this was a company that simply refused to develop or adopt a brand position that would differentiate them from the competition. And it was right there for the taking. They seemed to think the fact that they were in business would be enough to draw customers and resisted all efforts to lead them down a real marketing road.
They had some issues and hadn't done enough business to have generated the revenue to overcome those issues. So it was bye-bye. Maybe just for a while and maybe forever. But if they do come back and don't do things differently this time around, the result for version 2.0 will be the same as it was for the beta version.
You - or they - can blame the agency if you - or they - want for their failure, but I'm convinced that if they'd just taken a small step toward actually freaking delivering a better product, they'd have made enough money that they could have overcome all sorts of operational issues.
Do good. Tell people. But for God's sake DO GOOD.

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Not everybody is going to agree with me on this.








Everybody loves Geico advertising and everybody loves the Martin Agency and they win a whole lot more awards than we do for their advertising, but maybe I'm missing something.

Because I hate them. Just about all of them.

Oh, some of them are funny. And if all they are supposed to do is make you remember Geico - and it doesn't matter why -  then they're brilliant.

But it has always seemed to me that humor is best if it has some real relevance to the product or service. Like the "Jake from State Farm" (above - you can get a real person on the phone any hour of the day or night) or "Mayhem" from Allstate (above - you can't plan for everything and if you have cut-rate insurance you might be screwed).

These are both funny and the humor is directly related to the benefit. I just have never understood what the fuck cavemen, pigs, a camel on hump day, a witch in a broom factory or a woodchuck chucking wood have to do with insurance. (See? I remember the spots, it's just that I still don't know why I should buy Geico insurance . . . )

Compare all three for yourself if you like.

I have said over and over again on here that I'm an idiot and certainly many will read this and agree with me because I fail to see the brilliance of the Geico advertising. I just think it's stronger if it's a more of a joke that relates to a product than a joke in search of an audience. Like a lot of advertising, it seems like somebody had a funny joke and they found a way to bolt it on to a client.

I'm clearly going to be dating myself here, but I have always thought that the Miller Lite "Tastes Great / Less Filling" campaign was brilliant. The spots were very funny, and every one of them was rooted in the brand promise of Miller Lite.

I just don't understand how that stupid damn pig has anything at all to do with insurance.

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

Just to keep things clear . . .

I hate this campaign.


And I love this one.


Now you know.