But to break out of the mental best practices box, you may need some outside stimulus to spark your contrarian thinking. One good way to generate that spark is a look at the New York Times/Freakonomics blog. (Additional plug for Freakonomics: Steven Levitt is a really nice guy; I know because my wife was once his kids’ nursery school teacher.)

That’s where I ran across an “unbranding” post about Gucci and Jersey Shore. Supposedly all kinds of luxury brand marketers are sending designer purses to the notorious and controversial Snooki. But what they’re sending are samples of their competitors’ products, not their own. They want to keep the proverbial ten foot pole between their brands and Snooki. This is a one kind of unbranding – protecting your brand by hiding it and shifting the blame to the competition.

What would I find, I thought, if I Googled the word itself? The results were surprising; there is a whole, unexpected range of marketing activities defined as “unbranding.” For example:

There’s the elitist, maximize-your-PC version of unbranding, in which products have greater value and prestige simply because they have no brand name.  (After all, brand names are part of that lowlife activity called “marketing.” Eeuuuh!) The Note To CMO blog says: “Think about the difference between what’s happening in organic food and most other industries: perceived value increases if the product carries no label. “Un-brand” loyalty is dramatically enhanced when you know the person who produces it personally, and see them every week. It’s a bit like how the PC industry was pre-Apple.”

There’s distract-your-attention version of unbranding, which the world’s largest coffee shop chain used to counter pushback against a cookie-cutter Starbucks on every corner. They opened 15th Ave Coffee and Tea shops, with no Starbucks branding at all. According to Thought Gadget, “It’s all about overcoming consumers’ defenses to your brand…in simple terms, persuasion knowledge means consumers know that you are trying to seduce them, so they filter every message accordingly.”

And there’s the sweep-it-under the rug version of unbranding. Philip Morris became Altria, to lessen the taint of tobacco. Iraqi civilian shooting Blackwater became Xe. And financially disgraced AIG became AIU.

Who cares? Why did I think that this relatively rare activity called “unbranding” was worth my attention, and yours? Because it’s exactly the opposite of what marketers do in their daily work. So as a remedy for complacency it’s a valuable mental exercise. Instead of thinking of how to build your brand, consider how you’d defend it by calling attention to competition, or give it elite status by minimizing branding, or overcome negatives by creating an alternative brand, or just plain replace your brand.

The campaign is built around the tagline “Be Stupid,” and features attention-getting photographs of people doing just that. At first glimpse, it’s nothing more than one more example of crudeness and stupidity replacing the traditional sex and celebrities, as the chief tactic for communications to get attention fast. (On a broader culture-wide scale, think stupid pet tricks, any episode of Jersey Shore and Rod “Stupidity Is The Best Defense” Blagojevich.“)

But we think Diesel goes a good deal deeper, into a special kind of stupidity. In marketing there are three kinds of stupidity (there are probably a lot more, but this is enough for now):

1.    There are ideas that are just plain stupid all the way around. We’ve covered a few of them here in our blog, in the past. Examples: Office Depot’s Adopt A Small Business Contest, and the Google daily billboards campaign.
2.    There are smart ideas with stupid executions. In auto dealership Evergreen Kia’s “taking it all off” TV commercial, the idea is good – low prices backed by customer support. The execution? Well, they’ve got the first step right. It does get your attention, being mooned by your car dealer.

3.    And then there are smart ideas that only seem stupid – Diesel’s is one of them.

“Be Stupid” is Diesel’s external communication of an internal thinking process that we’ve used informally for years at R&M, to develop innovative marketing ideas. We adopt, for the short term, an attitude of intentional ignorance and stupidity. The idea is to question everything, and take nothing for granted. That way, instead of leaping immediately to executions, we can question the basic objectives and processes of the marketing operation.

We’re in good company; some very smart people also use stupidity as a thinking tool:
•    There’s a computer science process called Artificial Stupidity.“ Wikipedia states that “…a sufficiently developed Artificial Stupidity program would be able to make all the worst cases regarding a given situation. This would enable computer programmers and analysts to find flaws immediately while minimizing errors that are within the code.”
•    In the Journal of Cell Science, an article headlined “The importance of stupidity in scientific research” states that “Productive stupidity means being ignorant by choice. Focusing on important questions puts us in the awkward position of being ignorant…The more comfortable we become with being stupid, the deeper we will wade into the unknown and the more likely we are to make big discoveries.”

We’re not sure exactly what this contrarian thinking process has to do with the way that customers choose their blue jeans brand.  But we are sure that the Be Stupid campaign is a worthwhile challenge to the ways we all think about marketing planning and creative. It’s telling us to stop trying to be conventionally smart and to try a different way: “How stupid are you willing to be, to really achieve your goals?”

But now something unexpected is happening. A recent Wall Street Journal article tells how cemeteries are now using on-site concerts, clowns, scavenger hunts, film festivals and even fishing derbies, to attract prospects for future business. “It gets them into the cemetery, but not in a scary way, and if they have a nice experience, maybe they’ll say, ‘I want my family there,’ ” explains William F. Griswold, Jr., executive superintendent of Cedar Hill Cemetery in Hartford, Conn.

Cemetery Fest is just one way that marketers are breathing new life into the death business:
•    Cemeteries and funeral homes are running provocative ad campaigns, with headlines like “Hey, It’s Your Funeral” and “Your Own Little Slice Of Heaven.”
•    Getting to your own funeral is half the fun, because you don’t have to settle for a conventional stretch Cadillac hearse. Now you can set out on that final journey in a customized hearse.

•    You can choose a custom coffin too – for instance, a replica of a Rolls Royce. And you can go green when you go, in a totally eco-friendly coffin.
•    Or if you don’t want to think outside the box, you can choose a more conventional coffin at a discount, at your friendly neighborhood Wal-Mart.
•    Google “funeral marketing” and you’ll see scores of specialized agencies, consultants and websites offering advice. You can read a case study on coffin marketing. Choose from a ready-to-use stock ad service for funeral homes. Even enter a creative advertising contest for funeral homes.

Why should marketers care about all this, if they’re not in the funeral home or cemetery business?
1.    Because business opportunities can be hiding in plain sight, just waiting for someone smart enough to exploit them. It’s not some tiny niche market they’re targeting here – ultimately, everyone is a prospect.
2.    It’s evidence of disappearing taboos in marketing communications. Over the past decade, we’ve become used to seeing Viagra and KY Jelly advertised on prime time TV. And now, with this revolution in funeral and cemetery marketing, it’s becoming OK to say the “D” word.
3.    It shows where to look for inspiration for innovation, no matter what product or service you’re marketing. Sometimes the interesting stuff is out on the edge, in unexpected product categories, barely noticed by the marketing mainstream.

A truly powerful brand is one that can pre-empt a letter of the alphabet for its very own. Only a few have ever done it.
•    Dual “Ms” may be the most famous candy brand in the world, from Mars Incorporated.
•    Everyone knows the cereal called “Os,” from General Mills.
•    And in the past few years, with the iMac, iTunes, the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad, Apple has claimed the letter “i” as its very own.

Now iNquiring minds want to know what the notoriously secretive Apple will come up with next. The rumor mills are already grinding away, spewing out fantastic new product scenarios based on nothing but BS. Not to be outdone, we asked the R&M staff to iMagine what’s coming up from Cupertino.

Some of my colleagues say the next big thing will be iPhone-like devices dedicated to single apps – contemporary digital equivalents of the old Ronco Inside The Shell Egg Scrambler and the Pop-Up Hot Dog Cooker from Hammacher Schlemmer. For example:
•    The iDo, for engaged couples trying to keep track of (and constantly communicate to their wedding guests) their long, long bridal registry wish lists at way too many stores.
•    The iLike, an extension of the Netflix software that predicts which movies you’ll like. Enter your profile, then enter information about a person, a car, a vacation destination or whatever. Stop thinking. Let a machine help determine your most deeply held opinions.
•    And the iLid, for California other states where marijuana is legal, sort of. Learn about the strength, price and nearest retailer for your favorite semi-legal smoke.

Other R&Mers disagree. They point out that Apple customers have a problem. What will they do with the next big thing from Apple, now that they’ve already got an iMac on their desk, an iPod in their pocket and its bud in one ear, their iPhone in their hand at their other ear and a new iPad tucked under their arm? There’s no room left for something new.

Since its customers already have their hands full (literally), my colleagues believe that Apple will be moving into implants. If you can’t get customers to buy any more portable hardware, build your new products directly into their bodies. We’re looking forward to:
•    iEar. Think of it as the next generation of cochlear implant, implanted directly into the side of your head, bypassing your iPod and delivering iTunes directly into your ear.
•    iPeds replace your flesh and blood feet. They meld the latest in high tech artificial limb prosthetics with a Tom Tom GPS, for walkers everywhere and especially wilderness hikers, who will never get lost again. Think it’s ridiculous? Another company is already just one step away, with GPS functions built into eyeglasses.
•    iClops, for Apple’s more spiritually-inclined contemplative customers. It’s an inward looking third eye implanted in the middle of your forehead, giving you mystical powers and insights into the secrets of the universe.

•    And ultimately there will be the iBorg, with a Mac built right into your brain. Now Apple lovers everywhere are looking forward to saying “I’m half man, half Mac, and all “i” could ever want to be.”

Thanks to my daughter Ellie, who inspired all this by first coming up with the idea of the iClops.

Nothing, really. It’s a good idea. The real problem is with some of the marketers who’ve fallen in love with it. As ethical marketers, they’re opposed to practices that deceive the customer. If only they’d be equally opposed to practices that deceive themselves. For example – look at these recent headlines from the marketing press and blogs:

“Mediabrands Launches Shopper Marketing Agency”

“Integer Expands Shopper Marketing Expertise with New VP”

“Birdsong Gregory Appoints Jared Meisel to Head Shopper Marketing Team”

“Coca-Cola India Appoints OgilvyAction To Oversee Shopper Marketing Business”

“New Report On Shopper Marketing Illustrates Need For Mobile Channel Focus”

You’d think from all the attention it gets and so-called news it generates, that “shopper marketing” was some newly created discipline that was about to reorganize all agencies and revolutionize all marketing practice. There’s even a trade journal and a trade show dedicated to shopper marketing.

But you’d be wrong. Once again, the marketing business has demonstrated its almost limitless talent for deceiving itself. Shopper marketing is just a new name for something that our agency and many others have been doing for years.

A Deloitte report defines shopper marketing as “all marketing stimuli, developed based on understanding shopper behavior, and designed to build brand equity, engage the shopper (i.e., person in ‘shopping mode’), and lead him/her to make a
purchase.”

Hmmm, sounds vaguely familiar. Been there, done that. It seems like the more things change, the more they stay the same. My colleague Steve Smith touched on this before, when he wrote a post about P&G’s (supposedly) new Store Back marketing concept.

Shopper marketing is what sales promotion and merchandising agencies started doing 1960s and 70s: Using marketing tactics to take advantage of shopper preferences and behavior. For example, in a bricks and mortar store:
•    The best display position, all things being equal, is to the right of the front door, because that’s how shoppers tend to turn when they enter.
•    Shoppers are more likely to take advantage of savings if you give them a piece of paper to carry around and remind them (a coupon) than if you just hope they remember the savings they read about a week ago.

Now shopper marketing extends that kind of thinking beyond bricks and mortar to all kinds of purchase behavior. For example:
•    To online shoppers, and their behavior when they fill and then abandon, their virtual shopping carts.
•    To B2B shoppers, and the role of the gatekeeper, and the decision making differences between the small business shopper and the large corporation network of purchase decision makers and influencers.

Now the shopper isn’t just Mom in the supermarket, deciding which brand of toilet paper to buy. The shopper can also be a C-level executive, deciding on purchases that will determine the company’s strategic direction.

But the name “shopper marketing” is not just a harmless piece of marketing puffery, directed at us. There are some real risks to believing that it’s something entirely new. True believers may end up:
•    Reinventing the wheel, recreating techniques and ideas that behavior-oriented marketers have always practiced.
•    Failing to create the new insights and techniques that clients need, because they’re too busy recycling old ones.
•    Deceiving themselves into thinking they’re making a major contribution to marketing thought.
•    Wasting time and effort, patting themselves on the back.

So go ahead and call it “shopper marketing,” if you like. But beware of persuading yourself that you’re doing something new and better than before, just because it’s got a new name. Remember the famous George Santayana saying about history:
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Not a new Porsche. Not a dream vacation in Tuscany. Not even $25,000 to help me create the kitchen I’ve always wanted. But a year’s supply of cereal. Whoop-ti-doo.

Did I unknowingly fall asleep like Rip Van Winkle, and awaken to a new world of no-nonsense, just-the-facts- Ma’m, totally practical sweepstakes promotions? Should I look forward to other marketers offering me a chance to win a pair of socks a day for a year? A pound of ten-penny nails? A gallon of paint?

What’s missing here is the subjective element of excitement and aspiration that usually sets sweepstakes, games and contests apart from other promotion tactics. To work, a coupon or a refund must offer an obvious, objective and assured measure of savings. A free merchandise premium should offer obvious, objective value and/or exclusivity, vs. purchasing the same item.

But sweeps, games and contests are a little different. Obviously, only a few can win the big prizes. So to make for this lack of assured value, chance and skill promotions substitute the appeal of “big dreams.”  The promotion’s delivered value may not be certain, but it is certain that you can enjoy the perceived value of anticipating something exciting.

A year’s worth of cereal may be a good value. But obtaining it isn’t assured, and it’s certainly not exciting.

But excitement isn’t all that’s missing from this promotion. For example:
•    The “year’s supply of cereal” is actually 12 coupons for free boxes of HNC – one a month. Personally, I can go through a box of breakfast cereal in a week and half during late summer’s peach and raspberry season. (Full disclosure: personal favorites are regular Cheerios and Frosted Mini-Wheats.)
•    If you don’t win, you’ll receive a 75 cent store coupon. But this benefit – the real traffic and sales drive – appears only after you participate in the promotion.
•    This is an adult promotion. The “Non Challenge” theme highlights HNC’s cholesterol-lowering benefit. So why did HNC choose to keep the cartoon bee and the roster of fairly lame kids’ online games as part of the promotion? And why expect adults to come back to play the online game every day?

•    The whole promotion is almost entirely online. There’s an on-pack communication – a promotional  burst on the front of the box, shown on the website. And there’s a TV spot. But there’s very little to directly drive traffic to the product, on the shelf, in the store.

Ultimately, the Honey Nut Cheerios Non Challenge game only does do two things well:
1.    Capture email addresses. Presumably HNC will use these for future promotions.
2.    Get Honey Nut Cheerios featured on the all the coupon savings and sweepstakes sites – “Stockpiling Moms,” “The Krazy Coupon Lady,” “Wicked Cool Deals” and more.
But are these worthwhile primary goals for a CPG promotion? The Non Challenge is a non-winner, because there’s little incentive to build store traffic and sales and little excitement to build the Honey Nut Cheerios brand.

But it seems some are questioning the tax incentives that have made productions like this possible. This excellent article by Kathy Bergen at the Tribune sums up the issue nicely. I would encourage you all to read it. However, its certainly clear to me that the jobs created and the amount of money spent in Chicago on productions like this far outweigh any potential negatives. And, full disclosure, as an actor I’m delighted to see it. Other productions are in town now and more are coming soon.

So all that is awesome and great for the local economy!

But I would argue that the hidden, non-quantifiable, long-term benefits are even better for the marketing of Chicago. Visit Chicago today and you’ll see a modern American city (with some noticeable exceptions of course like our mass transit system), with a beautiful lakefront, an inviting downtown, and gleaming skyscrapers. It’s a place where anybody would love to make a film.

But it wasn’t always like that and not so long ago either. Everybody has seen the “Blues Brothers” of course, but if you haven’t seen it in a while, go back and watch it again. You won’t see today’s Chicago in that film. You’ll see a tough, gritty, dirty city with old guys living in tenements asking for their Cheese Whiz. In many ways, it’s the Chicago I remember growing up with.

So what changed? Well the “Blue Brothers” introduced the nation to Chicago. And despite the grittiness of the movie it made our culture shine. The music, the cuisine (“Wrong glass sir.”), the neighborhoods, Lower Wacker Drive, the architecutre, and Wrigley Field were all things prominently featured that made people want to come here.

Chicago looked cool! Even today, thirty years later, I have friends from out of town who want to visit this place or that because they saw it in the “Blues Brothers.” If you’re from Chicago, tell me you haven’t taken pride in driving a visitor down Lower Wacker Drive just like the Blues Brothers did. People from all over the country now know what’s located at 1060 W. Addison. The Blues Brothers are such a part of our cultural fabric that you can’t imagine Chicago without it. That’s pretty powerful stuff for a movie.

Now am I saying that the “Blues Brothers” is responsible for the transformation of Chicago to what it is today? Of course not. But it was a critical factor. And many of the movies shot here since were also critical factors in the evolution of the Chicago brand. These productions and future ones are vital to the city’s growth.

So to Michael Bay, Ron Howard, Stephen Soderbergh and our Hollywood friends I say thank you, please come again, and please encourage others to shoot here. Chicago’s reputation flourishes and its brand beams the more you’re here.

Oh, and one other thing…while you’re in town, could one of you guys please call my agent?

KFC’s free sandwiches offer for their new Doublicious menu addition pretends to be a promotion. But a sales promotion is supposed to be like a business proposition: A marketer promises you an incentive for a specific behavior…but the value of the incentive has to match the potential cost of the behavior. Here’s how I (if I were a burger flipper at McDonalds) might have responded to the proposition from KFC, for their new Doublicious sandwich:

“A free sandwich just for coming in? Let’s see if I’ve got this right:”

•    I work at one of your competitors. (McDonalds, Burger King, Popeye’s, etc.)
•    You want me to betray my employer in favor of you. (Eat at your restaurant.)
•    You want me to make sure everyone knows I’m doing it. (Wear my uniform when I visit KFC.)
•    If I get caught, you’ll make up for it by graciously allowing me to apply for a job with you. (You’ll give me a job application…but not a job.)
•    And for all this, you’ll give me a free sandwich. (Oh, wow. Whoop-ti-do.)

“Hmmm. No. I don’t think so. I’ll pass on this one.”

Of course, KFC never really thought that competitive fast food employees would say “yes” to the free Doublicious offer. The whole thing’s a stunt, pretending to be a promotion.

But it doesn’t really work very well as a publicity stunt either.  Most of the publicity came from the marketing press and blogs, all talking to each other. Meanwhile, KFC ignored what their customers might think of all this.
•    Why should a potential customer care what the kid behind the McDonald’s counter thinks about the KFC Doublicious sandwich?
•    Why would you do business with a company that thinks someone’s job is worth no more than the price of a sandwich?
•    What’s exciting and appealing about any of this? A free sandwich is no big deal. The prospects of hordes of customers dressed in competitors’ uniforms invading KFC is unlikely. And the only creative tension comes from the slightly ghoulish prospect of knowing someone might get fired.
•    And most important, what’s in it for me, the customer who’s expected to pay for the Doublicious sandwich?

So as another one of KFC’s competitors said so famously many years ago: “Where’s The Beef?”

More and more companies are changing their well-known names into sets of meaningless initials: CA, CDW, UPS, BP, KFC and more. If it’s their own internal and external marketing people advising them, they’d be better off listening to the real experts on company names: their own customers.

The brevity of initials and acronyms is supposed to improve communications. But frequently it does just the opposite. Imagine an agency president making a new business presentation to your company. He says: “We work to build our clients’ marketing ROI, by leveraging their USP. And it’s our SOP to reply to client requests ASAP…usually by COB.”

Right ideas, wrong language. The same thing can happen when companies try to substitute a set of initials for a meaningful brand name. The overall effect is vaguely ridiculous, because the acronyms trivialize the importance of the ideas.
•    KFC used to be Kentucky Fried Chicken. For a while, responding to the potential negatives of “fried,” they tried to convince us it meant Kitchen Fresh Chicken. Now KFC doesn’t mean anything at all.
•    A well-own technology services company used to be Computer Discount Warehouse. Then, to move away from “discount” and to communicate their consulting capabilities, they became just CDW.  C, D, What?
•    Home Shopping Network is now HSN. The rush to shrink was a little premature, since Home Shopping Network wasn’t exactly a household word to begin with. Does HSN now mean…the Huh? Shopping Network?

Even worse are the automakers who choose their model names from a bowl of alphabet soup, with names like CR-V, RAV4, GLK, SRX and CTS. Might as well just number them 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

Companies switch to initials for what seems like good reasons. They think they want to:
1. Take advantage of a broader definition of who they are and what they offer.
BP used to be British Petroleum. Then it became Beyond Petroleum. Now there are many meanings for BP, few of them positive.
UPS was once United Parcel Service. Now they’re just three lonely initials that might suggest some kind of upward movement. Or maybe not.
2. Try to make people forget what they’ve done in the past.
The notorious Blackwater security firm, a name with uncertain meaning, became Xe, which means nothing at all.
3. Align with what customers already say.
Just recently, the 166 year old YMCA (Young Men’s Christian Association) rebranded itself as just the “Y” – what people have been calling it for years anyway.  This one was the right thing to do, a marketer’s dream in action, to “own” a letter or letters of the alphabet. But it only works if there’s an enduring, interactive customer relationship.

The recent YMCA rebranding shows the right way, and the right reason, to change a company name. It’s customers who condensed the name down into Y; the company merely came along later and confirms what customers already have done. Other examples include IBM (International Business Machines), AT&T (American Telegraph & Telephone) and AOL (America Online).  You can’t make your customers do this for you. But you can encourage them, as Miller/Coors has by continually reinforcing Miller Genuine Draft messaging with the initials MGD. Some day the brand may be MGD, all by itself.

Actual names offer these marketing advantages:
•    They differentiate from competition.
•    They build on company equity, sometimes decades-long.
•    They can deliver a relevant message – products and services offered, quality of service, and so forth.
Switching to initials offers virtually no advantages; they’re like talking to yourself, unless customers are part of the creation process, as with the Y.

Initially, it may seem like a good idea. But the rush to shrink the company name into a trendy sounding set of initials can end up meaning less recognition with less relevance.

Why the little old lady from Pasadena may be your best customer

Every once in a while, marketers’ mindsets should be shocked by information that makes them think “What if everything I thought I knew is wrong?”

That’s the kind of jolt that came from a recent Wired article, Clive Thompson’s contrarian take on the traditional worship of early adopters as best prospects for technology products. He believes just the opposite – that late adopters could be the key market segment.

Late adopters are like the Jan & Dean/Beach Boys’ Little Old Lady From Pasadena, the mythical fuddy-duddy grandma who turned out to be the fastest, toughest street racer in Southern California.

“The little old lady from Pasadena
Go granny, go granny, go granny go
Has a pretty little flower bed of white gardenias
Go granny, go granny, go granny go
But parked in her rickety old garage
Is a brand new shiny red Super Stock Dodge”

Late adopters leapfrog
Like all late adopters, it just took her a while to get going. But now she’s unstoppable, “…the terror of Colorado Boulevard.” Thompson tells us that late adopters tend to leapfrog from old technology to the newest, skipping several generations on the way. In one example, they switched from an antiquated cassette Walkman to the latest iPod, in one step. “If only 10 percent of laggards leapfrog, their purchases can drive profits from a new gadget 89 percent higher than they would be without leapfrogging.”

What’s behind this surprising behavior? We’ve got a couple of informed hunches:
•    Late adopters tend to be older, more rational decision makers.
•    But once converted, they tend to be true believers – loyal customers with stronger long-term relationship potential than twenty-somethings.
•    Most important, they resist “new” for its own sake. You’ve got to show them how they benefit.

Overcome skepticism
At Robinson & Maites, we saw what happened when we developed a marketing program for a Verizon broadband product. Most of the low-hanging fruit – early adopters – had already been picked. So we reached up and out for what was left: Late adopters who were dubious about broadband benefits. We reached them in a familiar channel: Retail, instead of online. And we invited them to experience and judge benefits for themselves: “Try Before You Buy.”

A more recent and very counter-intuitive example comes from nursing homes.  Wii game consoles are very popular there, but not because little old ladies (and men) from Pasadena are thrilled by the latest technology. Instead, it’s because Wii lets them enjoy something they needed (a simple way to exercise) and wanted (fun with bowling, baseball and other games they already loved).

Technology is not the only category where late adopters are an important force. Take food, for instance (everyone does; it may be the most universal product of all). The highest incidence of organic food use is not among young trendsetters, for whom it’s PC. Instead, it’s among consumers 40-55, because they realize the health benefits, which become more and more important as you age and lose your sense of immortality.

And finally, there’s the recent launch of the Tesla electric car. We think the young and trendy may be the late adopters here. First, because Tesla is expensive, and older people have more money. But also, as my colleague Paul points out, older drivers make more rational choices and take shorter trips. And after all, the classic original electric car was the 1910 Baker, a little old lady’s phone booth on wheels.