Where is the sausage?

Biggest bit of branding bull of 2009: Aol. ?

2009-12-17T05:34:00+00:00

Just when I thought 2009 was going to end without a really BIG example of brand bollocks, the troubled internet service provider (ISP) AOL and their design agency Wolf Olins* have saved the day. A big bash at the New York Stock Exhange announced the new brand identity as part of AOL's offical divorce from its catasrophic $160billion 2000 marriage to Time Warner.

[*Wolf Olins are not new to this sort of stuff, having created the bizarre and much-hated brand identity for the 2012 London Olympics, that I posted on here. A whopping 45,000 people signed an online petition to ditch that one.]

The 1st bit of big news is, wait for it, that AOL has become Aol.

The O and L have gone lower case. And there's a "." at the end.

I know. You couldn't make it up if you tried.

The "blink and you'd miss it" change to the name is accompanied by the 1st ever "invisible brand". The brand name only appears when it is put onto a background. An initial set of images has been produced, and the idea is that consumers and creative types will suggest their own. Apparently this is about the content on AOL (sorry, Aol.) being the big thing.

Isn't this a bit of a crap idea? Many online bloggers and commentators seem to think so, as shown by the following takes on the Aol. identity:

Here are my issues with this:

1. It makes the brand invisible, giving up on it and saying the content is more important than the brand. This is a bland logo not a brand logo. In a way, this a just fate for what is a broken brand and business. AOL’s subscriber base has fallen from 27 million in 2002 to 5.4 million at the end of the 3rd quarter of 2009, according to Times Online.

2. Wolf Olins again over-sell a new logo as a new "brand". Interestingly, on their website Wolf Ollins are now using a term we coined 9 years ago: “brand-led business”. They talk about branding being about big ideas that help inspire and guide change in the whole business, not just the image wrapper. But then they fail to walk this talk by trumpeting new logos as "brands".

3. The new logo appears to have been slapped on. The other problem with the Aol. re-launch is that the website, at least in the UK, looks very boring and un-inspiring. The new logo sits uncomfortably on a background of scrawl in the top-left of the site. Identity should not just be about the logo, but rather the whole look and feel of the site.

In conclusion, a new brand identity can be effective as a symbol of change. But the focus should be on the added value for customers from a change in the business, not on the bloody logo. And if you are going to change logo, make it a bold and striking, not invisible like Aol.

2000 thank-yous!

2009-12-16T10:28:41+00:00

A nice way to end the year is finding that the brandgymblog has doubled the number of subscribers in 2009, breaking the 2000 barrier this week. We're chuffed to still be going and growing, having done a total of 500 posts.

Thanks to everyone who reads the blog, comments on it and bothers to share their feedback. Your support makes all the work of writing 2 stories each week, every week, worthwhile.

We'd like to add another 1000 subscribers next year. So, if you know someone you think would like the blog, please do pass on the word!

Kind regards,

David

Consumers are not creative directors

2009-12-15T11:48:00+00:00

‘Consumer-created content’ is a red-hot topic at the moment. I've posted on it here. According to many experts we must give up control of brands and invite consumers into the driving seat. Consumers will come up with great ideas of their own, and this in turn will generate interest in the brand online. We have to stop talking at consumers, and start ‘a conversation’.

For example, UK food brand Oxo have invited consumers to upload their own homemade adverts to a YouTube channel called "The Oxo Factor” (named after talent show The X Factor). The five best ads are being aired on maninstrean TV. Oxo’s marketing manager told Marketing “The Oxo Factor signals a fundamental shift in marketing. Consumers’ expectations have changed. They expect to be able to talk back”. The campaign aims to “catapult Oxo into the 21st century". [This is a brand of stock-cubes remember. Sounds scarily like Hugo, the marketing director in my book ‘Where’s the Sausage?’]

Well, like most new toys on sale in marketing store, it feels like this one is being over-hyped. Oxo’s YouTube channel has attracted only 19,000 views. And the ads themselves are pretty cringe-worthy to say the least.

The way forward is perhaps not consumer-created content, but rather ‘consumer-amplified content’. Brands need to retain their role as producers of compelling and relevant marketing. But they also have exciting opportunities to harness the power of online media to amplify the effectiveness of this marketing.

A good example of this is T-Mobile’s Life is for Sharing campaign. The brand’s YouTube channel, featuring videos of mass dancing and singing, has scored 23 million views on YouTube. I posted earlier on Dance and Singalong. Here are some thoughts on how to get the best bang for your buck in this exciting new area.

Creative magic should be led by the brand
The amount of creative resource that meant into the T-Mobile Dance campaign is mind-blowing. There’s a great YouTube video on this work here. 400 professional dancers spent 8 weeks rehearsing. Cameras were placed in carefully planned locations in the train station. The musical tracks were chosen to fit the brand spirit. A YouTube channel was designed well before the event. And PR contacts were made with TV news channels in advance of the event, so it could be tailored to their needs, thus maximizing coverage.

Consumers amplify great content
Great content can spread like wild-fire, with the flames fanned by millions of online consumers. However, the key word here is ‘great’. Most of what normal folk post on YouTube is utter crap that never gets seen. There is so much of the stuff that the law of averages means 1 in a million will be great, such as Charlie Bit my Finger, that I posted on here. Its now the most viewed video of all time on YouTube.

However, brands will rarely get enough consumer-created content to end up with something good. The Oxo Factor is a good example of this. Most of the consumer ads are mediocre. Brands need to lead, and then let consumers amplify. T-Mobile created a template with Dance, and then invited consumers to do their own versions, and this worked much better.

Be true to your brand
The final point is of course to be true to your brand. The T-Mobile Dance campaign flowed from and reinforces the brand idea of Life’s for Sharing. Mobile communication is all about spontaneous sharing, and this is what the event captured beautifully. Innocent is a highly creative and fun brand, so asking kids to design a smoothie pack feels right. In contrast, Oxo is a humble stock cube, used to flavour foods, and asking consumers to make their own ads feels forced and a bit ‘jumping-on-the-latest-bandwaggon-y’.

In conclusion, create great content that is loyal to your brand idea and feels true to its spirit. And then mobilise the growing number of online consumers to amplify this content.

Steve Jobs: the ultimate brand leader

2009-12-10T11:37:00+00:00

Apple’s CEO Steve Jobs is the ultimate brand leader in my eyes. There is no better example of leading through actions, not words. He doesn’t tell people about the Apple brand. He IS the Apple brand personified. Jobs has just been named CEO of the decade by Fortune magazine, and the fascinating articles in this special issue give some great insights into his brand leadership and the stunning results it has produced. I share a few of my favourite highlights below.

Steve achieves
Jobs’ transformation of Apple is truly remarkable. Try and get your heads round these numbers:
- Market capitalization in 2000 = $5billion
- Market capitalization in 2009 = $170billion
- Increase in market cap = 3400%

This vertiginous climb out of the depths of despair has been achieved by transforming not one, or even two, but three industries: personal computers, music and mobile phones. You could even say four if you add retailing. And five if you add what he did with Pixar in digital animated movies.

Leader, not follower
Don’t let people kid you that Apple are a challenger brand, focusing on ‘thought leadership’, and content with a small market share. Jobs is a brand leader. And Apple is a Leader Brand. In 2001 Apple had a paltry 2% of the U.S. PC market and it now has 9%. But that’s not the real story. In high-end computers over $1000 it has a 90% share, according to NPD group. Apple has a dominant 73% of the U.S. MP3 player market. Jobs has focused on market segments where Apple can lead.

Still ‘making pots’
Business people all start out ‘making pots’. In other words, they learn a craft, whether it be marketing, product design or law. Over time, many leave behind their craft, and ‘run a pottery’, often losing touch with the customer and market. In contrast, Brand Leaders like Jobs ‘keep on making pots’. He still has a passion for the product and the marketing 33 years after starting Apple in his family's garage (see below); his remains a master-craftsman at heart. Fortune say ‘Jobs manages the money, the messages, the deals, the design, and more. The rare pairing of micromanagement with big-picture vision is a Jobs hallmark’.

Consumer empathy, not consumer research
According to Fortune, Jobs ‘does not pay attention to consumer research’, but he does ‘work slavishly to make products customers will buy’. He does this by using highly tuned intution about consumers, what we call ‘consumer empathy’. The article goes on to say ‘Jobs serves as a one-man band of consumer research.’ Part of his approach is picking up on things he sees at ‘the periphery’ of the market, and having a knack for knowing which will become big in time.

Follow the money
A common mis-conception is that Jobs is a maverick creative with little time for numbers. In fact, Fortune says ‘Make no mistake: Jobs is all about business. He’s grounded in reality, closely monitoring Apple’s operational and market metrics’.

In conclusion, Jobs is an inspiring example of brand leadership. Have a clear and compelling vision, but also a determination to turn this into action that drives growth. Keep one eye on the numbers, and the other on the craft of product design and marketing. And keep the passion burning throughout your career.

Heinz fight back vs. bully boys of own label

2009-12-08T07:40:00+00:00

For too long Leader Brands have been beaten up by the own label bully boys, as I posted on here back in 2007. Retailers copy the famous brands look, feel and product concepts and sell them side by side at knock-down prices. Things only got worse in the recession, with supermarkets like Tesco getting more aggressive with their "swaps" campaign: swap this basket of famous brands for our own label and save a packet.

So, its nice to see Heinz being brave and bold enough to so something about it. They've launched a new campaign called "It has to be Heinz" to promote the uniqueness of their five core products. You can click below to see the ad in the blog, or click here to watch on YouTube:

Here's what I think Heinz are doing well:

1. Focus on what made you famous
Heinz are not doing a high-level masterbrand campaign. Instead, they are focusing on their five core products. These are i) the source of authority for Heinz, ii) the source of profit. The famous five are tomato soup, tomato ketchup, salad cream, baked beanz and spaghetti hoops.

This is part of a bigger move to focus the portfolio on Leader Brands with strong equity and a number 1 or 2 position. Heinz have sharpened their focus by selling off non-core brands such as Linda McCartney's range and StarKist tuna. As Mark Ritson said in his column, "The resulting slender portfolio allows Heinz to focus marketing and research and development resources on the brands with the most profit potential." Right on Ritson.

2. Keep on keeping ahead
Heinz make their products distinctive by having ongoing waves of renovation. On ketchup the brand has maintained a 75% market share in this way, with ideas such as the upside down easy squirt bottle and a 'trap cap' that eliminates messy ketchup.

3. Combine sizzle AND sausage
The Has to be Heinz campaign is a good combination of product sausage and emotional sizzle. They manage to tell a product story in an emotionally appealing way. It taps into the fabric of British life, and does a good job of showing how Heinz is part of this. You love the taste, but also the emotional feeling you get when you open a can of soup or baked beanz.

Mark sums it up well: "There is nothing revolutionary about any of this. Tighten your portfolio, build brand equity, focus on innovation - these are the quintessential responses to private label. But Heinz has done them so well. As its founder, Henry John Heinz, noted more than a century ago: 'To do a common thing uncommonly well brings success.'"

10 Commandments for modern marketers

2009-12-03T11:11:00+00:00

Interesting piece in Marketing Week on 10 commandments for the modern marketer, based on interviews at the European CMO Conference. The top dogs who contributed included the co-founder of Facebook, the CMO of Zurich financial services, the CMO of Novartis healthcare and some top marketing professors. I share my top 3 tips below, and you can download the article by clicking here.

Tip 1: Talk to staff as well as customers

We'd agree with Zurich’s Arun Sinha recommendation that marketing should begin internally and then be followed externally. “Ensure that every staff member understands,” says Sinha. “They have to drive and create the momentum internally, so that must be prepared first. Right on Arun.

But we'd go much further than this. The key is not for leaders to talk to employees, but rather lead by example. Its the 100's of little things leaders do every day that bring to life a brand, not the big and flashy set-piece shows. Little things like Pret CEO Julian Metcalfe writing on his soup cartons how he has listened to consumer feedback and improved the product.

Tip 2: Pare back to your core activities
Novartis’ Philippe Zell explains: “Large corporations should focus on their strategic brands and re-invest to increase their consumer profile.You should never forget the core of what your company does and never let your employees do this either.” Spot on Phillipe.

This is a biggie we posted on this before, as part of recommendations on post-recession branding. The tough times have forced companies to re-focus on what they are really good at, and ways of doing this even better. The challenge is to keep this discipline when the economy picks up. A good example of growing the core is Gillette's promotion of all-over body shaving, and their online subcription service for automatic re-ordering of blades.

Tip 3: 2010 is about dialogue, not marketing
According to the big cheeses interviewed, "the traditional working practice of marketers of moving from campaign to campaign needs to shift to maintaining ongoing conversations", such as working on online, user-generated content.

The best example of this so far is perhaps My.BarackObama.com, the official presidential
campaign social networking website for President Obama. Chris Hughes, co-founder of Facebook, helped create this amazing site, which revolutionised fund raising by getting small donations from millions of people, instead of big sums from a few big contributors. Hughes says “It’s so important
that brands focus on giving people a voice. We made every single member feel that they had a role in the
presidential campaign. This sort of dialogue is essential to a brand’s success.”

If its good enough for Obama, its good enough for me. But, the watch-outs here are:

- Do it if it fits the brand: I'm up for a conversation with Apple, Paul Smith and O2. But not up for a dialogue with Rynair or Andrex toilet tissue.

- Do it right: if you open up a conversation, you need to listen and reply. And this means staffing up correctly. Jordans Cereals PR lady Rachel now spends a lot of her time dedicated to the company blog and newsletter.

In conclusion, 2010 is about doing the basics bloody well: growing the core, leading by example. And its about updating and upgrading how you execute marketing plans to connect with your customers.

O2 push the brand stretch boundaries

2009-12-01T05:57:00+00:00

I was recently interviewed for a front-page Marketing Week story on O2's plans to stretch from mobile telecoms into healthcare and education. You can download the full article here.

O2 has already stretched from just being a mobile network, recently launching a pre-pay card you can load money onto. According to partner Nat West in has been the biggest card launch in the history of financial services in the UK, with 100,000 cards issued in 7 weeks.

Now chief executive Ronan Dunne, marketing director Sally Cowdry and customer director Tim Sefton have even bigger ambitions. They plan to stretch into healthcare, via technology that automatically sends regular at-home blood tests or weight monitoring results to the correct hospital department via a text message or iPhone app. They're also looking at education. Sefton describes a vision for “a more multimedia-rich learning environment, probably eliminating the need for text books,and taking education out of the classroom."

On the positive side, I shared the view that O2 are smart in looking at new revenue streams, given that the mobile phone market is becoming more commodity based. For example, T-Mobile are offering free texts for life, and free broadband now widely available.

But is stretching into healthcare and education a good idea?

1. Think business model first

The first view I shared was that most analysis on brand-stretching goes wrong because it focuses on brand equity and not the business model. The key issue is whether O2 can create a compelling value proposition that makes them money? This would mean building the right team with expertise in healthcare and education, which is a big task. It would mean creating a whole new network of contacts with healthcare and education providers.

2. Brand trust

This is where I struggle with the proposed stretching. Do I trust O2 to deliver my confidential medical details to a hospital? Hell, my O2 powered mobile phone drops calls at least a couple of times a day. I don't see O2 as having the authority to pull this off. Rather, O2 could be the telecoms partner for the NHS, in the same way it provides telecoms services for big corporates. This is a B2B play, not a B2C one for me.

3. Forgetting what made you famous

This final issue I have with this stretch is that it wouldn't reinforce what has made O2 famous. The brand has started to achieve the nigh impossible task of making a mobile network brand interesting. They have done this through “interactive partnerships” with entertainment and sports properties, such as The O2 concert venue, offering O2 customer goodies such as priority ticketing. This has added energy and fun to the brand.

But education and health are much more serious. I love booking exclusive early tickets to see U2 in concert at the O2. But do I then want to click again and send my blood test results to my doctor?

In conlcusion, hat's off to O2 for looking at new revenue streams. But when stretching think business model first: do we have the capability and expertise to do this really well, and make money? And focus on stretching that reinforces what made you famous. Doing more with music, sports and entertainment may be better moves than healthcare and education.

2009-11-27T15:59:55+00:00

Nice bit of news to finish the week off: the brandgymblog has been ranked number 14 in Cool Marketing Stuff's Best 100 Marketing Blogs :-)

Create your own adventure playground

2009-11-27T06:55:41+00:00

I posted earlier this year on a book called "The Element". Its pretty life-changing stuff about doing something you love and have a natural talent for. I sum it up with the idea of "finding your own adventure playground". And there's no better way to do this than to create your own business. Some are leaving bigcompany plc to start their own businesses, such as Peter from Unilever who started Trattoria Guilia. Others are having a bit on the side: doing a "real job" by day, and creating a playground in their spare time, as covered in Marketing magazine.

Phone seller and boutique hotel owner

Russel Braterman is Marketing Director of Phone4U. He also launched and runs the Kemp Townhouse boutique hotel in Brighton. With his partner he created the hotel from scratch, completely gutting the building and refurbishing it in just 3 months.

One of the things he likes of having his own business is the autonomy: "The big difference when its your own business is you don't have to compromise and you can make decisions on the spot".

Shopping mal director and pickled onion purveyor

John Wringe is a director of The Mall, who run shopping centres. He has also created a £1million brand of pickled onions [non-UK readers, one of our peculiar haute cuisine foods ;-) ], endorsed by TV film critic Barry Norman. He developed the recipe, worked on the pack and design and pitched the idea successfully to retailers.

The first thing I took from John's story is creating a product you want, using your own intuition. Not understanding the consumer. Being the consumer. He'd been unable to find a pickled onion strong enough for his taste. So he made his own.

Second, he talks about how marketing folk should be good at creating new businesses: "You can have an expert who sees an opportunity, but it's bringing them to market that is key".

Voucher-scheme provider and music biz dude

Kevin Harrington is a director at Sodexho Pass. He also runs Josaka, a record label, webzine and live music promoter. He started with a webzine promoting local music, then brought out a CD. He know also sets up gigs for bands.

This experience has helped him be creative at finding low-cost marketing. "Its suprising how creative you can be when you have no money, and the fact I can transfer this to my day-job is great"

In conclusion, launching your own business is a great way of building your own adventure playground. You make the rules, you follow your passion and you get to use your marketing creativity. Why are you waiting?

Update on Pepperami's "crowd-sourcing" for new ad

2009-11-25T05:26:00+00:00

Interesting to read in Marketing that Unilever brand Pepperami has received 1185 ad ideas via the "crowdsourcing" website Idea Bounty. I posted back in August on the brand's decision to fire its agency of 16 years, Lowe London, and take the bold move of tapping into Idea Bounty's global network of freelance creatives.

The brand team have whittled down the ads to a final shortlist of 22 ideas. They will pick the winner by the end of the month, with the victorious creative team bagging a bounty of $10,000.

A few learnings from this innovative process already:

1. Works best when you have a defined creative territory. In this case Pepperami has its "animal" character, with the endline "Its a bit of an animal". This I find tough on Lowe, whose creative brilliance came up with this branding property. Shouldn't they at least get some sort of licensing fee?

2. Saves money, but not time. Noam Buchalter, of Unilever business unit Chrysalis, reports that the mew approach saved money, but the time spent was the same as on a traditional brief. I would guess it takes even more time, as someone had to sift through 1185 ad ideas to find the good ones.

3. Clever PR for Unilever. The company has got great coverage in the marketing press for this move. Not the main objective, but a good way of promoting the company as being innovative.

So, watch this space to see what creative work comes out of this fascinating process.

Microsoft's Bing: the plight of a follower brand

2009-11-24T09:48:00+00:00

News that Microsoft is delaying the much-heralded launch of its Bing search engine till at least quarter 1 of next year shows how hard it is for a "follower brand" to take on a strong leader brand, in this case Google.

Bing has been available in the UK since June of this year, although it has not had any marketing activity. So far, it has less then 5% market share, compared to 90% for Google (combining the .co.uk and .com sites). My guess is that even with marketing support Bing will struggle to get more than 15-20% market share at most. Why?

1. Strong leader brands own "the high-ground"

Leader brands like Google own the key central benefits of the market, in this case speed, accuracy and ease of use. These associations are hard-wired into our brains. Say search, and you think Google. Or rather you feel Google instinctively, without even thinking. Indeed, "to Google" has become a verb. This is shown by my 11 year old daughter, whose response to most questions is "Let's Google it".

2. Follower brands are forced to differentiate

Follower brands like Bing are forced to differentiate. And this is, contrary to popular belief, a recipe to be a niche brand, not a leader. Leader brands stay leaders not by being different, but by being distinctive. They offer what are sometimes called "generic" benefits. But do this with an ownable twist. In the case of Google, their search engine is unbelievably simple. Despite launching a plethora of new services (mail, maps etc.) they have stuck to what made them famous by keeping the purity of their home-page with the single search box.

Bing is forced to be different. But in doing so, makes itself less relevant, not more. Their home-page has a fancy picture. It has floating boxes that reveal obscure facts. Which of the 2 sites below would you trust to be simple, quick and accurate, even taking off the branding? Bing looks more like a travel agency or a photography site to me.

And the added complexity continues when you search. On the results page as you move your cursor down, more boxes appear with extra information that distract you. Most people are used to Google's way of showing headline info, and then inviting you to click through.

To sum up the service, VCCP Search MD Paul Meed said in Marketing, "The user experience from the UK is not living up to expectations, so they go back to Google".

3. True leader brands renvate relentlessly

Bing is doomed to always be in catch-up mode vs. Google, as the Leader Brand is a great example of constant renovation to make the service better. Google employs the brightest and best, and spends millions of dollars a year on R&D. This includes the core search service, and new services such as maps, mail that make the site even "stickier".

In summary, think twice about taking on a Leader Brand unless you believe there is a real opportunity to deliver the core benefits of the market in a distinctive and more relevant way.

Killing the "dwarves" is good for business

2009-11-19T17:22:48+00:00

Came across a great article on how killing the "dwarves" in your brand's product range can help you grow, in BA's Business Life magazine, by Steve Martin.

The challenge of trying to focus

One of the most common challenges on projects we do is the need to try and focus a brand's product range. Often, the range is cluttered with small and poorly performing products. These are versions, formats or sizes that don't add real value for the consumer. We call these "dwarves". They suck away attention and budget from the core product in the range, or Snow White.

Even when a team is persuaded of the need to kill these smaller products, the problem is proving that this is good for business. Push-back comes from the organisation, who fear that it will result in a loss in sales. Well, Steve Martin's piece explains why it can actually help you grow.

Less really is more

Martin is an expert on persuasion, having written a book on it called Yes! 50 Secrets from the Science of Persuasion. And his research show that having too much choice can actually backfire. In one experiment on a jam brand shoppers were exposed to two product ranges. The first had six flavours. The second had 24. Which produced better results? You might think the one with 24 flavours. Surely, more choice is a good thing. In fact, with the bigger range 3% of shoppers bought the brand. With the smaller range of six flavours a whopping 30% made a purchase.

Martin has not only experiments to prove that less can be more. He quotes a case of a well-known shampoo reducing its range from 26 to 15 varieties and experiencing a 10% increase in sales.

Why focus works

Works for consumers: Offering less choice makes it easy for shopper to decide what they want, and reduces the risk they get frustrated at trying to choose. Given that people spend on average 30 to 60 seconds in front of a shelf for a given category, this is a big plus. It makes it easier for them to "zoom in" and find the product they want.

Works for the business: Beyond the consumer benefit, killing the dwarves can have huge benefits for the business. It simplifies manufacturing and the supply chain. And it re-focuses of marketing and management on the core products

Works for the customers: As reported in Marketing this week, retailers are busy killing dwarves, reducing the number of lines across most product ranges. So, you can either wait for the retailers to get out the gun, and risk loosing the shelf-space. Or, you can be pro-active, and do it yourself. This way you at least have a chance of making a case to re-allocate the space to your better performing product lines. This is the approach taken by Unilever, who have simplified the Knorr stock cube range (removing 4 and 9 packs, and leaving just 8 and 12 packs). They have also killed Persil Washing Up Liquid, giving up on trying to compete with the dominant Leader Brand, P&G's Fairy Liquid.

In conclusion, killing the "dwarves" in your range can be good for business, with benefits for consumers, business and customers. And, better to do the shooting yourself before someone else does it for you.

Bringing your brand to life. Literally

2009-11-17T06:28:00+00:00

Nice post by Jez Paxman of Live Union on how to make live experiences an integral part of your brand. Live events can be gimmicky and one-off affairs that do little to build the brand. But the examples Jez talks about are different. They show how live experiences can become a strategic and long-term part of the brand mix.

Times + uses privileged access to live events as a way of driving the paper's subscription service

Apple Camp - summer classes at Apple stores teaching kids how to use iLife programmes such as Garageband and iMovies.

Mark's Work Wearhouse - a smallish brand in Canada has installed walk-in freezers with fans to create windchill in its stores so you can trial their clothing and see how they perform at temperatures as low as -40.

Nike Human Race - allows you to compete in a global 10k race, trying to set your own personal best, but also having your time be part of your own country competing against others. One of a host of live experiences that Nike uses to bring to life the brand.

Mercedes-Benz World at Brooklands in Surrey allows you to test drive cars on a track

O2's priority campaign gives customers exclusive early access to tickets at the O2 venue, and also entry to a special VIP area at Twickenham rugby ground and other sporting events. This has helped the brand be distinctive in the ultra competitive mobile network market.

Howies Do Lectures - This annual retreat in the Welsh hills plays a fundamental role in helping the ethical clothing brand spark conversation and build a community around itself.

In conclusion, live experiences can play a big role in creating a distinctive and relevant brand. The challenge is to create events that really connect with your consumer and dramatise the brand positioning. And then put real and long-term support behind them so they become true brand poperties, not just one-shot events.

Maclaren: mis-managing a brand in crisis

2009-11-12T07:15:38+00:00

Great article in the FT on how Maclaren, the pushchair people, mis-managed a product crisis (thanks to my mate Mark for the tip-off). And this was no minor hiccup: the baby buggies in question, wait for it, cut the fingers off children. Ow.

The shit storm

On Monday, the company announced it was 1m issuing kits in the USA to repair pushairs sold in the last 10 years, after 12 cases of children having fingertips chopped off in the pushchairs’ hinges. The website crashed. Phone lines were swamped by irate parents. And Twitter was full of messages such as “OH MY GOD. Amputations from a stroller?!”

So, what can we learn from this?

1. Act fast and bold

This is a lesson we saw in an earlier post on Renault's handling of the F1 crashing scandal. It pays to be decisive, act quickly and boldly. Maclaren failed to do this. First, the 15 incidents fingertip mutilation happened over 10 years. They could have acted faster to solve this. At the least they should have had a properly thought through crisis plan, including an online element, ready in case hell broke loose.

2. Use the online world, don't be a victim of it

It seems McClaren seriously under-estimated the viral power of the story. In the FT article the CEO of the US business, Farzad Rastegar, said “Did I expect this kind of coverage? No I did not.” As the journalist, John Gapper commented, "It was hard to grasp why. The words 'child' and 'amputation' in a media release from the US safety regulator would surely terrify anyone."

I am also amazed that the home-page of the US business doesn't open with a reassuring message about the repair kit. Instead, it has some bland message about how important safety is.

Close this and you get a happy-clappy picture of a toddler in a pushchair! Look closer and you can see the little boy looks like he is missing a few fingers ;-)

3. Empathise, don't lecture

As Gapper says, "Maclaren is the latest of many companies to fall into the trap of being inwardly focused and failing to realise how customers will react." McClaren actually has an excellent safety record. But its the way they are getting this message across that is wrong. Check out this quote from the homepage of the UK website, explaining why repair kits are only available in the USA: "If a buggy is folded or unfolded in line with our operating instructionsthe risk of injur is non-existent". Protesting that their pushchairs are safe if used properly is a cold, logical and uncaring reaction.

4. Think global

Maclaren made the mistake of treating US consumers differently. In our online world the news of the US repair kit has spread around the globe. Even though safety regulators in most countries were content with Maclaren issuing a short-term warning, it would have been smarter to offer the kit to anyone who wanted it. Only now is Maclaren is backtracking, under pressure from consumers and retailers, saying anyone can have the hinge cover if they ask for it.

In conclusion, companies need to think like human beings. How would the Mclaren CEO have felt like if his kid had a finger chopped off by a product? And how would he expect the company in question to act. As we say, don't try to understand the consumer. Be the consumer.

innocent's stretch into veg pots: pots of money, or not?

2009-11-10T08:42:09+00:00

Update on last year's post on the stretch of smoothie brand innocent into veg pots. These are individual, veggie based meals sold for £3.50. 85% of people had then down as a miss in our 2009 hit 'n miss survey. However, based on a record amount of 20 positive comments on the blog, I started to wonder if we called it wrong. Let's look at the issues raised, and what has happened.

Will veg pots will be "a dwarf"?

On the one hand....

The biggest question was would these pots make pots of money? My concerns were not with the brand equity stretch. We can trust innocent to go from fruit to veg. And the funky new design and quirky pack copy are very innocent. No, the concerns raised were about the business model stretch. Could innocent profitably create a new market sector, and get the product into peoples' repertoires, given a high price-point of £3.50?

The only report I have been able to find suggest sales are c.£8million. And the fact innocent are advertising the veg pots suggest they must be doing OK. So, on the one hand, not bad. And by no means a flop. I think I didn't give enough credit to innocent for the good stuff in this brand extension:

- Solves real consumer problems: i) what to have for lunch?, ii) getting 3 of your 5 daily fruit and veg

- Decent, tasty product: made by one of our clients, Kerry Foods, who know a thing or too about tasty products

- Creating a new, premium segment: what I under-estimated is how keen the innocent fan-base of pretty upscale folk would be to buy these pots. They see £3.50 as a fair price for a hot, healthy, tasty lunch

On the other hand....

However, compare this to the sales of smoothies at c.£100 million, and you do get a slightly different picture (see below, done to scale). The veg pots are still dwarfed by the smoothie business. Now, as one smart Unilever manager asked at a recent workshop in Cape Town, "Is this a dwarf, or a toddler?". As it stands, the veg pots look pretty dwarf-like. But, innocent seem to think they have potential to grow. Net, I think we need more time to see what happens. Also, I'd love to know the profitability of the veg pots vs. the smoothies, as in most cases new products make less profit than core products.

Risk of neglecting the core

The other issue raised, which has unfortunately come true, is the risk to the core business when stretching. We predicted that the time spent by management in 2008 on developing veg pots should have been spent on driving growth of the core smoothies business, and defending it against the launch of Tropicana. I shared this view with innocent founder Richard Reed when I met him at the innocent AGM back in Jan 2008, suggesting a need to drive distribution and also move down pricing to make the brand more accessible. This would also have protected the business against the ravages of the recession that was to come.

Well, unfortunately this bit we called right. UK smoothie sales fell 17% last year, a loss of £17million. In other words, twice the amount of new sales in veg pots. If effort had been focused on the core smoothies business, lets say half of this loss could have been avoided. This would have produced the same revenue result, but a much stronger business.

Now, to innocent's credit they learnt from what went wrong. They worked to get the price point of the smoothies down. They have promoted the brand at point-of-sale. Supported them with advertising. And, benefited from a recent Department of Health ruling supporting the "2 of your 5-a-day claim". These efforts are making an impact, with sales for the quarter to September reported as up 10%. They have won back just over half of the 2008 losses. Add in the veg pots and you have the same business as last year. But, more fragmented, with two different product lines.

Conclusions

First, credit where credit is due, innocent have shown the importance of creating new products that meet a true consumer need, in a way that builds on the trust and user-base the brand has created. Second, neglect the core at your peril. The growth in sales from the new product was more than off-set by loss in sales on the core. If you are going to stretch, ensure your protect enough time, effort and money for the core.