Robbing Peter to Pay... Peter

I recently received a big shiny $100 cheque from the provincial government. It's part of their
"climate action" scheme. I guess I'm supposed to use it to do something good for the environment.
Tomorrow, gas taxes go up 2.4 cents per litre for similar reasons (and to pay for these $100 cheques).

Governments do this all the time. Essentially: we'll take a bunch of money from you, then give some of it back (after covering administrative and bureaucratic costs of course).

I can sort of see the logic behind the program, since the people who drive least will benefit the most, and its the government's job to redistribute wealth. But it still seems convoluted (and more than a little unfair -- why pick on driving but not the thousand other ways that people hurt the environment?).

Businesses are just as bad.
It's not quite the same, but price promotions seem to follow the same kind of logic.

Rebates are the worst...
"We'll charge you more than we have to, then give you back a portion of it. Eventually."
(I'm still waiting for a TiVo rebate from last Christmas).

Tell you what, Mr. Shopkeeper: Instead of giving me $10 off and paying $5 towards the administration of the rebate program, just give me $15 off at the till.

I recognize the value of discounts, rebates, coupons, sales, etc. and have even used them in marketing programs that I've run. But they need to serve a purpose, or at least be special in some way. Use coupon codes to track which marketing initiatives have been effective... Hold a big, attention-grabbing, newsworthy sales event...

Just giving a discount to try to create the illusion that customers are getting a deal is extremely wasteful and inefficient.

Of course, everybody does it. It's the standard "marketing" solution for any company that needs to temporarily boost revenue.

But how long before consumers get tired of it and start to ignore it? Or worse, how long before people clue in and just wait for a price promotion, never buying anything at regular price?

Personally, when I see a big "Everything 50% off!" sign, my first thought is "They can afford to sell everything for half price, still make a profit, and cover the cost of all the promotional materials. I guess that means I'm paying way too much the rest of the time."

Wal-mart may be a big evil corporation, but one thing you have to give them credit for is that they simply charge low prices all the time. No gimmicks or temporary discounts (well, a few, but those aren't their main promotional message).

Another "Does This Actually Work?"

Why are banks and credit card companies such annoying marketers?
Not always, of course (some of my favourite clients are in the financial industry), but there seems to be a disproportionate amount of bad marketing coming from them.

I just received a DM piece from American Express informing me that I've "...been selected to apply for a no-annual fee..."

Wow! I've been selected! I get the rare opportunity to apply for a credit card!

Seriously - do they think that any consumer is actually going to receive this and be excited at their good fortune?

It's not even addressed admail, so I'm assuming this is just a mass mailing to my neighbourhood.

Don't pretend that I'm special.

Part of a Complete Breakfast

You know what the most amazing health food is? Chocolate sauce mixed with nuts. You should give it to your kids. For breakfast.

Yup.

According to the sample of Nutella that I received in the mail this week, Nutella is all about nutritious breakfasts. The little brochure that came with the sample even says "Learn more about nutritious breakfasts at www.nutella.ca."

Unfortunately, when I go to the Web site there's not really any information about nutritious breakfasts. They use the tagline "Spread some energy", which is kind of related, I guess, but not exactly the same thing. There's one page of nutritional information about the product, but that's hardly teaching me about nutritious breakfasts either.

It doesn't even have that silly "Part of this complete breakfast" thing that you see in cereal commercials (where the bowl of cereal is surrounded by about fourteen bananas, six oranges, a bale of hay, a gallon of apple juice, a pair of running shoes, a set of weights, and a personal trainer).

Based on the brochure and the Web site, here's the entirety of what I know about the product's nutritional features and benefits:
1. It uses all natural ingredients.
2. It has no preservatives
3. It has no artificial colours
4. It is a source of vitamin E.

Wow! It's practically a green salad with low-fat dressing!

Okay, sacrasm off.

Is it just me, or is this a stretch for the brand?
I have to wonder why they've chosen to position this product with the term "nutrition".
I can understand that they don't want to be associated with ideas like "give your kids candy for breakfast", and probably don't want to be limited to being seen as an "adult" product. But... there's a big leap from "this product is actually not that bad for you" to "this product is great for you!".

The "spread some energy" slogan seems like a much better fit, so I wonder why "energy" isn't their driving message. I can also see some value in an approach like "Even fussy eaters love Nutella for breakfast", since I'm sure a lot of parents have trouble getting kids to eat a proper meal in the morning. So it's not like the product has nothing going for it and has to focus on nutrition. The quality of ingredients needs to demoted to a secondary message.

Maybe I'm totally wrong, but is anybody* really buying the idea that a chocolate spread is a generally healthy choice for kids? To me, all they're doing is reminding me that this is the same stuff that Ferrero Rochers are made from.






(* or, at least, anybody who can afford this premium product? I doubt that the target market is the "bag of Doritos for breakfast while watching wrestling in a trailer down by the river" audience)

Official

Pet peeve time.

For some reason, I really don't like it when marketers use the phrase "The Official (insert product/service) of (insert season/holiday/occasion/emotion)"

Soft drink companies are particularly bad for this ("The official taste of summer!", "The official drink of Christmas!"). But they're not alone. Some companies even use a variation of this as an ongoing slogan ("The official source of relaxation!" "The official home of saying 'I do'!).

Now Airmiles is doing it:

Stop it. Nobody has granted you this "official" status. Nobody even has the right to grant you this. It's just silly.

It's Never Too Late

So, following up on my previous post about how sometimes brands need to just do things because they're expected and not make a big deal about it.

A good example is the reusable shopping bag. By now, it's too late for any company to start selling these and expect it to automatically be a great marketing opportunity.

There's a difference between "noteworthy" and "newsworthy". Do something good that others are already doing is just noteworthy.

BUT...
Do something good in a new way and it might become newsworthy.

UK retailer Tesco is launching and selling a series of reusable bags that are created by a well-known designer, and with proceeds going towards a charitable cause. They aren't the first to do this, of course -- as this article points out.

However, the combination of:
- a high-profile designer
- releasing a series of bags (thus making them somewhat collectible) rather than just one
- the charity tie-in, and
- the fact that this is one more stage in an already-started program to reduce plastic bags
helps make this a bit of a big deal.

It's not a drastically different approach, but its enough to make it more than just another bag.

The Value Is In The Second Beer

I had a nice "networking evening" with other local marketing folks a couple of weeks ago. Nothing fancy - just a casual gathering of various people who work in the same field. It seems like everybody in this city is "two degrees" from everybody else -- anytime you meet somebody new, chances are you share a mutual friend or business associate -- so it's always nice to combine some of the various circles.

Anyways, something that made the event even better was that everybody attending got a drink ticket and shared some appetizer platters. There was no charge to attend and it wasn't sponsored by anyone, but we still got some goodies.

I didn't ask, but I assume these were provided by the pub where we met. (If I'm wrong, somebody else who was there please let me know). If I'm correct (and let's assume I am for the remainder of this post), it's great to have a pub (or restaurant or any other business for that matter) that understands the value of hosting group functions.

They know that the average person is going to have a least a couple of drinks (alcoholic or otherwise), and that several people in the group are going to order additional food items beyond the appy platters. They also know that most people in the group are going to get a good impression of the place and come back again (paying fully next time).

How many businesses, though, don't get this? They see a large group of customers as a chance to sell a larger-than-normal volume. The last thing on their mind is "Let's automatically give the people in this group a bunch of stuff for free that they would probably pay for anyway."

Extra Shiny (But is it current?)

Following up on my previous post about presenting timely information vs. deep or broad information...

In that post, I wondered about Google's brand direction, using their presentation of real-time stock data as an example of "currency".

Now they've released something pretty neat that demonstrates the opposite (yet complementary) side: lots and lots of detail.

Teaming up with Disney, Google Earth now allows you to explore a highly detailed virtual Disney World.

Very fun, but is it particularly useful? Can I plan a trip to the real Disney World better because of this? Will I better remember past trips there, using this like a computer-generated photo album?

Google's brand is supposedly about presenting all the world's information in an easy-to-find-and-use way. This certainly succeeds, though I think it will be a gazillion times better if overlaid with real-time data.

Imagine if I could "fly" through the virtual park, see a ride that interests me, zoom in, and immediately learn valuable information? Not just facts and figures, images from the past, etc. but current line-ups, maintenance schedules for the next few weeks, how the ride might be effected by current weather conditions, and so on?

Just some thoughts.
I'm still eager to see where Google is taking their brand in regards to timeliness vs. depth.

Here's a video someone has made using Google Earth. (Warning: You will get the French version of It's a Small World stuck in your brain).