Category Archives: Marketing and Media

9.6 Billion Coming for Dinner – how can we feed them?

Posted on April 21, 2014 by davetuchler

If you are reading this and you’re not hungry, be thankful. If you are hungry, remember what it feels like, and get yourself a snack. In either case it’s important that you then read this post.

There are expected to be about 9.6 billion people roaming the planet by 2050 – 35% above today’s 7.1 billion, growing 190,000 daily for the next 36 years. Who’s going to feed them all? This is a huge challenge – – we cannot do this on ramen alone.

A new initiative is exploring ways to fit everyone around that big dinner table in 2050, using solutions we can all live with. It’s called FutureFood 2050. More below, but it considers novel approaches such as 3-D food printing, leveraging the awesome power of the world’s women, and more.

THE CHALLENGE

This issue starts with a large serving of irony: according to worldhunger.org, about 900 million people regularly go to bed hungry – – about one in six people in developing countries. Yet, we produce enough calories globally to feed everyone now. (Daily per-capita food production in 2012: about 2700 calories (FAO), more than the 2000-2500 recommended for adult women and men).

The problem, as we know, is partially one of distribution – the food may exist, but many people simply have no access. Unfortunately there isn’t (not yet, anyway) a way to electronically transmit calories around the world.

Why is this so hard to fix? We did figure out how to get creme filling inside a Twinkie, right?

Well, it’s just a little more complicated – – there are some major dynamics at work, including:
– POVERTY. Between 1-2 billion people live on $1.25/day or less, concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.
– CONFLICT/DICTATORSHIPS/CORRUPTION. These isolate refugees, or divert needed aid, or both.
– INFRASTRUCTURE. About half of the food grown in developing countries is wasted because of insufficient processing, packaging and storage capability. And it’s often impossible to import due to lack of reliable transport. Related to this is access to water; an estimated 800 million people don’t have access to clean water.
– CLIMATE CHANGE. Whether you call it Global Warming or not, extreme droughts, flooding and the like disrupt ability to grow crops efficiently.
– ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY. Industry faces increasing challenges in producing food in a sustainable, responsible way. And there is a phenomenal amount of food wasted in developed countries.

THE PATH TO A SOLUTION WE CAN AGREE ON

The most important step has been recognizing the problem. Importantly, the UN, through its Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), has conducted World Summits on Food Security to develop policy solutions to solve hunger.

But that’s at a policy level – ultimately consumer acceptance, with willingness to compromise, is key to program adoption. And that’s not always easy. There have certainly been some dramatic food-centered communications over recent years. But they’re often at either end of the ’science is always bad’ or ’science is the only solution’ spectrum. In reality, most actions balance benefit with consequences; progress is made by objectively agreeing on serving the common good.

So how can we identify programs that we can all live with? I think we can agree that this is a problem worth solving together.

The Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) has created FutureFood 2050 to take the discussion out of the conference rooms and to the people, to create an open dialogue and ultimately workable solutions.

[IFT has 18,000 global members; they are often thought of as food scientists but their purview also includes most of the food supply chain.]

FutureFood 2050 will work over the next 18 months or so, featuring 75 conversations with the world’s leading independent-minded thought leaders, about how they think we can get to a healthier, safer and better-fed planet. These opinion leaders will include policy makers, cultural influencers, scientists, engineers, avant-garde chefs, entrepreneurs, and more.

The first three interviews, covering 3-D food printing, leveraging the power of women, and an ‘Evergreen Revolution” (agricultural productivity without ecological harm) are already available on the website: www.futurefood2050.com. Very interesting reading.

These interviews will then be distilled into a documentary by Scott Hamilton Kennedy, an Academy Award-nominated director, to be released in 2015. As he said in an interview recently: “the hard part isn’t getting great content, it’s ‘how do you fit this amazing conversation into just 90 minutes’?”.

2050 seems a long time away, but world hunger is a massively complicated problem to solve, and it’s not too early to start. Keep your eyes open as new interviews are conducted – – ultimately solutions may well come from the most unlikely places.

And once we solve that, we’ll work on getting the Cubs into the World Series.

1 Comment

Posted in Marketing and Media, Marketing Strategy, Social Media, Technology and tagged 3-D food printing, 3-D printing, Evergreen Revolution, FAO, FutureFood 2050, hunger, IFT, Institute of Food Technologists, Scott Hamilton Kennedy, UN, United Nations, water, world hunger, world population growth, World Summit on Food Security. Bookmark the permalink.

SELFIES: Narcissism is now officially a trend (How can you tell?)

Posted on April 14, 2014 by davetuchler

The youth of our society regularly assault the rest of us with a regular stream of silly fads, most of which mercifully fade from view in short order (think Cronuts, #anything, the phrase ‘YOLO’, and hopefully soon, Bieber).

However, a select few cross over into the magical land of Trends, which have more longevity, presumably because they offer something of (more) lasting value.

Last week’s Sunday comics provided an unexpected validation of the latest fad-to-trend transition: the Selfie.

Of course you know that selfies are photos taken of one’s self, in some unique situation, typically for the purpose of sharing (usually via social media) to demonstrate how fabulous your life is. Recent selfies in the news have included our President, Ellen DeGeneres and Boston Red Sox slugger David Ortiz. All have fabulous lives.

Last week, 3 comics (‘Doonesbury’, ‘Dustin’ and ‘The Lockhorns’) featured the Selfie.

Now, for this writer to extract deeper meaning from the comics is not news.

However, it is particularly instructive when you consider that the average age of the cartoonists (Garry Trudeau; Steve Kelley/Jeff Parker; Bunny Hoest/John Reiner) is 65!

As an activity that started with teens and spread via social media, one would hardly expect this totally narcissistic behavior to be recognized, let alone embraced by retirement-age journalists.

And yet, to quote Edna Mode: “…here we are”.

In the case of selfies, this is one technology and social media-driven fad that has gone mainstream. Who would have guessed?

So what, you say?

1) Demographics, technology and social change are shifting so rapidly that generalizing about which groups will be trend adopters isn’t necessarily a good idea.

A recently published Pew Study finds that while older consumers are indeed less likely to be online than younger consumers, still, 59% of consumers 65+ are going online, and 82% of those are online regularly.
Think about that the next time someone assumes that xyz technology or app is ‘only going to be popular among younger consumers’.

2) Don’t overlook the comics as a barometer of the national social conversation.

We have seen a little of what the future looks like. And apparently, it looks like ourselves at arm’s length.

2 Comments

Posted in Marketing and Media, Marketing Strategy, Social Media and tagged 2014 trends, Bunny Hoest, doonesbury, dustin, Edna Mode, fads, Garry Trudeau, Jeff Parker, John Reiner, lockhorns, Pew Research, selfie, selfies, seniors online, Steve Kelley, trends. Bookmark the permalink.

Chicago IFT: Michael Jacobson, CSPI, the Food Babe and the curious impact of social media

Posted on February 11, 2014 by davetuchler

I had the privilege of attending a recent meeting of the Chicago Section IFT (Institute for Food Technologists). The guest speaker was Dr. Michael Jacobson, Executive Chairman of the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), who spoke about America’s progress in becoming a healthier-eating nation.

Dr. Michael Jacobson

Over the last 40 years or so, the CSPI has helped to reduce saturated fats, sodium and sugar in our food supply, among other things. While CSPI has often been a thorn in the side of Big Food in America, its efforts have resulted in meaningful change, usually brought about by government mandate (as opposed to corporate altruism). And Jacobson is no party-line activist – – he independently assesses the social benefits vs cost on any initiative, including things as controversial/PC as GMOs (he’s open-minded on this, in case you were wondering).

My key takeaway: regardless of the advances in food science, our chances of becoming a healthier nation lie in the hands (and mouths) of the consumer. The locus of influence in food and nutrition is becoming decidedly less institutional.

Food Scientists – heal!
Dr. Jacobson offered that while food scientists have culpability in having created most of the ‘Franken-foods’ that he reviles (“…a breakfast cereal that is nothing more than vitamin-enriched marshmallows…”), these scientists now play a key role in creating healthier alternatives that can be adopted by mainstream America.

Two things occurred to me during Dr. Jacobson’s presentation, illustrating both the weakness and strength of the consumer:

1) You can build it but they will not necessarily come. These healthier foods need to appeal to intended consumers for this to work, as was brought home by an attendee who commented that her school district’s new, more nutritional lunches, in addition to costing more, are also discarded much more often by the kids.

The problem is that consumers typically don’t want foods that make health claims. Putting ‘reduced sodium’ on a package, for example, is almost like saying ‘don’t buy me’.

So the conundrum is: how do you get people to eat healthier foods without them knowing it? Not easy.

2) According to Dr. Jacobson, the rise in social media has accelerated the process overall, despite consumers’ sometimes misguided crusades.
Consumers, who previously had no voice, are now collectively applying pressure through social media.

Just this week, the so-called ‘Food Babe’ helped prompt the removal of azodicarbonamide from Subway bread, through a petition that is at 78,000 signatures and counting. We have been unable to detect one shred of relevant credentials in the area of nutrition, food science, or science in general, about the Food Babe. She apparently has an undergraduate degree in computer science. But she cleans up well, is able to get access to influential people, and operates a successful blog. And guess what – she’s helping dictate your food options! Deal with it.

Vani Hari – the Food Babe

Earlier examples of removed ingredients include:
– Kraft Singles removing an artificial preservative (sorbic acid)
– General Mills’ Cheerios removing GMOs
And that’s just 2014.
– Other recent examples are here, including Starbucks, Gatorade, Kraft Mac and Cheese, and Chick-Fil-A. These are not inexpensive or simple changes to make, and speak to the power of the consumer.

Yes, the consumer is a fickle, capricious creature and quite often prone to acting immediately (or signing petitions) without checking facts. But overall, the ability to project a collective voice is starting to make a difference in the food landscape – – and on balance, it appears to be for the better.

First Ever Battle of the Super Bowl Ad Reviewers!

Posted on February 4, 2014 by davetuchler

Ever wonder why you never totally agree with Super Bowl ad reviewers?
Well, other than for a few good ads* they mostly don’t agree with each other either.

Doberhuahua

The Armchair MBA has selflessly taken on what is certainly is a vast unfulfilled need and compiled a comparison of 9 disparate SB ad reviewers just for you! Wow! Almost as much fun as being a Broncos fan!

Just click on the chart below to see that while there is some consistency, in the end advertising is still an art and everyone’s got their opinion. (You can click on the chart twice to make it even more readable.)

(*Generally universally liked: Budweiser, Cheerios, Radio Shack, Microsoft – – although I’m not in the bag for all of them)

The reviewers:

Kellogg Graduate School of Management
Advertising Age
Wall Street Journal
Chicago Tribune
Entertainment Weekly
Variety
Slate
Yahoo Sports
New Yorker

I’ve provided my own opinion, to make it an even 10.

Green/Yellow/Red ratings were my best interpretations of what the reviewers meant. White means they didn’t review this particular ad – – which in itself tells you something. They are grouped based on my ratings, on an alphabetical basis by brand within ranking.

My evaluations are generally based on the Kellogg ADPLAN approach, which is becoming the standard:
– Attention
– Distinction
– Positioning
– Linkage
– Amplification
– Net Equity

However, I also incorporated a liberal dose of my visceral reaction during the game.

Quick commentary: The Super Bowl is a unique marketing environment where stakes and expectations are high, and the bar for breakthrough is considerably higher than any other day.
Advertisers use the SB for much more than the eyeballs – – as a way to make a corporate statement, introduce something new, reposition themselves, set up other promotional activity, and many other things.
So these spots can be seen through many different lenses, which is why reviews often differ dramatically.

Having said that, sometimes an ad just sucks any way you look at it.

Not included in my ratings (but increasingly important) is how long of a tail these ads might have – – what their viral reach, impact and duration becomes.

Maybe next year.

5 Comments

Posted in Branding, Marketing and Media, Marketing Strategy and tagged 2014 Super Bowl advertising, ADPLAN, Advertising Age, Advertising review, Audi, Axe, Bank of America, Beats Music, Beckham undies, Bud Light, Budweiser, Butterfinger Peanut Butter Cups, CarMax, Cheerios, Chevy Silverado, Chevy Trucks, Chicago Tribune, Chobani, Chrysler 200, Coca-Cola, Dannon, Doritos, Entertainment Weekly, GEICO, GoDaddy, Heinz, Highlander, honda, Hyundai Elantra, Hyundai Genesis, Intuit, Jaguar, Jeep, Kellogg, Kia K900, M&Ms, Maserati Ghibli, Microsoft, New Yorker, NFL, Oikos yogurt, Quickbooks, Radio Shack, Russell Wilson, Slate, SodaStream, Sonos, Sprint, Squarespace, Subway, Super Bowl, Super Bowl advertising, T-Mobile, Tim Tebow, TurboTax, U2 Red, Variety, Volkswagen, wall street journal, WeatherTech, Wonderful Pistachios, Yahoo Sports. Bookmark the permalink.

Top 10 2013 Mostly Accidental Marketing Lessons

Posted on December 30, 2013 by davetuchler

This is the time of year where instead of being productive, people put together lists.
So here’s my look back at 10 events in 2013 that provided (purposely or not) great learning.

2013 Lesson 1: Measure Twice, Cut Once. Make that: Measure three times.
Healthcare.gov rollout
(honorable mention for Chicagoans: Ventra public transit card rollout).
– So many lessons here. It’s the lesson that keeps on giving. Reminder: even if your brand isn’t one-sixth of the national economy you probably still want to test a new e-commerce site. Test, test and then test again.

2013 Lesson 2: A brand CAN do a 180 in a Single Day
Miley Cyrus
– And in this case it took about 5 minutes. The recipe: take one tweens’ idol named Hannah Montana. Remove most clothes, liberally add makeup, a big foam finger and nationally televised awards show; mix aggressively using the body and add a large dash of idiot grin. Voila! You’ve now transformed from Hannah Montana into what looks like the love child of Gene Simmons and Dita Von Teese, without the charm.
The winner: probably Miley and her handlers, but hard to know yet. The clear losers: Millions of formerly innocent Hannah fans. Also, the general cultural level in the US.
So yes, it is possible to completely change your brand’s image in a day. But it might involve twerking.

2013 Lesson 3: There is such a thing as too much transparency
Lululemon
– Due to quality control snafus, Lululemon’s yoga pants delivered a little more than was supposed to meet the eye. The media, always a model of sober restraint when it comes to high-minded topics like see-through clothing, did its best to spin this story as salaciously as possible. Ultimately it went viral, resulting in loss of gobs of market value, as well as Lulu’s top management. At least they kept their sense of humor about it. (actually, there is a real lesson here: at the end of the day it’s about the product – and you can never take your eye off the ball).

2013 Lesson 4: The early bird still catches the worm – – if he tweets about it.
Oreo cookies
– We now live in an era that enables, and requires, real-time marketing. As has been reviewed ad nauseam (guilty!), Oreo slam-dunked it with a timely tweet during the Super Bowl blackout. Meanwhile, given the opportunity of Marco Rubio’s magic cotton-mouth TV moment, the Poland Spring ad team not only didn’t stick the dive, they missed the pool entirely.

2013 Lesson 5: When life gives you lemons, make lemonade. When your meatball supplier tries to slip you some horsemeat, clean house IMMEDIATELY.
IKEA
– When IKEA learned that some of its famous meatballs (150 million annually!) might contain traces of horsemeat, it immediately got rid of all meatballs in inventory, whether suspect or not. Cost of write-off? Probably pretty high. Benefit to reputation by immediately taking action? Priceless. Sales of meatballs since then? UP.

2013 Lesson 6: Hint: ‘Fail Fast’ is really just a euphemism for Test and Learn. It doesn’t mean your goal is actually to fail fast.
JC Penney
– Here is a retailer that tried to do a 180 without twerking. Or more importantly, without considering that its customers preferred periodic discounts. Boom.
Easier to adapt to customer preferences than to try to force them to adapt to you.

2013 Lesson 7: There is No Such Thing as Bad PR (at least for Jeff Bezos)
Amazon
– Amazon’s eerie delivery drones cleverly debuted on ’60 Minutes’ the day before Cyber Monday. Never mind that if you give it about 5 seconds’ thought, the barriers are significant (snow? wind? power lines? privacy issues? teen boys with slingshots?) – what it really shows is that in addition to any product you can think of, Amazon’s mission apparently also includes delivering PR to all homes.

2013 Lesson 8: If you go for the ‘wink-wink, joke’s on me’ approach, and people don’t get it, then ‘wink-wink, the joke’s on you’.
Honda/Michael Bolton Holiday campaign
– If you didn’t see them, these spots feature the man of the strained tenor and shorn mullet singing soulful holiday-esque tunes from atop a Honda, next to a Honda, in a Honda showroom, behind a piano, behind a guitar, all to the indecipherable reactions of surprised, baffled, younger presumed car shoppers. It’s difficult to tell what the point is. The obvious assumption is that this is a quid pro quo: the 60-year old Bolton (perfect for a younger target!) has a new album that needs promoting (true) and Honda needs some breakthrough quality in the holiday car ad environment that generally features obnoxiously gift-wrapped luxury cars (true again).
But what’s Bolton doing up there on that car? Apparently, according to Adweek, this campaign is ‘poking fun at itself with melodramatic guitar solos and idiotic lyrical gems like “This special time of year, it’s filled with joy and cheer, for me and you and you and you, too’.” Well, I know something about misplaced melodrama and idiot lyrics and I didn’t catch it. If there’s a wink in there somewhere, it’s subtle enough as to be invisible.
So we’re left with a spot with bland cars, being promoted by bland music – – a perfect match, but I suspect probably not what they were going for.
The American public as a rule doesn’t respond well to ‘subtle.’ Witness, if you will, Ron Burgundy for Dodge – – a more effective celebrity hookup.

2013 Lesson 9: When in Rome, do as the Romans do. When trying to break into Southern California, and your name contains the word ‘Fresh’, don’t pre-wrap the fruits and vegetables.
Tesco Fresh & Easy
– This one already has a coda. Big UK retailer Tesco created its Fresh & Easy chain in late 2007 to penetrate the Western US market with a fresh new smaller format store, famously after significant consumer research. The experiment failed when consumers didn’t respond well to new formats, new food presentation, and in some cases, truly foreign concepts. Ultimately F&E was sold to Yucaipa, which has added “competitive pricing, improved hours, fresher foods and assisted checkout” according to management. Everything, it appears, has been changed except the name.
– The obvious lesson – – listen to your customers (see Lesson 6).

2013 Lesson 10: You can say Social Media and B2B Marketing in the same sentence
Maersk Shipping
– Maybe it’s the exotic locations where its ships are shown. Or maybe it’s just the fact that deep down we’re all little kids and are awed by really cool big boats. Whatever the appeal, big freight shipper Maersk found a way to go from zero to one million+ in Facebook likes in about a year (good Forbes article here). Of course, no one places container orders on a Facebook page, but for very little cost (repurposing archival company photos) this enhances the Maersk brand, distances it a bit from its competitors, and likely provides meaningful recruiting and morale benefits.

Probably the big lesson for 2013 has been that while many old conventions are being challenged (e.g. static campaigns, role of social media), the key marketing fundamentals are still alive and well: understanding your customers and their needs is the surest way to success (or at least avoiding being in next year’s write-up).

Happy New Year.

2 Comments

Posted in Branding, Marketing and Media, Marketing Strategy, Retailing, Social Media and tagged 60 minutes, amazon, amazon drone, drone, Facebook, fail fast, Fresh & Easy, hannah montana, health care rollout, health care website, healthcare.gov, honda, honda holiday, horsemeat in meatballs, ikea, JCPenney, jon stewart, Lululemon, Maersk, Maersk shipping, Marco Rubio, meatballs, michael bolton, michael bolton commercial, miley cyrus, Oreo cookies, Oreo super bowl, Poland Spring, shipping, swedish meatballs, Tesco, transparency, tweaking, tweeting, ventra rollout, Watergate, Yucaipa. Bookmark the permalink.

A MINI appreciation of branding consistency

Posted on September 2, 2013 by davetuchler

I recently saw an online ad for Mini USA, talking about how the brand is “not normal”.

2013 Mini USA Ad

The big news here is that there is no news.

Mini is a brand with 10 years of absolutely consistent positioning and execution. This leaves it free to have fun dramatizing its benefits, rather than having to explain or redefine itself.

Introduced for the 2002 model year, the reimagined Mini Cooper was BMW’s very clever reinterpretation of Sir Alec Issigonis’s 1959 revolutionary original Mini (which sported 10 inch wheels!): retaining the basic lines and dimensions, but adding handling, power and an extra dose of sass.

It originally came in just 2 models, but you could customize it to an almost infinite degree to express your identity, and then follow its progress online as it went from order to manufacture and then shipped. I liked it so much I bought one (still have it 10 years later).

Sir Alec Issigonis and original 1959 Mini

2012 Mini Model lineup

Mini has always been about individuality and flouting typical automotive marketing convention.

No swoopy drives through fluttering autumn leaves here – – they’d rather slide a car through paint (see above).

And while the Mini concept is arguably approaching its limit (e.g. a Mini SUV, convertible, models approaching $40k), it has succeeded in maintaining its playful, nonconformist personality, with an impressive array of clever, tongue-in-cheek marketing, executed with a wink.

The (real) Mini goes up and down

(A collection of 20 AMAZING Mini ads can be found here – definitely worth checking out).

There’s a huge benefit in getting branding right, and then sticking with the program – – consumers know what you stand for, and every marketing dollar serves to strengthen the brand, in addition to delivering a message.

1 Comment

Posted in Branding, Marketing and Media, Marketing Strategy and tagged BMW, Mini, Mini Cooper, Sir Alex Issigonis. Bookmark the permalink.

Marvin Gaye vs Robin Thicke – Blurred Copyright Lines?

Posted on August 23, 2013 by davetuchler

We take a break from more typical weighty matters with a lighter story for the weekend.

There’s a bizarre and public music copyright jousting match going on, which raises a few questions:
Who’s in the right? And has the very public legal wrangling damaged either party’s brand? YOU be the judge! You’ll need to invest about 20 seconds (below).

Robin Thicke – Blurred Lines

Marvin Gaye

The Song of the Summer of 2013 was Blurred Lines by Robin Thicke.*- it’s a catchy party tune, complete with the standard provocative lyrics and misogynistic video. If you’re under 20 you’ve heard it at least 500 times.
*Alan Thicke’s son. Their career arcs have definitely crossed.

Here’s the catch: many people who heard Blurred Lines heard a strong similarity to Marvin Gaye’s Got to Give It Up (1977). The Estate of Marvin Gaye (he died in 1984) sure did, and made a legal claim that the similarity was too close.

Gayes strike first: The Gaye Estate notified Robin Thicke’s lawyers and preemptively offered that if “…plaintiffs do not pay a monetary settlement of the Gayes’ claim, the Gayes intend to initiate litigation for copyright infringement against plaintiffs.”

Thicke’s camp responds, with a polite lawsuit: “Plaintiffs, who have the utmost respect for and admiration of Marvin Gaye…reluctantly file this action…The suit requests legal confirmation that “there are no similarities between plaintiffs’ composition and those the (Gayes) allege they own”.”

In other words, Marvin Gaye’s heirs claim they’ve been ripped off and want damages; Robin Thicke’s lawyers want a judge to confirm that this similarity doesn’t constitute infringement.

Because of the players involved, this otherwise mundane dust-up has garnered intense 24/7 global media coverage, with one result being you will have a hard time finding these videos online (but I’ve found them for you).

More to the point, it would seem that this increasingly public legal activity would undercut the appealing image that any musical artist strives for, and that this would harm their brand and consequently their ability to make money.
– so there’s 2 questions: was Marvin Gaye ripped off, and will this harm either Gaye’s or Thicke’s brand?

Listen to just the first 10-15 seconds of each song, starting with Blurred Lines (below) and see what you think.

I found Blurred Lines starting at :40 on this outtake from Jimmy Kimmel:

http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/stop-the-presses/robin-thicke-pharrell-williams-join-jimmy-kimmel-hilarious-170809874.html

Got To Give it Up can be sampled here:

http://blog.al.com/wire/2013/08/does_thickes_blurred_lines_inf.html

SO – – Was Marvin Gaye ripped off?

My opinion: The two songs’ similarity is striking and unmistakable. But while I personally have great regard for Gaye’s genius (if not his personal conduct), it doesn’t seem that recreating a 35-year old beat should constitute infringement.

Will this hurt the images of either artist to the extent that they’ll suffer a financial impact?

NO! Of course not!! Trick question!

Their brands would be damaged if anyone in their fan base noticed or cared, and neither is going on here.

Robin Thicke’s fans don’t watch/listen to the news and almost certainly have never heard of Marvin Gaye. This will not make one iota of difference. Lawsuits are boring grownup stuff.

From the Marvin Gaye standpoint, there are now a lot of people listening to his music as a result of this skirmish, which has probably revived music sales. And if his personal brand has survived coverage to date, it can definitely survive this. No harm, no foul.

Net, this is an interesting event to watch unfold, but solely for the amusement factor. Have a good weekend.

4 Comments

Posted in Branding, Marketing and Media and tagged Blurred Lines, Copyright infringement, Got to Give it Up, Marvin Gaye, Robin Thicke. Bookmark the permalink.

Relaunching Twinkies – – Attempting Marketing Alchemy?*

Posted on July 14, 2013 by davetuchler

*Alchemy: “A process by which paradoxical results are achieved or incompatible elements combined with no obvious rational explanation.” Source: The Internet

You may have heard that Twinkies are now available again.

New Twinkies Collector’s Edition Package

In the spirit of ‘don’t waste a good crisis’, post-bankruptcy, union-free Twinkies management is aggressively marketing the product at relaunch, including PR, a billboard in Times Square, social media, retail presence, and an increased shelf life to 45 days, from 26 previously. (yikes!)

However, they are attempting an extremely difficult balancing act: adjusting enough to develop a new franchise, while simultaneously not alienating the current customer base. This is a tightrope walk at best; there may be actually no way to serve these two masters with one product. Twinkies may be trapped in a box.

Pulling this off, based on what’s already been tried in the past, would be a huge success.

As everyone knows, with one ‘Twinky’ containing 150 junk calories and 2.5g of saturated fat (13% of the recommended daily intake), this iconic brand had become out of step with current food trends. And that’s not to mention 30+ ingredients.

What’s a Twinkie really made of?

Twinkies had actually achieved some level of cult status for its indestructibility, celebrated in (among other things) a 2012 Super Bowl Chevy Silverado ad.

Surviving the Apocalypse – 2012 Chevy Super Bowl Ad

So with much fanfare Twinkies is now relaunching, but long-term growth will still depend on either getting current older consumers to buy more, or getting new younger consumers to buy. Or some combination. There’s no other way. And therein lies the rub.

Is it possible to keep the core elements consistent enough to satisfy the loyalists, while at the same time changing enough to appeal to a new crop of consumers? Difficult. New Coke of course comes to mind, as does JC Penney.

Further, this was a product that was off the shelves for a year or so while competitive ersatz Twinkies (now there’s a concept) chased some of the unmet demand. So it would appear that they have their work cut out for them.

Can they pull it off? Some clues may come from the new owners (Metropolous brothers) from an interview in March 2013 (my interpretation):
– statement that the brand is bullet-proof (“cannot be killed“)
– confidence that core consumers have high loyalty and can be kept while new ones added (through viral and other guerrilla marketing)
– goal to leverage “younger hipster consumers”…who are “on the pulse of what’s trend-setting”
– focus on merchandising and retail execution – with separate grocery and convenience strategies
– willingness to play with the core formula (e.g. the shelf-life extension)
– expectation that product innovation will help grow the business going forward
– statement about cost savings, not being “slowed down with analytics or bureaucracy”

Twinkies Historical Line Extensions

I respect the ambition and energy of the new owners. However, I will hold to my comment about 6 months ago: despite the incredible publicity, it may be difficult to achieve much upside.). There is nothing obvious in what we’ve seen so far to support a turnaround, and in fact there may be a few areas of concern:
– focusing on retail blocking and tackling is an excellent move and should yield good results – for the current product
– brand awareness is not the same as brand elasticity. And affection doesn’t necessarily translate to purchase. Many of us fondly remember the Good Humor bars of our youth. Do you have any in your freezer right now?
– innovating an iconic product may not be that easy – – this is a product with just one proven form. Former management unsuccessfully introduced 100-calorie packs, low-fat, banana and chocolate creme versions. So extending the Twinkies brand is not exactly an original idea.
– willingness to change the original product – – they’re already smaller. What’s next? Take away a man’s Polysorbate 60 and there could be hell to pay.

Net, we wish new management luck – – it would be great to have Twinkies always within arm’s reach. But attempting to deliver on two strategies with a single product is a tall order.

3 Comments

Posted in Branding, Marketing and Media, Marketing Strategy, Product Management and tagged 100-calorie Twinkies, alchemy, banana Twinkies, chocolate creme Twinkies, Hostess Twinkies, low-fat Twinkies, Metropolous, new Twinkies, twinkies. Bookmark the permalink.

Zimmer and Deen – Are pitchmen still a good idea?

Posted on June 27, 2013 by davetuchler

Sort of weird that both George Zimmer and George Zimmerman are in the news this week. One is defending himself, the other is a men’s clothing marketing icon and decidedly playing offense, and is the one we’ll discuss here. We’ll also discuss the slow-motion self-destruction of Paula Deen, food celebrity.

The upshot of these stories:
– Companies need to realize that consumers tend to instinctively side with the person, not the company
– Increasingly, sponsors are cutting ties with celebrities at the first hint of controversy – – because they think they have no choice
– Ultimately celebrities get our attention but it’s harder than ever to have a 30-year spokesperson

Link to Men’s Wearhouse History

George Zimmer, founder of midscale clothier The Men’s Wearhouse and famous after umpteen years saying “You’re gonna like the way you look – – I guarantee it”, was booted from the organization last week. The reasons have evolved into a sort of ‘he said, she said’ PR battle (one good summary is here). In the end, though, the reasons aren’t important. What’s important is that the company looks cold and heartless for mercilessly getting rid of the old guy who, yes, founded the place, but apparently can’t appeal to the more important younger shoppers. And that has translated into consumer antipathy towards MW, which has decidedly lost the PR war.

We remember Wendy Kaufman, the popular straight-talking ‘Snapple Lady’ who was dumped right after the company was bought for $1.7B by Quaker Oats. Quaker was 0-for-2 on that one – -it eventually unloaded Snapple for $300 million 3 years later to Triarc Brands, which immediately reinstated her as spokesperson, to the delight of consumers.

In January 2012, William Shatner (who has had more career changes than Madonna) was terminated as Priceline pitchman (‘The Negotiator’) after 14 years, apparently due to a change in their business strategy. Credit to Priceline for offing Kirk in a suitably campy explosion. On the other hand, a survey by Priceline.com discovered that 94% of customers wanted him back. So this past January he returned, in different, but still amusing executions. Good move, Priceline.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDSnjfxu_Ig

On the other hand, when celebrities clearly behave badly, a company is justified in letting them go. O.J. Simpson, Lance Armstrong, Kobe Bryant (a seemingly endless list of pitchmen gone bad is here), which brings us to the case of Paula Deen.

Ms. Deen, longtime Food Network celebrity chef, is being fired by seemingly every sponsor she has (Food Network, Caesars, Smithfield Foods and now Wal-Mart). Her crime? Well, aside from glorifying heart-attack food, she admitted to using a racial slur several decades ago during a robbery. OK, 30 years ago, she certainly could have moved beyond that mindset, right? Well, she compounded the controversy by a continuing series of self-inflicted misfires in ensuing interviews. She deserves to be heard and to have a chance for redemption, but she also can afford better PR advice.

Her sponsors, seeing this story take on a life of its own, probably figured that inaction on their part could be interpreted by some as tacit approval of using racist words. So they needed to disconnect as a defensive play. Fair? Who knows; in this 24/7 news cycle the truth is less important than perception and reaction precedes facts. But Paula Deen won’t starve, and business is business. So it’s an understandable move by her sponsors.

On the other hand, the $1500+ Paula Deen cruise, where the food star mingles with guests and does cooking demos, has seen sufficient goodwill-fueled demand to require the cruise line to add another 500-person cruise to the schedule. And her upcoming cookbook has seen a 1300% surge on Amazon since the incident.

Famous people can still move product – – but increasingly these relationships require caution – – and lawyers – – on both sides.

6 Comments

Posted in Branding, Marketing and Media and tagged celebrity pitchman, celebrity spokesman, celebrity spokesperson, endorser, george zimmer, george zimmerman, Lance Armstrong, Men's Wearhouse, O.J. Simpson, paula deen, Priceline, The Men's Wearhouse, TMC, William Shatner. Bookmark the permalink.

Restoration Hardware Weighs In Heavy

Posted on June 4, 2013 by davetuchler

When I first heard that Restoration Hardware was delivering 7 lb. reflections of its founder, I feared that science had finally mastered cloning and was sending us all little Gary Friedman (‘Chairman Emeritus‘) babies. Turns out it’s even worse.

It seems that Restoration Hardware, which owes its success to the retro look, is also committed to retro marketing.

RH Spring 2013 catalogs

Chairman Emeritus Gary Friedman

Last week in my mail I received the latest RH catalog – make that catalogs with an ‘s’ –no, scratch that – -make it ‘Source Books’ – all 7 lbs and 1600 pages of it. It is huge, glossy, painfully self-conscious, and utterly uncalled for. Comprising 5 separate parts (‘Interiors’, ‘Outdoor & Garden’, ‘Objects of Curiosity’, ‘Tableware’, and ‘Small Spaces’), it prominently features the heroic, studiously casual, Ralph Lauren-style visage as well as philosophical meanderings of the founder, Mr. Friedman. It also features a sober collection of furniture marketers, as well as such fashion-forward innovations as deconstructed furniture. Yes. You can now have this for your home.

RH Design Team

Deconstructed chair

You can find some other worthy commentary in the MorningNewsBeat blog. And the philosophy of Mr. Friedman in the inside cover pages (“uh, do you mind if I, um, quote myself?”) is worth a quick look.

Now, to be fair, I’ve bought things at RH before (although I can’t remember the last time), and among the weirdness they do have some very nice stuff, although it always seemed overpriced. But I can’t figure out why they would invest anywhere from $3 to $18 (depending on who you ask) to send this bulky material to my house. I didn’t ask for this crap! How does this ever pay back the millions invested? New users?

Beyond the RH website, the catalog itself is available online as an iPad/iPhone app, which seems more consistent with how people shop. And sending this enormous bulk of paper, in addition to being highly wasteful, now requires effort on the part of environmentally-conscious recipients – to execute recycling properly. Mine went to the bin right after the photo shoot.

More likely, it is a true ego reflection of the founder – – and reveals his most basic underlying philosophy: size matters. In a final unintended irony, an almost whispered disclaimer on an insert commends itself on sending this catalog ‘twice a year rather than monthly’, and encourages consumers to ‘participate in the recycling programs in their communities’. No kidding.

Please recycle!

The Armchair MBA

Category Archives: Marketing and Media

First Ever Battle of the Super Bowl Ad Reviewers!

A MINI appreciation of branding consistency

Marvin Gaye vs Robin Thicke – Blurred Copyright Lines?

Relaunching Twinkies – – Attempting Marketing Alchemy?*

Zimmer and Deen – Are pitchmen still a good idea?

Restoration Hardware Weighs In Heavy

Recent Posts

Archives

Categories

Meta