PODCAST: NATPE Explores the Many Sides of Consumer-Created
Content / Issues That Worried Many at the Conference
By Hoag Levins / Published: January 22, 2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- A buzzword as well as a headache pressing
ever more painfully on broadcast and cable TV networks, consumer-created
content is rapidly rising as potentially as sweeping and transformative
a force as the initial emergence of the internet itself.
As this podcast indicates, the issues surrounding consumer-created
video were high on the minds of attendees and speakers such as
Wired magazine editor in chief Chris Anderson at last week's National
Association of Television Programming Executives (NATPE) conference
in Las Vegas.
xxxxxxxx
Showdown
Looms in Congress Over Drug Advertising on TV
By MILT FREUDENHEIM / Published: January 22, 2007
Direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising campaigns, such
as this 2005 television commercial for Enbrel from Amgen, are
being scrutinized by the Food and Drug Administration over the
claims they make.
Drug advertising aimed at consumers, a fast-growing category
that reached $4.5 billion last year, will face hard scrutiny in
the new Congress, according to industry critics in both the House
and Senate.
The government was displeased with claims in a 2005 AstraZeneca
Crestor commercial in 2005. The consumer ads will be on the griddle
early in this session at hearings on the user fees that manufacturers
pay to speed the reviewing of new drugs by the Food and Drug Administration.
The user fee law will die in the fall unless Congress acts to
renew it.
The pharmaceutical industry, which often gets what it asks
for from Congress and the executive branch, seeks to renew the
law and add a new set of user fees that would be pay salaries
for additional F.D.A. employees to evaluate all consumer drug
ads, before they are shown on television.
Both the industry and its critics agree that there should be
a pause before the advertising starts — to allow time for doctors
to learn about a new drug. The companies want the delay to be
left up to them, but critics say the F.D.A. should require a wait
of up to two years. Criticism of direct-to-consumer advertising
has intensified since 2004, after Merck withdrew Vioxx, a heavily
advertised painkiller, after a clinical trial showed that it sharply
increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes.
“From the beginning , everyone, including the company, agreed
that not everybody ought to be getting Vioxx,” said Helen Darling,
president of the National Business Group on Health, an organization
of large employers. “But the ads implied there was a widespread
need for it.”
Spending on consumer drug advertising, meanwhile, has been
growing robustly, from $1.1 billion in 1997 to $4.2 billion in
2005, according to a recent report to Congress by the Government
Accountability Office. In the first nine months of 2006, spending
rose 8.4 percent to $3.29 billion, on track toward $4.5 billion
for the year, according to TNS Media Intelligence, an advertising
research firm.
Spending on the ads faltered in 2005 after soaring 27 percent
in 2004, before Vioxx was withdrawn, said David Kweskin, a senior
executive at the firm. “Now they are in a catch-up phase.”
Two independent government watchdog groups sharply criticized
consumer drug advertising recently, and a separate survey Jan.
9 commissioned by the PricewaterhouseCoopers accounting and consulting
firm indicated that skepticism is widespread among the public,
too. Only 1 in 10 consumers said the direct-to-consumer, or D.T.C.,
ads could provide useful information to a large audience, the
survey said. (Consumer drug advertising is not permitted in most
of the world, except New Zealand and the United States.)
The pharmaceutical industry itself acknowledges having an image
problem.
“It would be naïve to not acknowledge the fact that D.T.C.
advertising is also a lightening-rod in the health care debate
in this country,” said Billy Tauzin, the former congressman who
is now president and chief executive of the Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America, in a speech to venture capitalists
last spring. There is “one great problem” that the manufacturers
face, he said: “in a word, it is trust.”
“While individual patients find the information useful in discussions
with their physicians,” he added in his speech, “patients, physicians
and consumers generally express unhappiness with D.T.C. advertising.”
Mr. Tauzin’s organization issued voluntary guidelines for consumer
ads, which took effect last year. Under the guidelines, the companies
have promised to hold off on consumer advertising of a new medicine
for an unspecified “appropriate” period. That would allow time
to tell doctors about risks and benefits, before television and
Web site viewers see an ad and demand a prescription.
Twenty-seven members of the pharmaceutical manufacturers organization
have endorsed the guidelines, but it is hard to figure exactly
how long the delays in advertising will run. Bristol-Myers Squibb
has said that it would delay for 12 months. Johnson & Johnson
and Pfizer said they would wait six months. The manufacturers
group cannot say how other companies have interpreted the guidelines,
a spokesman said.
But according to TNS Media Intelligence, the companies have
actually been waiting 15 months, on average, since the Vioxx debacle.
Critics say that even after F.D.A. approval, the full safety
profile of a new drug cannot be known until it has been widely
used for a number of years.
But the manufacturers’ guidelines have to be voluntary, said
Daniel E. Troy, a former chief counsel of the F.D.A., because
the Supreme Court has “struck down restrictions on advertising
of tobacco, alcohol, gambling and unapproved compounded drugs.”
The agency sent 15 warning letters to drug companies regarding
ads in 2005 and a total of 22 complaints last year.
The F.D.A. told AstraZeneca, for example, to “immediately cease”
a “misleading superiority claim” in a 2005 TV commercial. The
ad said AstraZeneca’s Crestor was “clearly the best” in a “head
to head” test with the three largest-selling cholesterol drugs.
Emily Y. Denney, an AstraZeneca spokeswoman, said that by the
time the letter was received, in March 2005, the ads were no longer
running. The company defended its message in the advertising as
“appropriate.”
Another F.D.A. letter told Amgen, a biotechnology company,
to stop running commercials for Enbrel, a treatment for the skin
disease psoriasis, that the F.D.A. said minimized “serious risks”
associated with the drug. Amgen immediately withdrew the commercial.
xxxxxxxx
Wendy's
Taps Publicis Shops for $300 Million Account / Saatchi Takes Creative,
MediaVest Gets Buying and Planning Duties
By Brooke Capps and Lisa Sanders
Published: January 24, 2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Wendy's is moving its $300 million
creative account from Interpublic Group of Cos.' McCann Erickson
to Publicis Groupe's Saatchi & Saatchi, and Saatchi sibling
MediaVest will handle media buying and planning responsibilities,
the marketer said today.
The fate of the Wendy's account has been hotly speculated for
more than a year.
The media incumbent was Interpublic's Universal McCann. Wendy's
also said MDC Corp.'s Kirshenbaum Bond & Partners will work
on designated creative projects.
Year of speculation
The fate of the account has been hotly speculated about for
more than a year. A number of agencies have met with Ian Rowden,
senior VP-chief marketing officer, according to these executives.
A Wendy's spokesman couldn't be reached, but Mr. Rowden, contacted
by cellphone, refused to comment, saying he was in a meeting.
The agencies referred calls to the marketer and a Wendy's spokesman
declined comment.
According to one executive familiar with situation, Mr. Rowden
declined the traditional pitch process in favor of a series of
meetings with agencies, in which each agency presented past work
and talked a little about ideas for the client. "They picked
an agency and not a campaign and that is how you should find an
agency," said the executive.
Wendy's spent $387 million in measured media in 2005 and $290
million from January through September 2006, according to TNS
Media Intelligence. With only national and some cable responsibilities,
McCann Erickson and Universal McCann handled about half of that
media outlay.
Good end after bad start
Wendy's rival and market leader McDonald's today reported record
earnings for 2006. Wendy's, the No. 3 fast-food chain (behind
Burger King), on Jan. 5 posted improved same-store sales during
the fourth quarter of 2006, though last year started out disastrously,
with negative same-store sales in the first half. Those results
had compounded an already bad situation, as 2005 ended with losses.
That poor performance prompted a franchisee revolt, and activist
investor Nelson Peltz won seats for himself and two disciples
on the company's board. Last April, Chairman-CEO Jack Schuessler
was ousted.
Kerri Anderson, named CEO-president in November after serving
as interim chief for several months, reshuffled management and
marketing, trimmed employees and shed assets to cut $100 million
in costs.
While Wendy's same-store sales have turned positive, executives
close to the matter said franchisees remained unhappy with sales,
given its long drought and the improved sales at rival burger
chains. "How long can you be down," asked one industry
observer.
Vidal Partnership, an independent agency based in New York,
retains duties for Hispanic marketing.
Kate MacArthur and Matthew Creamer contributed to this report.
Google
Video, YouTube to Remain Separate Operations / Search Giant to
Have Its Properties 'Play to Their Respective Strengths'
By Abbey Klaassen /
Published: January 25, 2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Google unveiled the first integration
between Google Video and YouTube today, when it announced it was
adding YouTube video results to its Google Video search index.
The company issued a statement to update the status of Google
Video and YouTube and said the two services would remain largely
independent and "play to their respective strengths."
For YouTube, that is remaining the destination for uploading,
viewing and sharing videos; for Google Video, that remains search
and creating new video technologies.
Video search destination
So it would appear Google Video is viewed less as an online
video viewing destination and more primarily as a video search
destination.
Google purchased YouTube for $1.65 billion in early October.
The deal closed mid-November but the companies have, until now,
stayed relatively mum on whether they would remain entirely independent
or work together. Some have even suggested Google should merge
Google Video into the more popular and widely known YouTube. It
appears the answer to that question lies somewhere in the middle
of range of speculation.
Google will offer YouTube access to search and monetization
platforms -- although the statement didn't indicate what exactly
that monetization would look like. Currently, YouTube has sold
branded channels and worked with advertisers to sponsor user-generated
content contests. It has also worked with TV networks and movie
studios to help promote programs and films and offers advertisers
the opportunity to buy plum front-page placement. It recently
signed a deal with Verizon that offers a subscription mobile service.
"Ultimately, we envision most user-generated and premium
video content being hosted on YouTube so that it can further enhance
the YouTube experience," the statement read. "We also
envision YouTube benefiting from future Google Video innovations
-- especially those involving video search, monetization and distribution."
For
Super Bowl Buy, Think Local / With Six Days to Go, Spots Still
Available at Affiliates
By Claire Atkinson /
Published: January 25, 2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- With six business days to go until
Super Bowl Sunday, the CBS TV Stations group has two to three
spots left in each of its local markets for advertisers seeking
to take advantage of cheaper local ad buys than coughing up $2.6
million for a national buy.
To get around Anheuser-Busch's beer stranglehold on the Super
Bowl in 2005, Heineken found airtime for its ad with Brad Pitt
on local affilaites.
According to executives on both the sales and buying side of
the big game, the priciest 30-second spots are selling for around
$300,000, and, not surprisingly, the most expensive local market
is Chicago, as the hometown Bears are squaring off against the
Indianapolis Colts. Audience levels are expected to be highest
those two markets.
Good matchup for CBS
The matchup is good news for CBS, which owns its affiliate
station in the Chicago market. Julio Marenghi, president-ad sales
at the CBS TV Station group, said most new money had come from
advertisers that had negotiated a contingency clause that stipulated
they would buy time in the game if certain teams reached the final.
Otherwise, he said he hasn't experienced a surge of last-minute
buys and that he expects local sales will be wrapped up next week.
Marketers who can't buy into the big game because of category
exclusivity clauses can get around that restriction by doing a
local buy. In 2005, Heineken got around Anheuser-Busch's dominance
of the beer category on the national level with a huge local spot
buy for its ad featuring actor Brad Pitt on local Fox stations.
Fox aired the Super Bowl last year.
"There are people who wait to see who the teams are to
see if [the game is] going to be exciting," said Kathy Crawford,
president-local broadcast at MindShare Worldwide.
Tough to get around exclusivity
But it might be tougher this year to orchestrate a local buy
to get around exclusivity, because CBS owns many of its affiliates
in major markets, Ms. Crawford said, and it will likely restrict
those stations from selling ads to competitors of marketers that
have already bought airtime on a national level.
CBS owns stations in Austin, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Dallas,
Denver, Detroit, Green Bay, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, New
York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Sacramento, Salt Lake City and
San Francisco.
While a local buy might seem like good value, Ms. Crawford
said its important to realize that marketers aren't simply buying
an in-game spot from the local affiliate, because affiliates often
only allow buys in a package of spots that include pre-game, post-game
and possibly other nights in prime-time that week. Marketers need
to be prepared to factor that into their buys, she said.
Now that the matchup is decided, a number of marketers have
chosen to publicize their participation in the game, including
Walt Disney Co., InfoUSA's SalesGenie.com, Sprint and Coca-Cola
Co. On a national level, CBS said it is 85% sold and is tying
up a variety of negotiations.
Marketers gauge interest
JoAnn Ross, CBS president-ad sales, said yesterday at a Super
Bowl panel, "Like any other event, like the Academy Awards,
people want to wait to the last minute to see if they are going
to get a discount. What has happened this year is that after our
championship game on Sunday, which had one of the biggest ratings
in years, there has been a lot of fresh interest."
The National Football Conference game on Fox between the Chicago
Bears and the New Orleans Saints drew 43.2 million views and a
25.1 rating. The big numbers point to a huge interest in the Feb.
4 Super Bowl. Meanwhile, 46.7 million viewers tuned into CBS to
watch Colts make it past their American Football Conference nemesis
New England Patriots, the most-watched AFC championship since
1986.
"It might be a very intelligent thing for CBS to tell
people how well the games did last Sunday," said Aaron Cohen,
senior VP-director of national broadcast at Horizon Media.
CBS also has plans to involve its star news anchor Katie Couric
in its Super Bowl coverage. Ms. Couric, who hosts the "CBS
Evening News," will be featured in the pre-game package of
events.
Xxxxx
PODCAST: NATPE Explores the Many Sides of Consumer-Created
Content / Issues That Worried Many at the Conference
By Hoag Levins / Published: January 22, 2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- A buzzword as well as a headache pressing
ever more painfully on broadcast and cable TV networks, consumer-created
content is rapidly rising as potentially as sweeping and transformative
a force as the initial emergence of the internet itself.
As this podcast indicates, the issues surrounding consumer-created
video were high on the minds of attendees and speakers such as
Wired magazine editor in chief Chris Anderson at last week's National
Association of Television Programming Executives (NATPE) conference
in Las Vegas.
xxxxxxxx
Showdown
Looms in Congress Over Drug Advertising on TV
By MILT FREUDENHEIM / Published: January 22, 2007
Direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising campaigns, such
as this 2005 television commercial for Enbrel from Amgen, are
being scrutinized by the Food and Drug Administration over the
claims they make.
Drug advertising aimed at consumers, a fast-growing category
that reached $4.5 billion last year, will face hard scrutiny in
the new Congress, according to industry critics in both the House
and Senate.
The government was displeased with claims in a 2005 AstraZeneca
Crestor commercial in 2005. The consumer ads will be on the griddle
early in this session at hearings on the user fees that manufacturers
pay to speed the reviewing of new drugs by the Food and Drug Administration.
The user fee law will die in the fall unless Congress acts to
renew it.
The pharmaceutical industry, which often gets what it asks
for from Congress and the executive branch, seeks to renew the
law and add a new set of user fees that would be pay salaries
for additional F.D.A. employees to evaluate all consumer drug
ads, before they are shown on television.
Both the industry and its critics agree that there should be
a pause before the advertising starts — to allow time for doctors
to learn about a new drug. The companies want the delay to be
left up to them, but critics say the F.D.A. should require a wait
of up to two years. Criticism of direct-to-consumer advertising
has intensified since 2004, after Merck withdrew Vioxx, a heavily
advertised painkiller, after a clinical trial showed that it sharply
increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes.
“From the beginning , everyone, including the company, agreed
that not everybody ought to be getting Vioxx,” said Helen Darling,
president of the National Business Group on Health, an organization
of large employers. “But the ads implied there was a widespread
need for it.”
Spending on consumer drug advertising, meanwhile, has been
growing robustly, from $1.1 billion in 1997 to $4.2 billion in
2005, according to a recent report to Congress by the Government
Accountability Office. In the first nine months of 2006, spending
rose 8.4 percent to $3.29 billion, on track toward $4.5 billion
for the year, according to TNS Media Intelligence, an advertising
research firm.
Spending on the ads faltered in 2005 after soaring 27 percent
in 2004, before Vioxx was withdrawn, said David Kweskin, a senior
executive at the firm. “Now they are in a catch-up phase.”
Two independent government watchdog groups sharply criticized
consumer drug advertising recently, and a separate survey Jan.
9 commissioned by the PricewaterhouseCoopers accounting and consulting
firm indicated that skepticism is widespread among the public,
too. Only 1 in 10 consumers said the direct-to-consumer, or D.T.C.,
ads could provide useful information to a large audience, the
survey said. (Consumer drug advertising is not permitted in most
of the world, except New Zealand and the United States.)
The pharmaceutical industry itself acknowledges having an image
problem.
“It would be naïve to not acknowledge the fact that D.T.C.
advertising is also a lightening-rod in the health care debate
in this country,” said Billy Tauzin, the former congressman who
is now president and chief executive of the Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America, in a speech to venture capitalists
last spring. There is “one great problem” that the manufacturers
face, he said: “in a word, it is trust.”
“While individual patients find the information useful in discussions
with their physicians,” he added in his speech, “patients, physicians
and consumers generally express unhappiness with D.T.C. advertising.”
Mr. Tauzin’s organization issued voluntary guidelines for consumer
ads, which took effect last year. Under the guidelines, the companies
have promised to hold off on consumer advertising of a new medicine
for an unspecified “appropriate” period. That would allow time
to tell doctors about risks and benefits, before television and
Web site viewers see an ad and demand a prescription.
Twenty-seven members of the pharmaceutical manufacturers organization
have endorsed the guidelines, but it is hard to figure exactly
how long the delays in advertising will run. Bristol-Myers Squibb
has said that it would delay for 12 months. Johnson & Johnson
and Pfizer said they would wait six months. The manufacturers
group cannot say how other companies have interpreted the guidelines,
a spokesman said.
But according to TNS Media Intelligence, the companies have
actually been waiting 15 months, on average, since the Vioxx debacle.
Critics say that even after F.D.A. approval, the full safety
profile of a new drug cannot be known until it has been widely
used for a number of years.
But the manufacturers’ guidelines have to be voluntary, said
Daniel E. Troy, a former chief counsel of the F.D.A., because
the Supreme Court has “struck down restrictions on advertising
of tobacco, alcohol, gambling and unapproved compounded drugs.”
The agency sent 15 warning letters to drug companies regarding
ads in 2005 and a total of 22 complaints last year.
The F.D.A. told AstraZeneca, for example, to “immediately cease”
a “misleading superiority claim” in a 2005 TV commercial. The
ad said AstraZeneca’s Crestor was “clearly the best” in a “head
to head” test with the three largest-selling cholesterol drugs.
Emily Y. Denney, an AstraZeneca spokeswoman, said that by the
time the letter was received, in March 2005, the ads were no longer
running. The company defended its message in the advertising as
“appropriate.”
Another F.D.A. letter told Amgen, a biotechnology company,
to stop running commercials for Enbrel, a treatment for the skin
disease psoriasis, that the F.D.A. said minimized “serious risks”
associated with the drug. Amgen immediately withdrew the commercial.
xxxxxxxx
YouTube
gives Consumers the power to make or Break a Brand ; ON ADVERTISING
Jan 15, 2007 - Independent-London / Author(s): Claire Beale
There are people out there who think that truth in advertising
is as much of an oxymoron as an honest politician. Really. Ad
execs don't come bottom in the honourable profession stakes for
nothing; used-car salesmen and estate agents are generally considered
more believable.
Beauty brand Dove has built an entire market out of exploiting
this view. Its "Real Women" campaign has tried to unpick
the (lazy) conventions of the beauty ad industry and put the truth
back into advertising. It's been a very successful strategy and
has won marketing and advertising awards the world over.
You've almost certainly seen some of the ads (they're so different
that they really stand out: fat women in their undies and proud
of it). But there was a US viral released last year which sums
up the approach. It shows how a rather ordinary-looking woman
undergoes a total (computer-enhanced) transformation in the name
of advertising. For anyone who has ever felt even vaguely inadequate
when faced with perfect people in glossy ads, the Dove film Evolution
on YouTube is required viewing.
Anyway, now Dove is going further and throwing its brand name
into the thick of the user-generated advertising debate. It's
a hot topic amongst marketers generally. A couple of weeks ago,
I wrote in this column about how the internet was helping democratise
advertising: ads are no longer the preserve of the advertising
agency and punters are having a go themselves, making films about
brands and posting them on sites like YouTube. Incidentally, someone's
made a brilliant spoof of Dove's Evolution, called Anti- Dove
Parody, showing a beautiful man guzzling beer and burgers until
he becomes a hideous slob.
That's user-generated advertising for you.
Some advertisers feel deeply uncomfortable about all of this.
Coca-Cola went excruciatingly corporate when its customers started
posting films showing bottles of Diet Coke exploding under the
influence of a packet of Mentos mints: "Coca-Cola is for
drinking, not playing with" summed up Coke's response.
No such po-faced behaviour from Dove, though. Dove "wants
you to create its next great television ad" for its cream-oil
range; and proclaims ,"it's easier to create your own ad
than you think," (which raises some interesting questions
about how much Dove pays its ad agency Ogilvy for its work). Dove
will then screen the best user-generated entry in an ad-break
during the Oscars.
This is a really smart strategy: not only does it give Dove
credentials amongst the YouTube generation, but it also creates
a high-profile, PR-laden and extremely cost-effective ad campaign.
And the entries will no doubt throw up some interesting consumer
insights, too.
This is modern marketing in the digital age and allows Dove
to play the user-generated game with all the kudos that brings
without ceding control. Where it all leaves the ad agency creative
department, though, is another thing altogether.
TALKING ABOUT truth in advertising, if you're cynical enough
to believe this is a deeply cynical industry, check out a couple
of films on YouTube. One old, one new, this is ad-land at its
most cynical, superficial and hilarious. The first, Truth in Advertising,
is a few years old now, and particularly North American. It's
about the making of an ad, from briefing to the director's cut,
and everyone in it talks, well... the truth.
So the marketing director says: "I like making decisions
on multi- million dollar campaigns by basing it on what my peabrained,
disinterested wife thinks about it"; the creative team admits,
"we're two untalented hacks riding on the success of a campaign
we lucked into four years ago".
This film takes dialogue that has run through the heads of
a million ad execs around the world, and speaks it. It's made
by the Canadian commercials production company Avion Films, so
you have to think they know what they're talking about.
Now there's a new film out by a British team on a similar theme.
This one's called Truth in Ad Sales and the viral has spent the
last week going through adland like a batch of dodgy oysters.
It's a shameless, paler rip-off of the original, set this time
in adland's media world, and it employs the same tell-the-truth
device (media buyer to pa: "I'm going to tell you I DJ at
the weekends, when really I queue up outside Chinawhite begging
to be let in, before I get a night bus home to my mum's for a
quick wank and a Horlicks."). Again, the film has been made
by a team of people who work in the industry, and it's in this
week's top 10 comedy films on YouTube. This time the client is
a nappy-rash cream, Kiddi Care, and the hapless media agency comes
up with a strategy that sees Kiddi Care sponsor an extreme sports
show.
The strapline is genius: "Feel the rush, cure the rash."
Both these films enshrine universal truths about people in
the business. And they're not a bad introduction to adland's worst
practices and what your colleagues really think of you.
REGULAR READERS will remember last week's story of the Asda
review: a creative pitch called by the supermarket giant's new
marketing director Rick Bendel, who joined the company from its
ad agency Publicis last autumn.
Bendel was the man responsible - to a greater or lesser extent,
depending on who you believe - for Asda's advertising at Publicis.
His decision to review seemed like a kick at his own advertising
strategy.
Anyway, last week Bendel sealed the drama by snatching the
entire [pound]44 million account from his old agency, which had
held the business for 17 years. The winner is Fallon, Campaign's
Agency of the Year, and apparently Fallon has come up with a stunning
new strategy for Asda (expect the death of the arse-slapping "Asda-
price" routine).
You can't fault Bendel's choice of agency. Fallon is on a high
- this is the agency responsible for the Sony Bravia ads that
have swept creative awards and caught people's imagination. But
the power- play is fascinating.
As you might expect, Publicis insiders reckon it's Bendel's
fault that Asda's ads have ranged from forgettable to excruciating,
and he's now under pressure to deliver something stunning. If
he had decided to stick with Publicis and turn the strategy around,
the question would be why Publicis never managed to deliver great
work while he was there. What is also true, though, is that Bendel
knows where Publicis's weak points are and what the agency is
capable of, or not.
By appointing Fallon, Bendel is making a clean break of it
and, as I said, Fallon is a trophy agency right now. But Fallon
could do worse than have a quiet word with their Publicis Groupe
cousins, Bartle Bogle Hegarty. BBH had the Asda business in the
1980s and it nearly broke the agency: retail clients are notoriously
difficult to handle and often culturally opposed to the ethos
of a great creative agency.
If Fallon can deliver what Bendel's after and still retain
its hot-shop credentials, then this could be a persuasive early
bid for the Agency of the Year accolade once again.
Claire Beale is editor of 'Campaign'
BEALE'S
BEST IN SHOW: NHS ANTI-SMOKING CAMPAIGN
New year's resolutions are a time-honoured tradition. Giving
them up within a fortnight is another. This ad from Miles Calcraft
Briginshaw Duffy hopes to persuade people to give up smoking by
underlining the strength of nicotine's physical hold over its
addicts. Giant fish hooks snare unsuspecting smokers and lure
them to the nearest packet of fags.
It's a powerful image, though not as gruesome as some anti-
smoking campaigns. It lacks the impact of ads featuring real-life
cancer victims or the ones that show how nicotine clogs arteries.
Apparently, the average smoker feeds their habit with about
5,000 cigarettes a year, a phenomenal amount and a fact that,
I suspect, most smokers are in denial about. Although this ad
might not be as gruesome as its predecessors, for anyone whose
new year's resolution is wavering, it's a strong reminder of the
physical as well as psychological battle you need to wage against
the addiction.
xxxx
Fed-up Agencies Quit Punching the Clock / Following in Crispin's
Footsteps, Shops Charge for Ideas Instead of Time
By Lisa Sanders and Alice Z. Cuneo / Published: January 22,
2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Crispin Porter & Bogusky's bold
deal with Haggar, struck last year, in which the agency took an
equity stake as part of its compensation, stood out as a rare
exception from the sad status quo of agencies selling ideas as
if they were pork bellies to be traded by the ton. "We're
in the intellectual-property business," Crispin's Jeff Hicks
said at the time. "We don't sell time."
Rob Siltanen, chairman-chief creative officer, Siltanen &
Partners, owns the rights to the wee wisecracker Baby Bob.
Agencies have long rued compensation arrangements that see
them sized up by the number of man-hours they commit to solving
a marketer's problems rather than by the success of their solutions.
And, as consumer-empowering technologies such as DVRs put a premium
on agencies' ability to produce engaging content, they've created
an increasing number of entertainment properties, but they very
rarely get to own them. Now, finally, that is starting to change,
and others are adopting a Crispin approach, according to experts
involved in crafting agency-advertiser compensation contracts.
Innovation reaches critical mass
"The discussion is beginning to shift from 'What does
it cost to generate work and services a client wants?' to 'What
is the value of the services and materials the agency is creating
for the client?"' said Ronald Urbach, partner, Davis &
Gilbert. "Innovation is reaching a critical mass."
Like Crispin, Anomaly, the New York-based boutique started
by ex-TBWA executive Carl Johnson, eschews time sheets and instead
gets paid for a variety of activities. "We price ourselves
on the subjective theory of value," said partner Jason Deland.
"That allows us to structure more varied, entrepreneurial
compensation agreements." With client Virgin America, for
instance, Anomaly is helping design an in-flight entertainment
system that will contain content and be commerce-enabled. The
company will get a percentage of the revenue from the system's
sales.
Missed opportunities
One of the sorrier catalysts, from the perspective of older
general-market agencies, is a long list of missed revenue opportunities.
Goodby, Silverstein & Partners, San Francisco, which developed
the "Got Milk?" campaign in 1993, reaped no extra benefits
from the millions of dollars in licensing fees and royalties generated
after the campaign's launch. McCann Erickson created the concept
for client Staples' plastic Easy Button, a $4.99 gadget that's
sold more than 1 million units since its launch in January 2005,
but received no financial reward beyond its original fees.
"We certainly hope the agency will develop alternative
revenue sources for our clients," said Harold Sogard, partner
and general manager at Goodby. However, he said, when creative
produced for a marketer goes beyond its original intention of
selling a product or service, new language in some of the agency's
contracts calls for "some sort of royalty" to be paid.
Rob Siltanen, chairman-chief creative officer, Siltanen &
Partners, is well-known as the inventor of Baby Bob, a talking
baby with the mouth of a wisecracking old man, for client Freeinternet.com.
When the dot-com went out of business, Mr. Siltanen exchanged
rights to the character for the money owed the agency. He then
took Baby Bob to CBS, which used the character for a short time;
later, Quizno's used Baby Bob to hawk its sandwiches. Mr. Siltanen
won't reveal how much he's made by hanging onto character rights
but said, "It's been very lucrative."
Content creation
Agencies' moves into content creation -- such as Bartle Bogle
Hegarty, New York's co-production last year of an MTV special
that's set to become a TV show -- is another factor for rethinking
traditional labor-based compensation models. Agencies might share
syndication revenue or retain rights to creative content. When
Crispin created a video game for Burger King, it was paid a fee
in addition to what it is paid to create advertising, one executive
said, although the agency does not receive a percentage of sales.
A Crispin spokeswoman declined to comment.
Even agencies that remain focused on old-media advertising
are benefiting from the move away from cost-plus or labor-based
agreements.
Brad Brinegar, chairman-CEO of McKinney, Raleigh, N.C., is
a big believer that agencies should be paid for the value they
create and has been developing new compensation forms for several
years. With one client, in addition to a base fee, McKinney took
50,000 stock options in the company.
"They were growing sales and profits regularly; our assumption
is that we could increase their price-to-earnings ratio,"
he said. With another, McKinney aligned its financial objectives
with those of the client's chief marketing officer so the agency's
bonus was "based on the same criteria as his," Mr. Brinegar
said.
Long-running ads
Consider the value to a client of a campaign that's run over
a decade, such as MasterCard's "Priceless," created
by McCann. "We're pushing more and more" for contract
provisions that entitle agencies to additional payment if creative
is used beyond a certain amount of time, said Rick Kurnit, attorney,
Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz.
Another area under discussion: If an account leaves an agency
but the campaign created by the shop continues, should the agency
continue to be paid? "Perhaps the work can be used in one
geographic territory, such as the U.S., but if it goes global,
a new agreement is necessary," said Mr. Urbach, who advocates
approaching client-agency compensation agreements like prenuptial
agreements: "Instead of deciding it later, decide it now."
xxxxxxx
TBWA Drops Out of Sprint Creative Review / Agency Was Telecom's
Incumbent for Consumer Advertising
By Brooke Capps and Alice Z. Cuneo / Published: January 22,
2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Omnicom Group's TBWA/Chiat/Day, New
York, said it has dropped out of the Sprint creative advertising
account review.
Sprint's other incumbent, Publicis & Hal Riney, is still
in the review.
Publicis & Hal Riney, San Francisco, Sprint's longtime
agency for general advertising and the incumbent on the marketer's
business-to-business account, has said it will participate in
the pitch. TBWA handled Sprint's consumer advertising.
Sprint executives did not return calls and e-mails seeking
comment by deadline.
'Strategic decision'
In a statement released today, TBWA said, "This was a
strategic decision made with a clear understanding of Sprint's
challenged business situation, and how we can best help them going
forward. We remain very committed to Sprint as a partner for the
remaining aspects of service including retail and the marketing
services assignments we have through Tequila."
The No. 3 telecom company, which spends $1.6 billion in marketing,
cited a need for "fresh thinking" when it called the
account into review earlier this month.
Meetings with yet undetermined agencies are taking place this
week.
Xxxx
BELLWETHER
SET FAIR FOR 2007 UK ADVERTISING GROWTH
The Q4 2006 Bellwether Report, the quarterly survey of marketing
spend, published by the UK's Institute of Practitioners in Advertising
and researched by NTC Economics, reveals a stabilisation of marketing
budgets.
Contrasting with the sharp downgrades seen earlier in the year
this reflects improving business conditions. In fact, budget setting
across the whole marketing spectrum will be the most buoyant in
seven years for 2007-08.
Total marketing budgets were revised down in Q4, but only very
marginally. However, the internet saw by far the strongest upward
revision, with the sharpest gain since the first quarter of 2000.
Although traditional media still holds the lion's share of marketing
spend, the internet is now estimated to account for 5% of all
marketing budgets.
Highlights of the Q4 2006 report include:
Despite the improved performance in the second half of the
year, 2006 is likely to have seen the weakest growth in marketing
communications since 2002.
In Q4, 17% of companies reported increased total marketing
budgets while 18% reported a decrease, so only a marginal net
decline.
Although traditional advertising continued to lose share of
total marketing spend the overall reduction was slight. 18% of
companies reported a downward revision but 15% reported an increase.
Internet marketing budgets out performed all other sectors
in Q4, with a net balance of 31.5% of companies reporting an increase
across all business sectors.
Direct marketing was the only main category of marketing (i.e.
excluding the internet) to see a rise in budgets in Q4, with a
net balance of 4.1% of companies reporting an increase. Upward
budget revisions were linked to new campaigns to meet business
expansion as well as a shift in strategy towards direct marketing.
By sector, increases to budgets were most widely reported in
IT and computing, travel, entertainment, and the financial services.
Budget cuts were most widely reported in FMCG, industrial and
utilities and the autos sector.
Non-traditional marketing, including the internet and sponsorship
is so far showing the strongest growth in future spend, followed
closely by direct marketing and traditional advertising.
Comments IPA president David Pattison: "Business conditions
are continuing to improve with 2007 set to be a positive one for
all sectors, with indications that there will be strong growth
in future spend for both main media and non-traditional marketing."
WPP Group ceo Sir Martin Sorrell adds: "The UK, although
recently our weakest market internationally, is stabilising and
growing again. Q4 was stronger and budgets for 2007 are promising.
Again direct, interactive and internet are the star functional
sectors."
Aegis Group ceo Robert Lerwill says: "Digital excitement
shows no sign of abating, with ever more clients catching on.
The growth continues to come on all fronts: from those who went
digital early and like the results, as well as from the later
developers, who don't want to miss out a minute longer."
For full details of the report go to www.ipa.co.uk
Data sourced from IPA; additional conent by WARC staff, 16
January 2007
xxxx
The 12 Tenets of Social Media Marketing (and Why You Need to
Learn Them)
by B.L. Ochman / January
23, 2007
Marketing is a hard job. It fails almost as often as actors
looking for their big break.
The delicate relationship between management and marketing
is a dance roughly akin to that between fox and hen, but with
far less goodwill. To management, you're only as good as your
last campaign.
So let's look at "The 12 Tenets of Social Media Marketing"
to see how you can up your success rate.
I. The public is the Lord thy God
Ultimately, you can succeed only if your communications produce
results, which shall be known as return on investment, by reaching
the greater public. This can be achieved only if your product
doesn't suck and your communications are not only clear but also
interesting.
Verily, if you can become a useful source of information, your
message may be heeded, or at least looked at ever so briefly.
II. Thou shalt covet all media
Today media is a collective term for the producers of content
for mass and, yea, also for niche consumption. Thou must niche
or be niched. Thy niches may include surly teenagers in fly-over
states, as well as disgruntled consumers. To communicate with
them successfully you must approach them from the right perspective.
Thou shalt not piss them off by ignoring or patronizing them,
for if thou do they shalt bite you on the ass.
If you pitch big-time media, you need to have big-time story
ideas. However, despair not because these days everyone with a
Web site, newsletter, blog, e-zine, mail list or forum is a journalist.
III. Ignore not peer-to-peer media
Become familiar with, and participate in, forums, mail lists,
and discussion groups that pertain to your segment. Provide information
of value and your reputation will grow. Thou wilt not be sorry
that thou hast done this extra work.
Electronic media, of all kinds, is virgin territory for the
intrepid marketer. Useth video, podcasts, and blog advertising
to communicate.
IV. Thou shalt think globally and speak in tongues
Many perceive that a global marketing strategy is only suitable
for giants such as Proctor & Gamble and Microsoft, which have
big budgets to spend and big brands to promote. But the advent
of the Internet is the final stage in a process of globalization
that gives firms of all sizes the opportunity to sell their products
and services to the many countries of the world.
Only market to countries where thy sales items—product, idea
or event—affect their country and will be of particular interest
to their readers. Bother to hire a qualified translator rather
than relying on machine translations that can make you looketh
like the village idiot.
Be careful to make your communication with simple words, avoiding
idioms and complex sentence structures.
V. Thy communications must pass the "who cares?"
test
Abandon ye all communications that are long-winded, formulaic,
boring as hell, and laden with superlatives and marketing babble.
Write down your concept in one sentence. Then ask yourself,
and answer honestly, "So what?" If it still sounds like
a good idea, proceed to rewrite it, over and over, until it has
not one extra word.
VI. Thou shalt learn to create artful blog and forum comments
Yes, yes, yes, despite SEC requirements, bosses, shareholders
and lawyers, thou shalt participate in the social media sphere.
Write thy comments in a human, and not a godly voice.
Maketh thy comments in one-paragraph, in language appropriate
to the publication, and explaineth what thou art saying clearly.
Dispense with excessive exaggeration. Provideth contact details
in your signature.
VII. Thou shalt not talk shit
No one in any social medium will tolerate bluff or bluster.
They dislike anyone who takes forever to make a point. They particularly
don't like flacks or interviewees who try to make simple concepts
unnecessarily complex by burdening them with excessive technical
jargon or MBA-speak.
Clearly and transparently communicate facts and insight pertaining
to your company, its strategy, and its products… and therefore
appeareth intelligent.
VIII. Thou shalt not make someone else speak for thee
Write thy own comments, blog posts, articles, and emails. Flog
not. Do not think that nobody will know. Never, never let a lawyer
write anything, for all they talk is useless double-speak.
IX. Thou shalt not refuse to comment when thy company is under
fire
Diggeth a hole and place within it thy head only if thou carest
not that thy brand image will turn to doo-doo. "No comment"
is a fine phrase for royalty, criminals, and celebrities, but
not so great for corporations that have a responsibility to shareholders,
clients, and consumers.
Unfortunately, in difficult situations it may be impossible
for representatives to tell the media the whole truth. Try to
be honest about which subjects thou wilt be able to talk frankly
about, and which you may find difficult to comment upon.
In accordance with the sixth tenet, it's better to give a concise
response that is straight to the point than one that is evasive,
lengthy, and obviously spun.
X. Concern thyself with thy overall marketing strategy
Thy overall marketing strategy is an arduous process that requires
constant vigilance. To be successful thou must practice true multi-channel
marketing in which you synergize your advertising, PR, Internet
and sponsorship efforts to project a unified image and allow personality
to shine through the corporate shield.
XI. Give they brand to the consumer
They will take very good care of it, for they will give it
back to you in better shape than when they got it. Fear not that
thy consumer shall have input in your brand. But heed closely
thy clueless ad agency so it does not chargeth thee a hefty fee
when in fact the consumer creates thy ads.
XII. Remember: thou must keep holy the Internet.
The Internet has changed the nature of marketing irrevocably
in two distinct regards. It has changed the way companies communicate
with the public and the media. Thy public often is thy media as
well. Screw them not.
B.L. Ochman is a social media marketing strategist for S&P
500 companies, including McGraw Hill, IBM, Cendant, and American
Greetings. She publishes What's Next Blog and Ethics Crisis, where
readers can confess their worst ethics transgressions and others
can rate them on a scale of one to ten. She also blogs for MarketingProfs
Daily Fix Blog.
Marketing
on MySpace / by Stephan Spencer / January 2, 2007
With
tens of millions of users (but probably not the purported 100
million), MySpace.com is a force to be reckoned with. Especially
when you consider that MySpace apparently drives more traffic
to online retailers than MSN Search, according to some recent
Hitwise data.
But MySpace is hard for many of us adults to get our heads
around. It just doesn't seem logical: How does it hold the interest
of so many young people with short attention spans, despite the
fact that the design/usability is so atrocious, the Web page creation
platform is so frustratingly restrictive, and it's chock full
of so many profiles that are obviously fake, spam, duplicated,
or abandoned?
"Um, it's about looking cool, fitting in, and hanging
out, Duh!" one might imagine a teen MySpace user answering.
Then where do us adults feature in this? Besides offering a
tempting place for stalkers and voyeurs to hang out and follow
the daily lives of the teenagers who haven't made their profiles
private (can you say "Creepy!"?), MySpace is host to
concerned parents trying to keep tabs on their kids, college students,
obsessed sports fans, and realtors. In other words, the Average
Joe or Jane. MySpace is a real slice of humanity.
Of course within the MySpace ecosystem exist marketers. But
most are clueless. One would expect sophisticated MySpace presences
from big brand marketers. However, that is usually not the case.
And generally those that are present, like Blockbuster UK, 7Eleven,
and Meijer, lack key ingredients for MySpace success—like an impressive
number of "Friends."
What is probably horrifying to these brand marketers is that
employees and customers think nothing of developing a MySpace
presence on behalf of the company—one that may not be very flattering.
Consider, for example, these unofficial MySpace pages for Wal-Mart,
K-Mart, and Target. Undoubtedly, this leads to customer confusion,
because it can be difficult to ascertain the author of a MySpace
profile. And such unauthorized pages can tarnish the company's
reputation, depending on their content.
Before you leap in to MySpace as a marketer, you'd best understand
it. Because if you don't, the MySpace community can turn on you
the moment you make your first misstep. Just like bloggers can.
(Note: many MySpace users are bloggers too. MySpace supports blogging
within its platform.) The cardinal rule in MySpace is the same
one as in the blogosphere: Keep it real.
Still, despite the hazards, MySpace offers a lot promise as
a venue for marketers to hawk their wares. MySpace allows you
to interject yourself into existing networks of trust-based relationships
and to bond with your visitors in ways not possible elsewhere
on the Web. And you can interact with huge numbers of adults,
not just teenagers. Surprisingly, more than half of MySpace visitors
are age 35 or older, and more than two-thirds are age 25 or older,
according to comScore Media Metrix.
Do you have what it takes to crack MySpace? The most unlikely
of marketers seem to have it—bars, bands, and quirky dot-coms.
One of my favorite examples of MySpace marketing is Project Red.
Not only is Project Red a world-changing organization on a mission
to defeat AIDS in Africa, its MySpace profile is attractive and
engaging.
Other noteworthy examples come from Apple Computer, the Brooklyn
Museum, Drumz Clothing, the Orlando Magic, the movie studio that
produced Superman Returns, the comedy character Borat, and the
musical artist "Weird Al" Yankovic.
A couple of these I've been tracking for several months, watching
the size of their networks expand. First, consider Apple Computer.
Its various flavors of iPod Nano have a place on MySpace, e.g.
Pink Nano, which is enjoying a meteoric rise in Friend status.
I started tracking Pink Nano on October 15, when it had 1,500
MySpace friends. A week later, on October 22, it had climbed to
7,449 friends. On October 27, it was up to 37,070 friends. Now,
on December 3, as I write this article, it has reached 55,776.
Not a bad marketing job, Apple!
Now consider the "comeback king" of musical parody—"Weird
Al" Yankovic. He's using social media quite successfully
to help breathe new life into his 27-year-long music career—thanks,
in no small part, to YouTube and MySpace. Yankovic told Reuters/Billboard
in a recent interview that he had accumulated 155,000 MySpace
friends since he joined the site in July—all of which he had personally
added. He stated, "I used to be a little pickier. Now I just
kind of click as fast as I can." (I can only imagine the
Repetitive Stress Injury from that much clicking!) Here's the
kicker: a week after this article came out, he was already up
to 219,033 friends! Another seven days later, and Weird Al had
gained another 24,000 MySpace friends (up to 243,221). Now, on
December 3, it's at 325,614!
One small company that has enjoyed a degree of success in terms
of traffic and sales through MySpace is the online jewelry retailer
Pugster. Its mascot, a pug dog named Pinky, is the subject of
the MySpace profile—a clever move, as it puts a disarming "face"
to the company. The firm built up its MySpace page to a very respectable
8,053 friends. In a recent interview with me, Michael Boldin from
its online marketing team revealed some secrets of their success:
It's easy to get overwhelmed with the sheer numbers on MySpace—and
important to try to focus on marketing to the "right"
group for your product or service — otherwise you'll be spending
a LOT of time on people who will never be interested in you.
But, on the other hand, when starting off, you need to get
Friends. It's kind of a bragging right on MySpace. If you have
too few friends, it'll be tough to get the good ones—the ones
who will end up buying from you. So, before you go after those,
get a few hundred "bad" friends—bands are the easiest.
They'll give you a respectable number on your Friends list, and
will leave comments on your page—giving a little realism boost
to your profile—making the addition of friends of the "good"
type that much easier.
Where else could we find a place to actually build relationships
with people—who may or may not have heard of us before. We spend
time daily emailing people, and guess what, they email back. It
becomes the ultimate soft-sell tool.
Have patience. Without a huge brand presence, don't expect
to turn profits. The only investment is your time. As long as
you regularly give people something interesting—blogs, music,
and other tidbits that AREN'T related to your business—then you'll
develop enough trust for them to be interested in what you DO
sell.
Keep it personal—talk with the people as if you'd email a new
friend. Say "Hi," get to know them, and they'll want
to get to know you. If you try to sell, sell, sell, you'll have
a hard time earning respect on MySpace.
As far as layouts, there are a few "schools of thought"—one
says make it fancy and high end, but the other, and seemingly
more successful one, says simplicity is best. Since people are
browsing through so many profiles with the same layout, they look
for certain features in certain places. If you move too many things
around, you'll frustrate your visitors and they'll leave. Make
it intuitive and easy, just like a good e-commerce site.
If there's anything a "seasoned" MySpace user hates
it is a slow page. The MySpace site has loads of slow loaders.
You may get friends with a lot of stuff on your page, but they
won't actually spend the time to interact with you.
You know who else gets MySpace? Site owners like this one who
provide layouts, backgrounds, funny photos etc. to the MySpace
community. Those folks are sitting back, sipping pina coladas
and watching the moolah from Google AdSense roll in.
Xxxx
Marketing
to Generation X and Y
by Michael Fleischner / January 23, 2007
If you're trying to market to adults who were born between
1965 and 1994, then you need to understand the best method for
reaching generation X and generation Y.
Who is a part of Generation X? Gen Xers were born between 1965
and 1976 and make up about 17% of the U.S. population. As a whole,
this group is both independent and skeptical, existing in the
shadow of Baby Boomers. As they move into their 30s and 40s, Gen
Xers are establishing themselves as consumers who are starting
families and buying homes.
Who is a part of Generation Y? Individuals born between 1977
and 1994 are considered Gen Yers and make up about 25% of the
U.S. population. This group is generally idealistic, optimistic,
and patriotic. Gen Yers consume media in extremely fragmented
ways, representing the next big wave in our demographic makeup.
Gen Xers and Gen Yers have a number of things in common. Both
groups grew up with recessions, single-parent households, cable
TV, the Internet and other personal technology. Consequently,
these groups consume media differently from earlier generations.
Communicating with them through traditional marketing channels
can be difficult. So, how can you reach these groups, communicate
your message, and get them to take action?
The answer is more traditional than you think. In combination
with online marketing, direct mail is one of the most powerful
ways to market to both Gen X and Y.
According to a recent study conducted by InnoMedia, NuStats,
and Vertis, 87% of Gen Y and 86% of Gen X bring in the mail the
day it's delivered; and 73% of Gen Y and 68% of Gen X retail direct-mail
readers have used coupons received in the mail; Gen X and Y consumers
rate 75% of the mail they receive as valuable.
To reach Gen X and Y with direct mail, you should keep in mind
some basic marketing practices. Keep in mind that your direct
mail efforts can be supplemented with online marketing in the
form of targeted site advertising and keyword buys, or perhaps
you can give these consumers a reason to visit you online via
email (contests, sweepstakes, discounts, etc.).
Direct mail is most effective when you understand your audience,
time your campaign appropriately, provide a compelling offer,
and develop a relevant message:
Audience. Knowing your audience is essential for the success
of any direct marketing campaign. Having information about Gen
Xers or Yers in general terms is a place start, but you need to
dig deeper and develop a fuller understanding of the segment.
You should know their motivations, there greatest pains, their
latent needs—and what products or solutions they use. Once you've
gotten to know your audience, other marketing criteria can fall
into place.
Timing. Communicating your message at the right time can make
all the difference in your marketing results. Selling tax software
immediately after April 15th won't produce the results you're
looking for. You need to have an understanding of your audience's
timeline and when they are in the market to buy your product or
service. Be sure to give them enough time to respond to your offer,
but don't leave it open ended.
Offer. Many consumers need a reason to buy, especially Gen
Xers, who are normally skeptical. Your offer should provide some
benefit to the buyer as well as provide some level of comfort
in moving forward with a purchase. This can be in the form of
a satisfaction guarantee or something similar. One great technique
is to place your offer on the outside of the envelope that contains
your marketing materials. This can help to differentiate your
mail and get your envelope opened by prospects.
Message. Your message needs to resonate with prospective buyers.
Do you understand their needs? Have you communicated benefits
as well as features? Are you solving a problem for them? Have
you provided a simple, yet compelling message? Many direct marketers
talk about the "long" letter versus the "short"
letter. Studies validate the use of both. As long as your message
resonates with buyers, it doesn't matter how long it is. But be
sure to test your messages on an ongoing basis.
If you're marketing to either Generation X or Y, or both, use
direct mail in your marketing mix. Individuals in these groups
respond to direct mail. Keep in mind, however, that a direct marketing
piece should be supplemented with other forms of marketing—Internet
marketing, search engine optimization, advertising, etc.
Direct mail is your key to success with Generations X and Y
when used as the main vehicle of your marketing campaign.
Michael Fleischner is VP of marketing for an education planning
and finance company in central New Jersey and the founder of MarketingScoop.com
(www.marketingscoop.com). He has more than 12 years of marketing
experience and blogs at marketing-expert.blogspot.com.
xxx
Satisfying the 10 Cravings of a New Generation of Consumers
(Part 2 of 2)
by Lisa Johnson and Cheri Hanson / September 19, 2006
In Part 1 we discussed how some of the most recent cultural
touch points—groups riding the underground buzz on YouTube; MySpace
selling music from indie bands; and the "skinny jeans"
fashion trend—show a new market code at work. The young, tech-savvy
members of the Connected Generation are rewriting the rules and
changing how everyone will do business.
In our new book, Mind Your X's and Y's, we outline 10 cravings
that are driving this renegade new generation of consumers. Part
one explored the first five cravings: for extreme personalization,
adventure, loose social networks, brilliant design, and smart
editors. Before we move on to the last five, there are two critical
principles to understand about the Connected Generation.
Reconstructing the Market
When a band goes from dancing on treadmills in a low-budget
video clip to performing for the MTV Video Music Awards in a matter
of weeks, you know there's a change in the air. Clearly, underground
trends and finds have always filtered their way from the fringes
into the mainstream—especially if you're talking fashion or music.
What's different today is that the Connected Generation is completely
sidestepping the mainstream. Thanks to tightly knit peer networks
and online technology, indie bands, for example, don't need to
sign record deals. They can build a fan base on MySpace, pack
their local shows, and post pay-per-download digital files. No
middleman, no loss of control.
The new marketplace favors connected brands with three essential
components—community, content, and commerce. Think about MySpace
again. This popular networking portal has content (teens and young
adults posting their profiles, uploading photos, writing blogs,
and sharing messages), community (a dedicated group of users who
visit multiple times each day and conduct vast portions of their
lives online), and now, with its music sales, commerce. The brand
is unstoppable.
Breakaway Brands
To crack this new market code and understand the 10 cravings,
we studied hundreds of brands that are experiencing runaway success.
From Toyota's Scion to Jones Soda to Wikipedia and beyond, these
are the products, services, and organizations that are attracting
an unprecedented degree of buzz and customer loyalty.
We found that the most successful brands not only complete
the three-part business model—community, content, and commerce—but
also have implemented a "pull" philosophy in their sales
and marketing efforts.
The "go big, go loud, go often" approach just doesn't
cut it with the Connected Generation, which is all but immune
to traditional advertising. If the technology to block out unwanted
marketing messages does not already exist (such as TiVo and podcasts),
they will create it. But, they will pull in anything that is fun
or interesting and adds value to their busy lives.
The Connected Generation desires peer-like relationships with
the brands they love. Treat them with respect, satisfy their cravings,
and they will respond with unmatched enthusiasm and spread the
word faster and farther than ever before.
Here are the last five cravings that drive this powerful new
consumer group:
6. Keep it underground: The rejection of push advertising and
the rising influence of peer-to-peer networks
The Connected Generation has grown up feeling saturated with
advertising and marketing. They are suspicious of ordinary "push"
campaigns and gravitate toward integrated, contextual offerings
from trusted friends and members of their networks.
A select group of people discovers something new, from shoes
to bands to politics to neighborhoods, and translates it to satisfy
a much wider audience. This is the way of the underground.
7. Build it together: Connected citizens explore their creative
power and influence change
There are currently one billion people connected online around
the world. With so many people conducting large portions of their
lives online, we've only just begun to tap into the power of Web-based
networks.
The Connected Generation is becoming intoxicated by its growing
ability to spark change—both as consumer groups and as end users.
This awareness is spurring mass creativity and launching a power
shift away from companies and into the hands of consumers.
8. Bring it to life: Everyday activities are orchestrated to
deliver a dramatic sense of theater
From beverages to designer fashions to dinnertime solutions,
brand theater is popping up in virtually every industry as savvy
companies deliver compelling and entertaining new experiences.
Brand theater allows companies of all kinds to create emotional
connections with their customers. It takes typical experiences
a few steps forward by engaging the senses, the imagination, and
the spirit, and transforms routine experiences into riveting entertainment.
9. Go inward: Spiritual hunger and modern media find common
ground
Increasingly, the meaningful life is defined as the spiritual
life, and spirituality has become a dominant value among today's
consumers. Companies and media channels are introducing new products,
services, and forums to support this spiritually hungry generation.
The Connected Generation has embraced modern media and blurred
the lines between secular and sacred, finding spirituality in
all aspects of their lives.
10. Give back: Redefining volunteerism and the meaning of contribution
There's a new spirit of volunteerism in the air, led by a young
Connected Generation that has new ideas about how to give back.
Today's volunteers want to give their time and talent instead
of simply writing a check. Modern volunteer associations combine
fresh structures with fun people and a chance to make direct,
meaningful connections with the community. These new giving models
are igniting a generation and making their volunteer efforts convenient,
high impact, and more emotionally satisfying.
Lisa Johnson and Cheri Hanson are cofounders of the Reach Group
(www.reachgroupconsulting.com), a boutique consultancy that provides
fresh insights and clear thinking about the Connected Generation.
With three divisions—ReachWomen, Reach X and Y, and Content Strategy—the
Reach Group provide tools for engaging the modern marketplace.
Xxxxxxxxx
Wendy's
Taps Publicis Shops for $300 Million Account / Saatchi Takes Creative,
MediaVest Gets Buying and Planning Duties
By Brooke Capps and Lisa Sanders / Published: January 24, 2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Wendy's is moving its $300 million
creative account from Interpublic Group of Cos.' McCann Erickson
to Publicis Groupe's Saatchi & Saatchi, and Saatchi sibling
MediaVest will handle media buying and planning responsibilities,
the marketer said today.
The fate of the Wendy's account has been hotly speculated for
more than a year.
The media incumbent was Interpublic's Universal McCann. Wendy's
also said MDC Corp.'s Kirshenbaum Bond & Partners will work
on designated creative projects.
Year of speculation
The fate of the account has been hotly speculated about for
more than a year. A number of agencies have met with Ian Rowden,
senior VP-chief marketing officer, according to these executives.
A Wendy's spokesman couldn't be reached, but Mr. Rowden, contacted
by cellphone, refused to comment, saying he was in a meeting.
The agencies referred calls to the marketer and a Wendy's spokesman
declined comment.
According to one executive familiar with situation, Mr. Rowden
declined the traditional pitch process in favor of a series of
meetings with agencies, in which each agency presented past work
and talked a little about ideas for the client. "They picked
an agency and not a campaign and that is how you should find an
agency," said the executive.
Wendy's spent $387 million in measured media in 2005 and $290
million from January through September 2006, according to TNS
Media Intelligence. With only national and some cable responsibilities,
McCann Erickson and Universal McCann handled about half of that
media outlay.
Good end after bad start
Wendy's rival and market leader McDonald's today reported record
earnings for 2006. Wendy's, the No. 3 fast-food chain (behind
Burger King), on Jan. 5 posted improved same-store sales during
the fourth quarter of 2006, though last year started out disastrously,
with negative same-store sales in the first half. Those results
had compounded an already bad situation, as 2005 ended with losses.
That poor performance prompted a franchisee revolt, and activist
investor Nelson Peltz won seats for himself and two disciples
on the company's board. Last April, Chairman-CEO Jack Schuessler
was ousted.
Kerri Anderson, named CEO-president in November after serving
as interim chief for several months, reshuffled management and
marketing, trimmed employees and shed assets to cut $100 million
in costs.
While Wendy's same-store sales have turned positive, executives
close to the matter said franchisees remained unhappy with sales,
given its long drought and the improved sales at rival burger
chains. "How long can you be down," asked one industry
observer.
Vidal Partnership, an independent agency based in New York,
retains duties for Hispanic marketing.
Kate MacArthur and Matthew Creamer contributed to this report.
Google
Video, YouTube to Remain Separate Operations / Search Giant to
Have Its Properties 'Play to Their Respective Strengths'
By Abbey Klaassen /
Published: January 25, 2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Google unveiled the first integration
between Google Video and YouTube today, when it announced it was
adding YouTube video results to its Google Video search index.
The company issued a statement to update the status of Google
Video and YouTube and said the two services would remain largely
independent and "play to their respective strengths."
For YouTube, that is remaining the destination for uploading,
viewing and sharing videos; for Google Video, that remains search
and creating new video technologies.
Video search destination
So it would appear Google Video is viewed less as an online
video viewing destination and more primarily as a video search
destination.
Google purchased YouTube for $1.65 billion in early October.
The deal closed mid-November but the companies have, until now,
stayed relatively mum on whether they would remain entirely independent
or work together. Some have even suggested Google should merge
Google Video into the more popular and widely known YouTube. It
appears the answer to that question lies somewhere in the middle
of range of speculation.
Google will offer YouTube access to search and monetization
platforms -- although the statement didn't indicate what exactly
that monetization would look like. Currently, YouTube has sold
branded channels and worked with advertisers to sponsor user-generated
content contests. It has also worked with TV networks and movie
studios to help promote programs and films and offers advertisers
the opportunity to buy plum front-page placement. It recently
signed a deal with Verizon that offers a subscription mobile service.
"Ultimately, we envision most user-generated and premium
video content being hosted on YouTube so that it can further enhance
the YouTube experience," the statement read. "We also
envision YouTube benefiting from future Google Video innovations
-- especially those involving video search, monetization and distribution."
For
Super Bowl Buy, Think Local / With Six Days to Go, Spots Still
Available at Affiliates
By Claire Atkinson /
Published: January 25, 2007
NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- With six business days to go until
Super Bowl Sunday, the CBS TV Stations group has two to three
spots left in each of its local markets for advertisers seeking
to take advantage of cheaper local ad buys than coughing up $2.6
million for a national buy.
To get around Anheuser-Busch's beer stranglehold on the Super
Bowl in 2005, Heineken found airtime for its ad with Brad Pitt
on local affilaites.
According to executives on both the sales and buying side of
the big game, the priciest 30-second spots are selling for around
$300,000, and, not surprisingly, the most expensive local market
is Chicago, as the hometown Bears are squaring off against the
Indianapolis Colts. Audience levels are expected to be highest
those two markets.
Good matchup for CBS
The matchup is good news for CBS, which owns its affiliate
station in the Chicago market. Julio Marenghi, president-ad sales
at the CBS TV Station group, said most new money had come from
advertisers that had negotiated a contingency clause that stipulated
they would buy time in the game if certain teams reached the final.
Otherwise, he said he hasn't experienced a surge of last-minute
buys and that he expects local sales will be wrapped up next week.
Marketers who can't buy into the big game because of category
exclusivity clauses can get around that restriction by doing a
local buy. In 2005, Heineken got around Anheuser-Busch's dominance
of the beer category on the national level with a huge local spot
buy for its ad featuring actor Brad Pitt on local Fox stations.
Fox aired the Super Bowl last year.
"There are people who wait to see who the teams are to
see if [the game is] going to be exciting," said Kathy Crawford,
president-local broadcast at MindShare Worldwide.
Tough to get around exclusivity
But it might be tougher this year to orchestrate a local buy
to get around exclusivity, because CBS owns many of its affiliates
in major markets, Ms. Crawford said, and it will likely restrict
those stations from selling ads to competitors of marketers that
have already bought airtime on a national level.
CBS owns stations in Austin, Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Dallas,
Denver, Detroit, Green Bay, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, New
York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Sacramento, Salt Lake City and
San Francisco.
While a local buy might seem like good value, Ms. Crawford
said its important to realize that marketers aren't simply buying
an in-game spot from the local affiliate, because affiliates often
only allow buys in a package of spots that include pre-game, post-game
and possibly other nights in prime-time that week. Marketers need
to be prepared to factor that into their buys, she said.
Now that the matchup is decided, a number of marketers have
chosen to publicize their participation in the game, including
Walt Disney Co., InfoUSA's SalesGenie.com, Sprint and Coca-Cola
Co. On a national level, CBS said it is 85% sold and is tying
up a variety of negotiations.
Marketers gauge interest
JoAnn Ross, CBS president-ad sales, said yesterday at a Super
Bowl panel, "Like any other event, like the Academy Awards,
people want to wait to the last minute to see if they are going
to get a discount. What has happened this year is that after our
championship game on Sunday, which had one of the biggest ratings
in years, there has been a lot of fresh interest."
The National Football Conference game on Fox between the Chicago
Bears and the New Orleans Saints drew 43.2 million views and a
25.1 rating. The big numbers point to a huge interest in the Feb.
4 Super Bowl. Meanwhile, 46.7 million viewers tuned into CBS to
watch Colts make it past their American Football Conference nemesis
New England Patriots, the most-watched AFC championship since
1986.
"It might be a very intelligent thing for CBS to tell
people how well the games did last Sunday," said Aaron Cohen,
senior VP-director of national broadcast at Horizon Media.
CBS also has plans to involve its star news anchor Katie Couric
in its Super Bowl coverage. Ms. Couric, who hosts the "CBS
Evening News," will be featured in the pre-game package of
events.
Mainstream
marketers finally embrace the Web: What Took So Long?
by Kirk Drummond, January 2007 issue
A spate of articles highlighting various industries' entry
into online branding begs the question, "What took so long?"
The Internet has been a legitimate advertising vehicle for more
than 10 years. Why are mainstream marketers just now embracing
its huge potential as a branding medium?
Arguably, there have been barriers. Poky Web connections were
an issue up until a few years ago. But today nearly 80 percent
of U.S. Web users connecting to the Internet from home do so via
broadband, according to Nielsen NetRatings.
To a certain degree, lack of vision accounts for the delayed
reaction. Many marketers initially viewed the Web as nothing more
than "brochureware" or limited to below-the-line transactional
support, not as a platform for engagement or a vehicle for delivering
rich, brand-building experiences. In many cases, where senior
management overlooked the opportunities, grassroots efforts in
the organization served as the catalyst. There was a gap between
those who foresaw the Internet's potential and key strategists
and decision makers.
Finally, agency partners were also slow to adapt. Traditional
agencies, like their clients, focused on the Web as a transactional
medium and didn't initially recognize its promise. Only now, as
more of their branding budgets shift from TV to online, are these
agencies considering online as a core strategic component.
>>What did early adopters know that others missed? While
some companies hesitated on the road to online branding, others
overcame the hurdles and evolved their offerings for the Internet.
Nike's first online offering wasn't as compelling as today's,
but it was there, and it was good (if not great) based on what
was possible at the time. What did Nike have that others lacked?
Turns out that it's more about what the brand didn't have - fear.
Nike's risk-taking shows in its current foray with Apple's iPod.
>>Unprecedented opportunity. What visionary companies
including Nike, AT&T, and IBM understood early on is that
the Web's interactive nature makes it an incredibly fertile environment
for developing a brand. Done right, you can achieve a stronger
emotional response, develop a longer relationship, give people
a chance to delve as deeply as they desire, and it's all just
one click away from a transactional opportunity.
Marketers are now discovering that online experiences can actually
be the hub of branding strategies, not just a single spoke. While
high-end brands may have been the first to capitalize on the Web's
potential, companies of any size can, and should, add the Web
to their strategic mix.
>>Interactive edge. The Web's interactive capabilities
make it a compelling branding tool. Because it's a two-way medium,
it allows for rich content delivery and significant user engagement.
It offers connections to valuable and informative experiences
based on the viewer's unique needs. Some 80 percent of marketers
surveyed by Forrester and the Association of National Advertisers
said they planned to reduce TV ad spending by at least 25 percent
and reallocate funds to Web advertising.
>>Where do you go from here? If you haven't made the
shift to online, start exploring your brand's opportunities immediately.
Find champions within your organization and generate momentum
to integrate online branding into your marketing mix. Know that
senior executives may not buy the concept immediately - branding
online is complex, not without risk, and therefore a little scary.
Offset any fear with a well-designed strategy. A good way to start
is by partnering with a "solution-agnostic" agency -
one that understands the intricacies of the online space, how
to create strong brand-building experiences, and can maximize
the effectiveness of each marketing vehicle. It takes more than
a clever concept to compete.
Kirk Drummond is the vice president of creative and innovation
for T3. (kirk.drummond@t-3.com)
"The
Week" Willing to Prove Its Worth/ Offers Ad Effectiveness
Research to Almost All Its Advertisers
By Nat Ives / Published: January 26, 2007
NEW
YORK (AdAge.com) -- Ever since the internet came along, advertisers
have gotten used to seeing how many people are clicking on their
ads in near real-time. Despite the pressure that put on old-line
media to improve its slower and less exact proofs of return on
investment, offering outside research to advertisers for every
buy is far from the norm. Now The Week magazine is trying to take
advantage of that tension by promising third-party ad-effectiveness
research to any advertiser who buys at least three ad pages and
customized research for anyone running at least six pages.
Crucial clients
Plenty of other titles provide varying degrees of research,
but most often it is done for crucial clients or those with large
integrated buys, said Eric Blankfein, senior VP-channel insights
director, Horizon Media. "Even if you're a big advertiser,
in a lot of cases research still isn't part and parcel,"
he said. "You certainly expect verification for a schedule.
Ad recall is not something you would always expect."
Justin Smith, president of The Week, said offering research
to just about everyone is a something his advertisers should love.
"Marketers love putting money into the channels that work
and less into the channels," he said. "We're not only
tracking our engagement, reader demographics and psychographics
but ad effectiveness. It's a bit of throwing down the gauntlet."
"A lot of big advertises have twisted the arms of media
owners and said 'Do this for me if I throw down this money,' but
I don't think anyone's baked it into the heart of the business
model, which is our intention," he said.
Dangling a carrot
Mr. Blankfein called the offer appealing. "It's a least
a carrot to get some advertising to come in."
The Week, which Dennis Publishing introduced to the U.S. in
2001, enjoyed meteoric growth in ad page sales in its early years
but has lost some momentum as it matured. Ad pages were essentially
flat last year, up 0.7% over 2005 with a total of 572.3, according
to the Publishers Information Bureau. Pages rose 8.6% in 2005
after jumping 25.5% in 2004.
The Week reported an average paid and verified circulation
of 439,401 in the first half of 2006, the most recent figure available,
according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations.