Brand Ecosystems™

Licensed Sports & Entertainment Brands In Consumer Products

2010-11-14T13:31:00.008-06:00

Prior Press Release:

EARTH BEVERAGES LAUNCHES

WORLD SERIES OF POKER ENERGY BRAND:

GAME-CHANGING ENERGY SHOTS

New flavorful 3-ounce shots ...to energize industry sales

LAS VEGAS (May 28, 2010) – In true Las Vegas “go all night” style, Earth Beverages is launching a World Series of Poker-branded line of energy shots in eight flavors during this year’s World Series of Poker tournament from May 27 to July 17.

“This exciting new venture has been accomplished in great partnership with Harrah’s and the World Series of Poker,” says Don Mann, chief marketing officer for Earth Beverages, the drinks’ brand licensee.

“The shots will bring gaming players the focus and edge they need to stay sharp. “The vibe of Vegas and the exploding popularity of the World Series of Poker, online and on TV, brings a level of excitement the energy drink space has been missing—it’s a natural fit.”

The World Series of Poker Energy Shots, which were developed with a broad array of flavors, colorful packaging and unique merchandising, are intended to benefit convenience and other retail operators by capitalizing on impulse purchases.

The 3-ounce shots will come in eight flavors, although different from the mixers: Cranberry, Pomegranate, Citrus, Blueberry, Lime, Orange, Cola and Tropical.

For more information on World Series of Poker Energy Shots, follow on Twitter: WSOPEnergy or contact: info@earthbeverages.com.

###

Facebook Addiction? Do You Need A Twittervention?

2009-12-29T19:04:00.003-06:00

Do you have a Facebook addiction? (Do you need a Twittervention?)

Side note: On FB there's a update area that lists "Recent Activity." Speaking for myself and in light of this holiday period, I can see a need for another category - "Recent Inactivity" (burp).

http://news.yahoo.com/video/tech-15749651/kicking-teens-facebook-addictions-17337632

Happy New Year to all!!

FMCG Brands, Retail And Social Media

2009-10-14T12:13:00.004-05:00

As a follow up to the prior post below...

Many of the social media guru firms simply don't fully grasp/understand the business model dynamics of FMCG brands. (e.g. They think they know P&G and Unilever because they have met with the managers of 'new media' within those management organizations, yet I can guarantee that when they leave many FMCG offices, there's always a little bit of residual feeling that those touchy-feely media types really don't understand running and building FMCG businesses, thus, they are not in the position to help as they assume they are.) Yet, it's easy for those social media firms to take 'pot shots' at something they don't have the experience to understand. The clue, which almost nobody gets, is that ultimately, the center of the social media universe for FMCG brands will be with - retailers - not with brand suppliers, as retailers move to CRM (only then will FMCG brands have a better opportunity to be more engaged with those store shoppers in social media (but the retailers will control the dialogue).

While there are some examples of online FMCG communities (e.g. tampon-brand-sponsored websites for teenage girls with tons of questions about growing up) most low-involvement, fast-moving CPG brands simply annoy average consumers with dialogue about brands who are simply trying to save 20% with a coupon on cheese or soup or soap - hence the explosion of private label brands everywhere. Private label is the 'tell' that most consumers don't really desire to talk/twitter/post/read extensively about FMCG brands - more and more every day, it's the store that matters, not the brands inside.

The concept of a FMCG brand 'relationship' is overplayed (e.g. this is not the Apple brand, this is soap), and the brief relationship with FMCG brands occurs with every trip to the store, standing in the aisle. Just think about the proven fact that DISPLAYS, more than any other FMCG tactic, drive sales growth - sometimes +100%, or more - AKA, if they bump into it, they will buy it. (Ironically, all this new technology on our PDAs, etc., now leaves us even less room in our brains to think about FMCG products - life is moving faster than it used to be.)

None of the above is particularly poetic, but it's part of a practical reality known by brand managers, which needs to be understood by social media teams/agencies.

Forrester Research And Brand Management

2009-10-13T23:09:00.003-05:00

Here's a take in Business Week on a new POV from Forrester Research:

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/brandnewday/archives/2009/10/are_brand_manag.html#c149648

Forrester's idea is designed to stir controversy, and thus (self-serving-buy-our-new-research-methods) attention. But it's inaccurate. Don’t get me wrong, Forrester has valued capabilities, but as a CMO, I just can’t salute such a self-serving POV.

Brand Management has ALWAYS been about listening to the customer and consumer - new technology as just brought new tools to this central business function. New methods may be an improvement in consumer insight over prior market research practices, but they are still just new methods of market research – anything short of talking to each and every single brand consumer, is merely another form of extrapolation research.

I must add, there also seems to be a related naïve new concept about customization (as a by-product of listening), as if letting the consumer determine - everything - is all that is required with new technology, if only tired old managers would listen and embrace the technology. Listing and customizing to fit consumer desires is definitely a point of competition, but it has (and adds) a cost to be measured in any final product or service. It is but one part of any successful strategy including considerations beyond that of the ‘Brand Advocate.’ Or put another way, for example, if the ‘Brand Advocate’ is the consumer, does the consumer name the price (even at a loss to the company)? (Note: any detailed response to the last question may identify the respondent as a brand manager, not a brand advocate.)

So, to the Brand Advocate, what about business accountability? What about operating for a profit? (A contrarian concept in the land of billions of flushed experimental VC dollars, where so very many ideas are tolerated to slide down the wall after not sticking.) Yes, we’ve all read about the ‘long tail’ and ‘crowd sourcing,’ but this new push to eliminate brand management ignores the role that brand management plays in ERM and steering profitable strategy for the entire enterprise (which is the GM/profit core to any successful business model, whether it’s practiced by a brand manager, the CEO, or Steve Jobs himself).

Consider that in a world of growing scarcity, the LUXURY of customization, after the recent economic bubble celebration, is about to collide with competitive margin pressure in business everywhere. The falling value of the dollar, will no longer mean that we can just go make (and sell) anything we can possibly dream of from China. We are soon to be served Hybrid automobiles, whether we don’t want them or not. …We are about to be taught a humble lesson that was overlooked in the recent easier economic times. As a harsh and extreme summary to the point, there was a reason why Henry Ford said, “they can have any color car they want as long as it’s black.” He was trying to run a ‘profitable’ car company. …Yes, that would have made a Brand Advocate sick.

New Marketing Rules - Humble Is The New Black (part 2)

2009-08-20T11:01:00.014-05:00

This recent story appeared on Reuters:

ECONOMY UNLEASHES "PERFECT STORM" for BOUTIQUE BEER

http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE57G2VL20090817?sp=true

From the story:

"You can buy an exceptional beer for half the price of a mediocre glass of wine," said New York beer maker Kelly Taylor...

...Across the United States, craft breweries and shops specializing in artisanal and import beers are growing, with merchants betting that tough economic times will turn Americans who once favored wine or liquor toward premium beers.

"Even in this economy, people want to treat themselves to really extraordinary things," said Justin Philips, co-owner of the Beer Table bar in the New York City borough of Brooklyn. "People are recognizing that there is a diverse world of beer. And it tends to be less expensive than other drinks."

The number of boutique breweries in the United States has grown by nearly 5 percent in the past five years to 1,476 breweries, said Paul Gatza, director of the Brewers Association, a non-profit industry group based in Colorado.

...Catherine Saillard, owner of French bistro Ici, said private parties are increasingly requesting locally made craft beers rather than wine and spirits.

"I wouldn't say that (beer) has the same complexity (as wine), but it's not supposed to," said Saillard, who is French. "It's unpretentious. You don't need to know the grape."

(Beer), "it's unpretentious." That last quote is the key to the success of craft beer today. As noted before, the 'Bling' culture is now so out. In my opinion, consumers have shifted significantly, and will be saving more and spending more wisely for years to come.

It's interesting to look at the craft beer segment and wonder how much more might this segment grow if their marketers fully embrace this trend? In a sense, craft beers have grown on the basis of great product and a general shift in consumers' taste preferences (across many consumable food/beverage categories). But craft beers have also grown somewhat despite marketing that has sometimes missed on the concept of brand positioning and 'benefits' vs. 'attributes.'

'Beer Geeks' used to be a common term in the early days of craft beer. They were the early adopters. Highly-involved early adopters are more about product attributes. But the segment has broadened, and 'regular consumers' are more about benefits. Craft beer marketers can take their brands even farther - much farther - if they understand this shift. As the story above points out, craft beer is a natural value-alternative to wine and spirits, but even within adult beverage categories, it now pays to further position a brand in the consumer's value sweet spot. In loftier economic times, brand claims of superior attributes are more easily accepted by a broader consumer market - but not now - now a brand needs to convey perceived benefit, in order for the consumer to perceive value.

Shiner (well known in Texas for Shiner Bock) is one such craft beer brand that is now well-positioned for this new consumer market with its darn-good-but-folksy-down-to-earth image. Where Shiner use to be looked upon as a better beer, but not quite 'top-shelf' (e.g. "Yes, but vat abut das Hops un IBUs?") the brand is now doing quite well in this new value-oriented market environment. Frankly, and to be blunt, if you're spending your money nowadays on anything that is 'top-shelf,' and your seen doing it, you're not impressing anyone - often quite the opposite.

As for my poor attempt above at the question in accent, ask most Texans about Shiner and they'll probably say "I just drink it." Tomorrow is Friday, and I'm in Texas, so that may just be on my list too...

New Marketing Rules - Need vs Want: Healthcare

2009-05-19T17:59:00.003-05:00

Times are changing. As discussed in this Blog late last year, marketing rules that worked as recently as last year are now also changing as consumer values are shifting. The spending motivations of 2007 are looong gone. Higher-order benefits, experiences and aspirational values, which marketers aim to associate with brands, are being reshuffled in the 'way way back' areas of the consumer's mindset. It's going to take new marketing communications (and maybe adjusted positioning) to get the consumer to spend again.

Simply put, to sell in this new environment, make sure the brand's positioning message has been revisited since last year, before you bring the media manager in with a new offline/online spend plan. And if you're working on new products or business lines, don't underestimate the pressure for value that's going be there (on margins), as you now project and price that business into the marketplace. It has never been more important to get your message right - don't just assume last year's advertising campaign is still worthy of investment. (If your business is struggling now, you'd be wise to hire someone who knows brand positioning before burning dollars on more media behind an idea that's become off-the-mark in today's new world of 2009 and beyond.)

The example below is humorous, but it wouldn't be even a little funny if it weren't also a little bit true:

The Corona Story - Transcending a Category

2009-04-09T21:49:00.012-05:00

I suppose I could have shared this quite a while ago, but as easy as it is to paste this here, now seems like as good a time as any. Here a feature on my experience with Corona (from 1995-2007), the #1 Imported beer, the #1 selling SKU in grocery stores nationwide, and subject of a Harvard Case Study -- a brand that rewrote the rules for the beer category, and the consumer revolution of preference for new Craft, Specialty and Imported brands that followed in its wake.

Here is the story as it appeared in the book, America's Greatest Brands (click on images to enlarge):

Brands And Strategies Are Verified Over Time: Years, Not Months

2009-03-28T17:38:00.008-05:00

Sales goals, among others, have to be met day-after-day, week-after-week and month-after-month. That is at the absolute core of any marketing effort. But, how many times have you wondered if a marketing direction was really that strategically sound over the long-term, when it is quickly touted as being 'spot-on' immediately after being put into execution in the market? I see these new and untested claims for success all the time within the marketing universe, and I wonder about this point often when I see a new campaign effort.

There's a running joke in the consumer brand manager world, that all you need to do in order to find out what is wrong with your current marketing, is hire a new brand manager, and the answer will be that everything must change. Everyone wants to make their own mark -- and not always for the better regarding the brand involved. One of the consideration areas where I am proud regarding my leadership with Corona, and the time-tested success that we delivered, with the consistency that we employed against a very tight positioning strategy. Our Corona strategy was verified in the market over time -- said again, over time. Experienced marketing leaders have the perspective to recognize an enduring brand-building idea, when far too often, less experienced managers latch on to an idea and claim victory before the market can attest to the validity of their strategy.

Keep that in mind as I share two slightly aged marketing stories that I've been hanging on to for just such an occasion. As examples, let's pop the cork on these 2007 predictions. In fairness to these authors, I freely admit that hindsight is 20/20, but that doesn't mean learning by looking back at something over time should be avoided. The links are below, and I've provided a summary to spare you the click & read, if you so desire:

http://brandautopsy.typepad.com/brandautopsy/2007/01/starbucks_marke.html

This 2007 article claims that Starbucks is now somehow outsmarting the competition because it spends comparatively nothing on media, but it is among the top 6 QSR restaurant chains. This 'new thinking' is seemingly to be admired. They even had the distinct benefit in the comparison of being the only coffee chain among a sea of burger and taco chains. Yet, we all now know that Starbucks is presently in deep trouble, with store closings taking place everywhere (even before the credit crisis), and increasing pressure to reduce its pricing. Why? There are many reasons, but among them is that Starbucks failed to effectively defend it's value proposition to consumers -- they left themselves wide open by assuming they were invincible, without the need to communicate (in proportion to the scale of their business) and ignoring the potential the kiss-of-death question: Hmmm, why should I pay that much for a Starbucks coffee? We all know that Starbucks represents an amazing success story, but avoiding the use of media to support their position in the market was not reflective of the strongest part of their strategy, and now they face the difficult challenge of creating a resurgence.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/TheEndOfTheWalMartEra.aspx

In this case, the title of this 2007 article says it all, "THE END OF THE WAL-MART ERA." Ooops. That pitch was juuuust a bit outside. Wal-Mart is now absolutely on a roll. It seems the time-tested and scale-driven consumer positioning strategy of enabling consumers to improve their lives by selling products that offer above-average value, just keeps on ticking -- and louder than ever before in this current economic environment. That's not to say Wal-Mart's is the only strategy to succeed and grow share in a retail environment, but theirs clearly works. It's a good thing they didn't abandon their strategy because some said they were at the end of an era.

The moral of this story: Viewing marketing and business performance over time is the only true gauge of brilliance or success.

Trading Analog Dollars for Digital Pennies

2008-12-21T17:07:00.001-06:00

As a long-time P&L manager and strategic marketer for consumer businesses (aka agency client), I find this an interesting phrase to express a common thought about advertising investment, especially among digital/interactive agencies. This is speculation on my part, but I expect companies will ‘harvest’ savings from reduced investment in traditional (analog) advertising in the difficult business period ahead. I don’t think this will be a surprise to anyone. However, those savings, whenever they eventually again become added back to marketing budgets (2010?), will be cautiously invested …as pennies.

Retailers and Direct-to-Consumer businesses will react the most quickly, as their returns on investment have been impacted almost immediately. More traditional manufacturer/supplier advertisers, selling through retail trade partners, will continue to experience even disproportionately lower sales going into 2009, as many of their sales were ‘pre-booked’ into the Q4 holiday season (with retailers then carrying the greater inventory risk).

But where the phrase “analog dollars for digital pennies” has typically carried a sarcastic frustration amongst the digital marketing world, I think – my opinion – that this may now be a very positive opportunity for digital media. Less expensive, and more efficient, will be the orientation among advertisers going forward, like never before in recent years.

The likely result? Again, my opinion, but I see two important ramifications for marketing: First, big-dollar traditional media will be placed under tighter review for demonstrated benefit to any business. Nearer-term sales metrics, not consumer research scores, will be EVERYTHING. That will create a vacuum …an opportunity. So, and secondly, filling this opportunity, digital media, will benefit by focusing more on working harder with measurable results. However, unproven media that is only for sake of being ‘new’ won’t cut it. When dollars are tight, there is no need to hurry to be first into the latest media space (just like there is now no hurry to get back into the stock market). But digital media programs that demonstrate the ability to leverage a solid positioning with clear benefits to drive preference or response (and sales) in the marketplace, a USP, will get a very favorable review, if constructed as the most efficient investment in a challenging business environment.

Marketing: Humble Is The New Black

2008-11-02T13:29:00.006-06:00

This was well-stated on a recent CNBC program.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27294922

Everything has changed in 45 days. We know this -- but the mere fact that we all know this now, so quickly -- indicates that we really have little idea as to the degree that everything has changed. Often, social changes that come this fast are BIG. (Consider December 8, 1941, where across the country, everywhere, men and women stood in line the very next day after Pearl Harbor to enlist.) Things have now changed more than we can comprehend, and younger marketers, who have only known a world of newer, faster and stronger up to this point, are caught like deer in headlights (and they may not even realize it yet). The American Dream is now at risk, we feel it, and there is no more room for unnecesary weight. (Think October was just an economic bump in the road? Think again. Ask someone with kids how their outlook has just changed for the future.)

We all know that much of what was ‘in’ is now ‘out.’ We can rattle off categories (e.g. automotive, food, clothing, retail stores, wine, etc.), and think about the brands, and think about the changes in brand leadership that will likely follow – feel free to share and post some of those thoughts here. The changes run far deeper than just over-simplified changes in brand leadership. Values have profoundly changed. It’s ironic, how fashion and politics have so closely followed the 70’s as of late, but only those who actually experienced the significant recession of 72-74 will understand how we are now also headed back to some of those core consumer and family values (beyond fashion and politics). Remember the ugly, boxy, Chrysler ‘K’ car? Why was anything like that ever so popular??? Pull up a chair.

Here’s a clue. Not only will there be a shift away from admiration for having the latest, newest, coolest thing, there will even be some growing social disdain for it. Even how you spend your time will receive scrutiny. Suddenly, every activity, every purchase will be quietly subject to tests of being frivolous, naïve or undeserved. It's a little less cool to share all the places in the world to where you may of traveled, when the person standing next to you may be worried about their job and foreclosure on their home. You get the idea. This may also create some shake-out within emerging areas of technology: Truly valued-added? Pass. Novelty? Fail. This would have happened over years anyway, but the shake-out may be ultra-fast now.

As for marketing, here’s food for thought: It will be interesting to see how some of the newly-minted youngster marketing folks do during this coming severe recession, as many were only in school during the last national recession in 91-93 (the tragedy of 9/11 hurt the local NYC economy, and the slow-down of 01-02 was really only more of an industry-specific Tech bubble contraction than anything else) ...this time, every angle in the marketing world has just changed 180*, with values and brand structures now significantly altered, and only veteran marketing and advertising leaders have seen and made these adjustments before...

Social Media Embraces Advertising

2008-09-16T15:52:00.011-05:00

Briefly, I'm sharing a blog here from Julia Boorstin, a CNBC writer that covers media issues affecting Wall Street, because it touches on some recent (but predictable) evolutions within 'mainstream' social media – namely, the need to make a buck.

“MySpace Music Signs On Advertisers”

http://www.cnbc.com/id/26735667

If you’re on Facebook, no doubt you’ve experienced the recent format change. I have, and like many others, I have complained about it. There are several reasons behind the format change, but it does also appear to clear more space for – advertising (and marketing-oriented tools) – within each member profile. As a result, there is less display space, less ‘billboard’ effect for each profile, and more need to navigate through links and tabs to access each member’s content.

Again, this is only meant as a brief post, but the issue continues to confirm that in context of this explosion of social media, ‘advertising’ is NOT going away. Unequivocally, the collective social media conversation with, and among, consumers is game-changing. But advertising will continue to play a core role in that process – the Brand Ecosystem – and that, is an important consideration for marketers. No doubt, that advertising role/purpose will change and evolve to reconcile with social media and its role, but advertising isn’t going away just yet.

...How the role of advertising is changing, and needs to futher change, is a subject worthy of another post.

Digital Merchandising

2008-09-12T11:42:00.009-05:00

What are consumers searching for?
How to bring people in?
What items or areas should be emphasized?
How to design to build so as to optimize traffic flow?
How to drive conversion?

I am being a little coy here – to make a point. The above list may sound like a clumsy and vague dialogue geared toward SEM digital media and website design. But what if it doesn’t apply to that at all? What if I am merely talking about ‘merchandising’ at your local neighborhood retailer??? ...Some interesting similarities.

None of this constitutes branding – just as none of this even scratches the surface to define and position brands such as Best Buy, Costco, Gap, Target and Wal-Mart apart from one another. Merchandising is vital – it’s the daily operating life blood of any consumer-facing selling effort – but alone – it is not branding. Those retailers go far beyond featured sales, arrangement of merchandise and in-store display strategies to build their core brand franchises with consumers.

I know I'm still a bit obscure here, as 'digital merchandising' also has a more literal interpretation in the context of strategy and design for an e-commerce website. But I am actually driving at a broader context - that of consumers navigating the overall digital universe.

Let me digress for a moment.

In this digital DM response rate world of today, a lot of media tactics and ‘digital merchandising’ are being adopted by many professionals as new (and complete) marketing strategies. CFOs like response rates. They are predictable. When compared to investing in the consumer experience or fuzzy advertising or events and a host of other brand-building activities, a proven direct marketing response rate of 2% or 5% is sexy to a CFO. Good old-fashioned coupons have always carried such sex appeal in the marketing world. And lest you not forget, we’re not taking spam here. No way, spam is so yesterday, this is CRM. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist – I’m actually as big of an ambassador for CRM as you may find – when it is correctly comprehensive, true to the consumer’s lifestyle, and embodies the underlying fundamental positioning of a brand – but you must have brand positioning first.)

The fundamental point here is that any merchandising is a part, a valued part – but not the whole, of any consumer brand-building strategy. This is true in every context of the digital world, as it is and has been in the off-line world. Stating the more obvious: an X% response or conversion rate does not constitute brand strategy.

So the next time you address your online media and marketing efforts, ask yourself whether you are truly investing time against brand-building or digital merchandising?

On a somewhat related note, here’s a heads-up for a new book that advocates recognition of fundamental brand-building principals, even in a digital world. This is refreshing as so much that passes for ‘brand strategy’ these days is too often really limited to just digital merchandising …even social media, the heralded strategic meat for true consumer-brand connection in an otherwise SEM world, is sometimes misused, but I’ll save that for a later post.

The book, appropriately named: Brand Digital.

http://www.branddigital.com/#

Brand Involvement & Media Engagement

2008-07-24T19:41:00.004-05:00

Ok, right up front, it's been a few months since my last post. What can I say, this Blog is one hobby among other interests.

To another but not unrelated point, the Internet - for me - has become more of a tool, and less of a source for entertainment. Remember the term, 'surfing' (the Internet)? For some, the Internet is still a means for killing hours of time doing little more than occupying otherwise bored brain waves. But for myself, and I suspect others, the once novel curiosity that led us to surf and explore, has given way to a reality that the technology of the Internet has simply increased the pace of our lives, becoming so familiar and routine, that it's entertainment value of surfing has diminished in the face of higher and more urgent seeking purposes.

With that backdrop, I serve up the following video clip which aired on CNBC this week. In the interview, Max Levchin, CEO of Slide, talks about the applications that his company has introduced in social networking environments. A giggle can be heard off camera -- maybe pause for consideration is merited?

video link here:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=800646248

I think it's worthwhile to bring up brand involvement and media engagement. Category product involvement, brand involvement, media engagement and borrowed interest in advertising, etc., are understood as long-standing traditional marketing considerations. Extreme examples of borrowed interest in TV advertising have often been laughed at -- entertaining to watch, but then quickly criticized as wasted media spend and inconsistent with fundamental brand-building.

I recently heard someone refer to a well-known social networking site as My 'Empty' Space. It's been suggested that many users (e.g. college students) have moved on (with their time) to other social networks like Facebook. Before we attribute this fully to Facebook being a better mousetrap, might the novelty have also diminished for the attributes that once made the former site so interesting?

I've opened a can of worms here and I know it. Obviously, different groups use the Internet differently. Different consumers have different levels of involvement for different categories. While one media application may lend engagement to one type of product category or for certain consumer groups, it may be inconsistent with the character and involvement for other categories and it may appear a silly distraction for other consumer groups.

In the real (non-virtual) world, life experience has equipped us all with (some) scepticism of that which new, with a view that suggests 'a fad' until proven more sustaining. Yet in the virtual online world, we have yet to fully incorporate this scepticism for all that is new, instead viewing each new exposure as the next significant trend, until proven only a fad. Yet ...the online world has already well-earned some credentials for producing fads.

As marketers, we are confronted with all things new for digital marketing at a blistering rate. If we've got a true balanced (and experienced) perspective, we'll see a few of these things as 'borrowed interest,' worthy of a good laugh, but not brand-building strategies.

And btw, this is not a judgement against Slide. Only time well tell fad from trend, in terms of it's long-term role in media. It was merely a useful example from which to raise the question.

'Listening' through Online Social Media: Consumer Marketing Research 2.0

2008-04-27T19:33:00.007-05:00

Objectives, not technology, should drive groundswell strategies." It's almost poetic.

This is one of several good videos on the topic of Groundswell from the book's authors at Forrester Research, but ok, here's the real point: 'Listening' (to your consumer) is the discussion rage today regarding social media. Much is being said to the effect that social media will now allow marketers to (finally) be in-touch with their consumers. Well, any agency that says this, should be replaced -- ASAP. No doubt, social media is a turbo-charger when it comes to dialogue with consumers, but any agency with this view gives hint to the fact that they have little or no experience with the science of consumer marketing research. Forrester rightly urges marketers to get onboard, but they don't diss the value of traditional reasearch. There aren't many meaningful consumer brands that ever existed, prior to social media, without years of focus group research, attitude & usage studies, brand and advertising tracking surveys, various forms of purchase panel data, telephone, brand clubs and direct-mail CRM, etc., etc., and the timeless feedback from store managers and sales personnel -- not remotely ignorant of the wants and needs of their consumers. Social media is huge, for sure. With a growing world consumer population in the billions, real-time speed of information, not richness of learning, will be it's most profound impact. It represents many new things now possible or made easier to do than before, but the possibility of companies now 'listening' to their consumers (for the first time) gets too much attention relative to the other business implications of social media.

How reckless is it when someone who doesn't have research expertise with sampling methodologies and representation, or potential differences between 'claimed' responses and actual behavior, or the issues associated with 'group think' when openly dominant opinions overshadow others, or the appropriate uses for qualitative insight vs. quantitative data, and the list could go on, insists upon the idea that social media is the savior to lead marketers out of the darkness of not understanding their consumers? Such folks are well-intending, but for sake of following a new technology, they shun the lessons available from decades of the consumer marketing that often pre-dates their careers. As the saying goes, "those that do not learn from the mistakes of the past, are destined to repeat them."

A better line of thought when it comes to the power of learning from consumers online is the broader subject area of Web Analytics. In DMNews, Rick Weinstock, DirectGroup North America states, "...Businesses that were well-established long before the advent of e-commerce face unique challenges when it comes to analyzing consumer behavior. ...While the multichannel approach enables marketers to improve customer lifetime sales and the overall customer experience, it continues to be important to cater to your offline-only customers. ...Online activity for multichannel customers is often heavily impacted by recent offline promotions, skewing sales toward items appearing in print." The relevance here is that we really don't live in an offline or online world (with all of us now on our way exclusively to the online world), we live in a "multichannel" world. It's a multichannel world where offline and online experience is interrelated, and thus, offline and online marketing are interrelated. An intersection of Web analytics, relevant social media, sales data and traditional marketing research, all reconciled for consistency of implications for the brand business, may be my personal 'dream team' dashboard of choice.

Marketers and Wall Street Have Similar Questions for Investments in Social Media

2008-04-01T20:05:00.010-05:00

An interesting breeze was felt last week, one which might be an indicator of how the winds may be changing for Social Media. A story published by Dow Jones Newswires quoted a Wall Street analyst on the subject of the virtual software company, VMware. I read the story because I had been a buyer of the IPO last year, but have since sold my shares. What I found interesting though, was the last paragraph, commenting on the changing perception of Wall Street for online applications within the context of Web 2.0.

"Maybe VMware has a very strong product offering today, but the question investors are struggling with is, for how long can VMware continue to have a technology lead," said Trip Chowdhry, an analyst with Global Equities Research…

VMware has started to make noise about how Microsoft is spreading the so-called FUD factor [fear, uncertainty and doubt] into the market. The company posted a defensive white paper on its Web site last month, in which it noted that Microsoft is "trying to restrict customers' flexibility and freedom to choose virtualization software by limiting who can run their software and how they can run it."

"Over the last three months or so, the entry into this space has been very aggressive," Chowdhry said. …It seems a stretch to imagine that VMware will ever return to the highs it saw last year. Chowdhry also points out that another driver in the stock's run-up was the fact that some investors have looked at virtualization as an industry, when in actuality it is a feature that most business software companies -- large and small -- are now battling to offer…

"Virtualization is a feature, not an industry," Chowdhry added. "Once it is a feature, you cannot command the same valuation as an industry." This is something that many of the Web 2.0 start-ups in Silicon Valley are going to have to learn as well, but that is a topic for another column. (END) Dow Jones Newswires

What I find interesting about this story is how similar the hesitation is for some brand marketing executives as compared to some financial analysts in the area of Social Media. I am a fan of online Social Media. I don’t think anybody doubts the transformational impact that it is having on empowering the voices of consumers with brand providers in the marketplace and the influence of sharing brand perceptions within such networks. Unfortunately, there is also a lot of suspected hype, as some corners ‘adjust’ theories on ideas such as the ‘long-tail’ in order to support their latest concept of how Social Media will affect future brand consumption – and sometimes these viewpoints lack any real experience with consumer insights or psychology (especially offline) or experience with the production and distribution realities that balance against the consumer appeal to be gained through customization. (I plan to address this in more detail with a future post.)

What is interesting, is that while everyone sees tremendous change, this quote acknowledges that it is still yet unclear where and how the most effective investment (or marketing spend) can work within Social Media (and that’s not to assume it would be anything but different for each and every brand, depending upon category, involvement, etc.). For example, the recent addition of targeted social ads on Facebook, seems like short-sighted, first-level thinking ...(yes, even if it leads toward Google-type search potential, it still seems like ‘putting the cheese in front of the consumer mouse’). That’s fundamentally inconsistent with the appeal of Social Media. And are social network sites really just a 'feature'? Why couldn't large online email providers like Hotmail or Yahoo promote social networking and profile capabilities within their vast existing email account bases? Regardless of the application or digital data stream, tomorrow’s consumer is going to quickly catch up with any strategies to reach them via Social Media, and not every approach is going to work transparently as planned.

Everyone agrees that Social Media represents a profound change for consumers and brands, but not everyone agrees on what represents the best approach to this opportunity, to date (especially for offline non-ecommerce brands). To many brand marketing leaders, it still looks mostly to be experimentation, at this point, and that must affect perceived ROI.

The Paradox of Media

2008-03-28T09:22:00.006-05:00

Ok, cheap entertainment here …but check out this ad for bear costumes (wink). All kidding aside, this was served up elsewhere and as a ding on advertising, but the pitfall exists everywhere in all forms of brand communication: Borrowed interest (exactly as I am doing here with this post) to gain viewer attention, balanced against the hope that a brand’s compelling benefits will be shared, received and accepted. Video clip:

This, by the way, is why I don’t believe in Super Bowl television ads. Sure, sometimes they accomplish tremendous brand awareness, but for every infamous ‘1984’ Apple Macintosh commercial, there are far too many more ‘ads for moonwalking bears.’ The temptation for advertisers is to believe, that with so many eyeballs watching, a brand can and should do something spectacular. But more often, a brand’s advertising investment can be more effective by sticking to its USP and being smarter with media dollars. And before the cheers come loudly from the digital folks, the pitfall exists there too. Obviously, not all online connections or clicks are created equal. Even when an online audience is actively ‘searching,’ paying close attention, attentive within the published content (as in counting passes), consider the collective impact of static banner ads, repulsive pop-ups and pop-unders, animated Flash ads and expandable ads, as the focused viewer seeks to expeditiously reach/review desired content (count the passes). If you think people can TiVo through inconvenient television ads, you should see how fast I click past/around unwanted online ads, as I speed-surf to absorb (or post) my desired content.

Will social networks evolve us to a new environment to ultimately yield a different consumer communication result? They certainly empower consumer voices now. But what about the future of this environment? One possibility, a paradox, is that the earliest brands now becoming associated with these online networks, if well chosen, may be embraced by most members. But when the 500th brand shows up on the site, it may find a profitable, but empty party, as members say ‘I’m outta here.’ The social network sites are still trying to figure out how grow beyond being a charity event for their audience. How will they do this and what happens then? A person on the corner giving away free stuff is the greatest salesman in the world ...unless he has to charge for it.

Maybe they should just try the public television model: “Won’t you please donate, if you’d like to continue receiving this fine programming (space)”? ;-) ...Until then, we will not escape a world with advertising clutter.

Traditional 'Image' Marketing within Online Social Networks?

2008-03-26T13:21:00.007-05:00

Hopefully, this will be the first of many posts and great collaborative discussions about revealing the most effective marketing strategies today, and in the years ahead. Perspectives on social networks in all forms, including social bookmarking and online brand communities; e-commerce and online affiliate marketing; 1.0/2.0/3.0; mobile networking and digital convergence; SEO, website strategies and, of course, blogging; all are fair game – as are all forms of ‘traditional’ advertising, media, PR, and offline promotions and events, etc. All thoughts are welcome.

I may, as a devil’s advocate, present the contrarian consideration to prevailing or emerging views on positioning and brand strategies. Frankly, telling the world that everything is now upside-down, and that we are now on the cusp of an unimaginable New-Tipping-Clue-Jump-Train-Point-Revolution is the way to create headlines, and headlines sell -- books, content, advertising, you name it. Don’t get me wrong, there’s a lot of renaissance thinking out there, but not everything in the flood of ideas being proposed has been tested or proven, thus, not science. This blog, admittedly, may respond to headlines and also may not always claim to be science, but it is primarily about selling products or services, building brands …and building business.

As an appropriate first topic, this post opens the debate with the question as to whether node-to-node online social networking is only about 1:1 interactive connections and viral spread of communication (as now dominates most new thinking on marketing)? If so, why did a friend recently joked with me (after I invited him to connect in an online social network), “sure, I take all friends, I like people to think I’m hooked-up”? We’ve all seen the online mega-networkers, with 500+ of their closest friends. Sure, there are justified purposes for such a gluttony, career and other, but we also must honestly acknowledge the element of ‘schoolyard popularity.’ And consider personal social network sites that display an abundance of “I’ve-got-the-coolest-applications-on-my-site.” And then there’s the impressive expression of personal creativity on some social network sites. All of this seems to introduce some factor of portrayed image -- by the members -- in an effort to 'brand' themselves. Surely, not all brief recipients of such image can be classified as (meaningful) 1:1 personal connections. I guess its just ironic human nature how some of the same folks who reject display of mass-marketing (to anyone and everyone), practice the very same thing on a personal level. It seems the age-old trade of 1:many image marketing, however evolved, is still alive and well – even in today’s online social networks.