Brand Blog

Laughing it up with TBS

2004-11-23T08:42:00.000-05:00

A select group of off-network sitcoms – Seinfeld, Friends, Raymond - and a tagline “very funny” are at the center of TBS’s latest push. Few consumer brands, outside of retailers, can re-invent themselves with re-tread product. Other than Rhino Records and cable TV, not too many brands have been innovators solely by repackaging. Game Show Network and TV Land (and Nick at Nite), among others, have mined this territory on TV in the past. Rhino has famously rediscovered forgotten recorded music gems. And A&E Home Video, in a departure from its namesake parent, has turned itself into an imprimatur for cult TV fans.

At TBS, modern classics have inspired a quiet programming innovation. In a landscape of inane reality shows, the comfort of the sitcom format as evidenced by the best contemporary examples of the genre is a big, simple idea. Remove the uncertain performance of yet another wife-swapping, deranged boss entry. Avoid the faddish celebrity card games and budget make-over shows. Create a destination with identifiable programming that people want to watch – that’s always been the cable model.

Recent history has seen networks put more and more of their programming budgets – and, thus, their marketing and branding activities – behind original programming. A compulsion to own programming (and the related rights across all media) has driven a trend towards originals. Off-network programming is a staple across the cable dial, as cable nets often use original programming as aspirational products, while filling out much of the schedule with non-original fare.

The difference with TBS is in positioning. Think Lifetime, which for years has been calling itself “Television for Women” while promoting a slate of weakly performing original shows – yet the bread and butter of the network is Golden Girls reruns and old Made-for-TV movies. TBS eschews this hypocrisy by boldly positioning itself behind its winning sitcom lineup. They’ve even turned to a most-celebrated sitcom of yore in their requisite “reality” entry with The Real Gillian’s Island.

TNT, TBS’s sister net, has scored big in recent years as a drama destination with a slate of Law & Order and big-ticket Hollywood titles. TBS has ripped a page right out of that playbook with its comedy bid. Where the name of the game at the end of the day is ratings, riding the coat tails of proven products to create a reliable destination should prove a winning formula.

Combining Cingular and AT&T Wireless

2004-11-04T10:51:00.000-05:00

In a merger, a new logo or tagline is the most simplistic step in combining two distinct companies. For the new Cingular, grafting AT&T Wireless's "How Many Bars..." campaign onto their new identity is decidedly pre-mature, despite the completion of the long-anticipated deal.

Right now, customers are on incompatible networks, have incompatible phones and are stuck in non-transferable customer contracts. Yes advertising can - and often must - be aspirational, talking about what can be, what will be. But big promises can yield big disappointments -- much to the chagrin of potentially disillusioned customers and the employees who have the thankless task of servicing them.

Acquisition of AT&T's customers was a prime motivator in this deal for Cingular - as cellular customer churn is a major industry-wide issue. Yet this same issue, particularly with the advent of transportable numbers, should be top of mind if Cingular forsees any customer service challenges.

Logistical issues will keep the two companies separate for some time. AT&T itself had two distinct networks - with the geographically dominant one being phased out by a more web-surfing friendly infrastructure. (Remember M Life?) Many customers were loathe to give up the better coverage of the old network for unwanted web capabilities of the new one. And many customers just got new phones, virtually forced to do so by AT&T's phase-out of the old network.

When customer contracts expire - forcing people to get a new phone (again) - Cingular will need to have as compelling a story for them as any of the set of majors out there. Unmet customer expectations that may follow this merger can only work against Cingular in retention efforts.

Yes, Cingular needs to talk about "the near future" in their messaging - giving time for network logisitics to catch up to the need to unify their customer base. But Cingular should be very aggressive in moving to retain customers long before their contracts expire. Agressive equipment deals will encourage customers to acquire new phones (and new contracts). Immediately implementation of the Rollover Minutes feature to all AT&T Wireless customers will win excitement and enthusiasm.

A new tagline will only be lipstick on the gorilla without a broad plan to communicate to and migrate millions of acquired customers. If Cingular fails to deliver on the expectations their new advertising creates, the only winners will be their competition.

Promoting AOL's new identity

2004-10-21T07:08:00.000-04:00

AOL is using a subtle yet jarring tactic as they continue to promote their new corporate identity. In one ad in particular that has been running during the MLB playoffs, an AOL Member stands on a conference table barking demands about features and performance to an eager group of AOL employees. The message about responsiveness and the like is obviously none too subtle. The subtle part is more in the set design. The conference room is rimmed with the old AOL mark.

It is a bit strange to see a lame duck logo so prominently placed in an ad campaign. If an old logo does appear in an ad, chances are it will soon be shattered or crushed by its newer vintage. One would imagine AOL is looking bridge the old and the new. The old logo is, after all, fairly well recognized - even for non-members who've been bombarded with free discs for years. Perhaps the old logo offers some context. This is an ad about AOL - and look, we're listening.

But what the clichéd exploding old logo thing does that this ad does not is offer a segue. All of a sudden, at the end of the ad, the new, less distinctive logo appears. Wouldn't AOL have been better off using the new mark as a backdrop in the scene? Wouldn't the presence of this new mark have underscored their message that they continue to be responsive to a changing marketplace and an evolving customer?

As for the mark itself, fresher, cleaner, more contemporary - it's all of these. But it also lacks some of that folksy personality that has always been a part of the AOL brand.

And AOL seems to have come to the conclusion that customers want a more protected and secure Web experience. Security and comfort in online credit card transactions and the like are obviously key to success for AOL in getting members to open their wallets further beyond their monthly fee. But the "Peace of Mind" they have promoted in full page newspaper ads is kind of hard to get excited about. Broadband customers already pay up to $50/month for access. I would think AOL needs something more alluring than an insurance policy to get people to pony up an additional $25 on top of their access fees - especially if they hope to expand relevance beyond tweens and seniors.

Drinking Speedo

2004-10-15T11:48:00.000-04:00

In brand licensing, just because you can doesn't mean that you should. Case in point, Speedo Sportswater, the bottled drink marketed by Fuze Beverages under license from Speedo.

Yes, Speedo is a dominant water brand. But, as someone there may have failed to acknowledge, that dominance involves swimming in it, not drinking it.

Fit & relevance with the brand, product design & implementation, and channels of distribution are all key ingredients to successful brand extension, via license or otherwise. If this was an innovative product with exciting/unique packaging, maybe the definitions for fit & relevance can expand. Innovative packaging, for example, can create relevance with design or usability that leverages the heritage of the brand. For Speedo water, perhaps this could have been some kind of swimmer-friendly sipper-top, or something that stops the bottle from rolling away from the edge of the pool.

A few years back Nike teamed with Philips to market a line of MP3 players. Rather than just another gadget with a swoosh, this product was positioned as a device to enhance a workout - and this was supported by an ability to create a soundtrack for your workout with playlists from the Nike website.

Speedo Sportswater, by contrast, is a copycat product that offers no distinguishable benefit and no real connection to the Speedo brand, beyond the aforementioned water thing. The tagline on the bottle: "We know water." Well, Mercedes knows gasoline - but I don't see them getting into the petroleum business.

Channels of distribution offer another shot at sparking relevance. The cafe or vending machine at the gym can offer the consumer some context to connect the dots. Maybe the snack bar at the beach would be appropriate, too. Though I might steer clear of the poolside snack bar, as the ill-conceived blue bottle may mislead as to the actual source of the water. I should note here that the only place I have ever seen this water was at a local pizza shop. Very un-Speedo.

Speedo is a rich, dominant brand. Efforts to enhance that richness and extend that dominance require careful consideration in rationale, positioning and execution. Speedo missed on all three.

Nike & LIVESTRONG

2004-10-06T16:26:00.000-04:00

Great brands surprise in positive and reinforcing ways. Positive surprise can spark re-discovery of a brand by reminding customers why they fell in love the first time. And for those that don’t feel the love, surprise offers an opportunity for another chance.

Such is the case with Nike and LIVESTRONG. Nike adopted a soft approach to their LIVESTRONG initiative, selling upwards of 15 million $1 yellow bands to date (all proceeds to the Lance Armstrong Foundation), without so much as a swoosh on a single one.

For a company that continues to seek positive press to erase persistent memories of overseas child labor, charitable initiatives are certainly not undertaken with their hearts alone. Yet, in an environment where seemingly no surface remains logo-free, kudos to Nike for understanding that a relatively quiet approach would be far more effective than a blatantly self-aggrandizing one. Better to have fewer people make the connection between Nike and LIVESTRONG and be positively surprised than turning everybody off by telling them how great Nike is.

In-Flight Magazines: A Brand Opportunity?

2004-09-30T14:26:00.000-04:00

As an industry, there are few worthy of as much brand criticism as the airline industry. The major airlines are an easy target for a range of critiques - stemming from price wars, unfriendly behaviors, undifferentiated experiences, a la carte pricing for a paper ticket or a bad sandwich, etc.

Yet there is one tool that all of them have at their disposal – and none seem to use very effectively, the in-flight magazine. The first question is “Why does it exist?” Yes there is a need for a program guide for the movies and radio. Yes the airlines like to illustrate flight patterns and such. But does a “Nightlife in Dallas” feature have any relevance to someone who happens to be flying to one of the other 500 cities served? Just because I’m on a plane doesn’t mean I like to read about travel related stuff – particularly if it has absolutely no bearing on my destination.

There seems to be this idea that a crappy magazine becomes this conduit for communication with the consumer. The CEO often “writes” a letter at the beginning. The editor-in-chief may present an intro, too, as if you’re a dedicated reader and subscriber – and not a bored, captive customer looking to kill a few minutes while waiting for the flight attendant to bring you a drink.

Magazines in the pouch in front of you are great – if they are magazines you’d like to read. In fact, if I opened the pouch and found a couple of real magazines that I liked presented on behalf of the airline, that would enhance my in-flight experience for sure. Why should an airline reinvent the wheel and create a sub-par product when they can leverage a wealth of good magazines out there and put them to work on behalf of their own brand? Airlines have profiles of travelers that can help them in the selection. The business traveler vs. the vacation traveler. The early morning Chicago flight vs. the midday Puerto Rico flight. The ski destination vs. the beach resort.

Sure, there are often a few issues of a golf magazine or a news magazine circulating on board in those “don’t take this home” covers. But any major publisher would pay handsomely for the right to put their magazine in front of someone for 2-6 hours+. The waiting area of the NY-DC shuttle is filled with free magazines for the taking – and it’s the best part of the trip.

I’m sorry Continental and American and Delta and United et al, your magazine stinks. If you want me to bond with your brand, don’t insist I read a second rate digest published exclusively for your customers. Give me something I might actually like – and I promise I’ll remember that next time I’m buying a ticket.

Happy Meals for the Olsen Twins

2004-09-23T09:37:00.000-04:00

McDonald’s has signed an endorsement deal with the Olsen Twins to promote Happy Meals in France.

Huh? Wasn’t one of the Olsens just released from an eating disorder clinic? And isn’t McDonald’s at the center of a firestorm on obesity and unhealthy eating? Could this be more absurd? And in France no less.

So if you’re grossly underweight you can safely gorge on McNuggets and fries? And it’s okay to promote fat-laden foods to French children if we symbolically renounce eating disorders in the process?

Who the hell let this happen? McDonald’s has proven their short-sightedness time and again – and once again shows that they just don't get it. But don’t the Olsens have people looking after them? I mean the Olsens are a $Billion brand – these things aren’t supposed to happen to properly managed brands. Is it possible they thought we’d never find out about it here in the US of A?

Easily among the worst celebrity tie-ins ever.

Pontiac: Product Placement on Steroids

2004-09-21T08:00:00.000-04:00

First it was the “advertainment” extravaganza The Last Ride, a made for TV movie on USA Network that was essentially a two hour commercial for the 2005 GTO. Then, 276 Pontiac G6 cars given away to an obscenely ecstatic Oprah Winfrey audience.

In a world of increasingly fragmented audiences, these two events were something of a coup in the escalating role of product placement with the entertainment landscape. The Last Ride brought Pontiac and the GTO into TV listings and reviews across the country. The Oprah stunt made national headlines and became fodder for talk shows, late night comedy and the evening news.

But product placement is the double-edged sword of marketing. Lose control of the messenger and you may lose control of the message. As you might expect, reviews for The Last Ride were less than stellar – and the press positioned it as a glorified commercial. But with Dennis Hopper starring alongside a cool new muscle car and its vintage counterpart, plus a healthy compliment of driving stunts, the show scored some solid ratings. And the benefits probably outweighed the costs of any negative publicity.

With Oprah, the glow of the Pontiac brand just wasn’t quite bright enough to escape the talk show icon’s gravitational pull. Most of the coverage has cited Oprah as the benefactor of these cars – and Pontiac has been lucky to pull a mention.

From a media buy perspective, with the bonus eyeballs and press attention, I would have to assume that both deals paid off. From a brand perspective, Pontiac seems to have been successful in creating meaningful, memorable and positive associations for their brand and sub-brands. Yet brands looking to replicate this would be wise to consider the extent of media attention such events receive (if only fleetingly) and the expected style/tone/depiction of their brand in the chorus of 3rd party voices.

The New Xerox Identity

2004-09-15T14:05:00.000-04:00

Xerox has dropped “The Document Company” as its tagline. It has, instead, opted for a list of service offerings: “Technology/Document Management/Consulting Services.”

The pragmatist in me applauds the effort to speak plainly and directly about what the company actually does. But the brand strategist in me can’t help but be perplexed. Where is the vision? Where is the promise to the market that only Xerox could make?

Technology and Consulting Services? Does it get any more generic than that? This new tag seems to be their solution to the fact that people still think of “documents” as paper – as opposed to having a more multimedia connotation. (The word “file” has been able to transcend medium much more successfully than the word “document.”)

Document Management remains a solid depiction of what Xerox does – but why obfuscate that with generic phrases that any service business can tout? Of course there is technology. Of course it is a consultative process. So how do such phrases add value within the limited real estate of a tagline?

Xerox is missing an opportunity to truly build upon their equity in “The Document Company” - which they could do by further defining “document management” and creating an aspirational picture of what that can and does mean for their clients.

Whatever happened to Jiffy Pop?

2004-09-10T10:30:00.000-04:00

Corporate ownership and a shift in consumer popcorn behavior has made this brilliant self-cooking package-of-fun nothing more than a marginalized curiosity. Its also an incredibly under-leveraged brand.

You can still find Jiffy Pop at most major supermarkets – on some bottom shelf overwhelmed by a seemingly endless variety of microwave popcorns. And, as a brand within a ConAgra portfolio that includes powerhouses like ACT II and Orville Redenbacher’s, Jiffy Pop is probably lucky to get any attention at all.

Pity to see a brand like this just wasting away. Some of Jiffy Pop’s magic is a shared experience which very few products could match. Sounds, smells, that constant shake of the pan over the stove (or the campfire), that mushrooming foil top. Rich and deep multi-sensory associations that other brands can only dream about (if brands could dream). Yet, there it sits as the relic of the snack food aisle.

This is a brand ripe for re-discovery. And if ConAgra wanted to put some muscle behind it, think of the possibilities: Promotional Initiatives – perhaps with a chic appliance brand like Viking; Brand Extensions – into other innovative, self-contained food-making kits; Licensed Merchandise – how much fun would it be to have an exceedingly hip Jiffy Pop cap, T-shirt or gym bag?

But alas, this vibrant brand with all the potential of an unpopped kernel continues to languish in the ConAgra empire.

BP & Amoco: A Half-Pregnant Approach to Brand Integration

2004-09-08T08:00:00.000-04:00

If you happen to be in the market for a brand integration train wreck, look no further than BP and Amoco. It’s been about five years since the merger of these petroleum giants, and BP is now in the late stages of rebranding Amoco gas stations to BP. And they probably could not have done it any worse.

The BP identity that was developed also about five back was some very interesting and exciting work: graphics of yellow and green against a clean white backdrop and next to messaging that earnestly expressed a perspective of environmental awareness and alternative energy sources, creating a unique voice in the petroleum market.

But joining these two brands proved beyond the scope of this identity initiative. When it came time to integrate the brands at the retail level, the problem was – and remains – Amoco’s brand equity with consumers. Amoco was a dominant and recognized major consumer gasoline brand. BP has never enjoyed such a position in the US market.

The solution? Turn Amoco into an ingredient brand for fuels, potentially a very solid idea. The execution, however, is a nightmare. The dissonant Amoco identity of black, blue and red is featured in a landscape of green, yellow and white at the pump and on retail signage. Some stations even have signs proclaiming “Still Here” next to the Amoco signage – suggesting a time-sensitive relationship that’s on its way out the door.

If BP is looking to leverage the equity in Amoco and transfer it to BP, shouldn’t they suggest a long-term commitment to the Amoco brand (or, at least, to its product line?).

When it comes to major gasoline brands, there seem to be two camps among consumers: (1) Those who are brand-sensitive due to habit or product performance or reward programs or unique service features (like Mobil’s brilliant SpeedPass); and (2) Those who are fairly brand agnostic among a perceived A-list, choosing on price, location, convenience, etc…

BP has failed to properly communicate their absorption of Amoco to both of these camps. Amoco enthusiasts have been signaled that their brand will have a short shelf-life. And for the swing voters – so to speak – BP seems to have removed itself from a consideration set that includes Mobil, Exxon, Shell and, formerly, Amoco.

I like the idea of turning Amoco into a product brand or an ingredient. This would have worked had BP created a more harmonious identity for Amoco – and the two could have co-existed nicely at retail. As it stands, BP would have probably fared just as well by chucking the Amoco brand entirely and making the retail gas experience a focus of its awareness campaign.

Fedex Kinko’s?

2004-08-23T10:52:00.000-04:00

I find the rebranding of Kinko’s to Fedex Kinko’s a bit curious. The first question in any re-branding effort has to be, “why?” In this case, the answer seems to be a conformity to the Fedex naming architecture more than any sort of real value that emerges.

Fedex and Kinko’s have each become generic to their category ( a la Kleenex or Xerox). By combining the two, Fedex has some work to do in re-education – hence the major ad campaign currently underway. But strongly help popular opinion is a very difficult (and expensive) tide for any brand to swim against.

The Fedex naming architecture is a straightforward Masterbrand GenericServiceDescriptor (Fedex Ground; Fedex Custom Critical; Fedex Supply Chain Services…). Perhaps, as noted above, Kinko’s has taken on some characteristics of a generic – but this remains a strong, viable brand in its own right. By subjugating Kinko’s, Fedex is actually diluting the equity in the Kinko’s name – and maybe that’s part of the plan.

Squeezing this acquired brand into the existing architecture is an awkward solution. The Kinko’s brand has its own baggage and personality – some of which seems incongruous to its new Masterbrand. For one, Kinko’s is much more consumer friendly than Fedex, and the new corporate dressings with its push towards SMB customers is a definite departure from the Kinko’s roots.

The question remains, why is this good for either Fedex or Kinko’s? For Fedex, the acquisition creates retail outlets with an expanded range of services and revenue streams. For Kinko’s, it created a major payday for what was a privately held company – and it offers a significant opportunity for growth. But all of this is true without the rebranding.

Fedex could have done better by associating the two brands, but keeping the Kinko’s name more independent. Kinko’s, powered by Fedex, may have been an interesting solution. They could have achieved the same goals while preserving the equity in Kinko’s name and expanding the customer associations with Fedex. Similar results could have been achieved with a Fedex campaign that highlighted the new expanded retail presence.

As it stands, Fedex has a long and expensive road ahead in its re-education campaign and in creating all the new advertising, collateral, signage and retail upgrades that go with it. Further, by devaluing and/or repositioning the Kinko’s brand, Fedex may be creating an opportunity for a new player that is more attuned to the needs and demands of a consumer and SOHO market.

The Home Depot Goes for Gold

2004-08-17T10:18:00.000-04:00

The Olympic season brings out the window dressing.

From Allstate to McDonald’s to SBC to Samsung, NBC’s Olympics broadcasts are filled with corporations who simply slap the Rings next to their logo in hopes of reflecting some of the glow of the games. The Home Depot is one Olympic advertiser whose message rings true, with ads that tout the numerous Olympians that don the orange apron in the “off-season.”

For The Home Depot, focusing on employees and their success outside the big-box store powerfully delivers several key messages: (1) we respect our employees and their individual skills and pursuits; (2) the people you find working in our stores are passionate and driven about what they do; (3) price is not our differentiator: our service and experience and support will carry you through your own DIY effort.

The over-riding message here is about employee respect. The Home Depot illustrates that it is not here just to bring you cheap stuff (and its investors high returns) – but to create an environment that enables people to realize their dreams. It may all sound a bit hokey. But for The Home Depot, it works - as founder Bernie Marcus is known to take more pride in the jobs he’s created than in his own financial success. In a corporate climate that often seems content saying (more so than doing), kudos to the Home Depot for promoting Olympian ideals in their workplace as well as in their advertising.

Master Branding Run Amok at Bayer

2004-08-13T11:17:00.000-04:00

It’s a floor wax.
It’s a dessert topping.
Hey, you’re both right. It’s a floor wax and a dessert topping!

Bayer seems to have confused corporate brand positioning with a master brand strategy. How else to explain aspirin and pest control sharing the same brand? In a business portfolio, it makes sense – in a life sciences kind of way – improving health and well being with medicine and technology, etc. But as a consumer, I am left confused. “Wait, Bayer the aspirin company makes pesticide? Huh? Is that stuff getting into my aspirin?”

Certainly there’s a PowerPoint deck out there in Bayer land offering a healthy logic flow to using the Bayer name on aspirin and pesticide: “the equity in the Bayer name in various markets; the themes of life/science/technology that can serve as an umbrella to the portfolio, yada yada yada…” Bayer has a long history of innovation across a range of technologies and chemicals and materials. Yet most of their products are sold as ingredients for things like sunglasses and vehicle construction and, yes, pest control. For an investor audience, a Bayer umbrella may make some sense (Hey, it works for GE). For internal corporate structure it may make sense to group businesses by technology, rather than by market. And perhaps the Bayer name has “aspirin equity” in one geography and “pest control equity” in a second geography and neither business was willing to drop the brand.

But someone, somewhere at Bayer should have just offered some Emperor’s New Clothes common sense. Products that are almost diametrically opposed in what they do should not live under the same consumer brand. Period.

Mmmm delicious.
And just look at that shine!

Scotts and Smith & Hawken

2004-08-12T12:54:00.000-04:00

Could Smith & Hawken have found themselves a better buyer than The Scotts Company?

I don't think so. Scotts is the world's largest lawn/garden care company, controlling a strong portfolio of brands including Scotts, MiracleGro, Roundup and Ortho. Smith & Hawken adds an upscale lifestyle brand to the mix, and the result may well be greater than the sum of their parts.

Smith & Hawken had become a bit too upscale for its own good - and will be well served by turning a bit more mainstream in their pricing and positioning. The powerful machine behind the Scotts brands can fuel distribution, product extension and volume for S&H.

For Scotts, the acquisition elevates their offerings beyond products and into lifestyle. Its not the teak benches and the gardening clogs themselves that make this an interesting deal. Scotts will have a newfound ability to position brands like Scotts and MiracleGro as essential components of a rich and beautiful life.

Of course, this all has to come together. On paper this seems like a great match - and it will be interesting to watch it evolve.

Welcome

2004-08-06T08:53:00.000-04:00

Welcome to the Brand Blog. Check back soon for views and thoughts on brands and marketing issues. And please offer up your own.
- Jonathan