Tag Archives: Radio Shack

It’s Dunkin’. How You Like Us Now?

Change happens.  Brands must adapt.

Dunking a Toffee Coffee

As a company’s offerings evolve, a brand should keep up and not perpetuate a narrower or outdated image.

Thus:
Weight Watchers becomes WW (health)
Starbucks Coffee becomes Starbucks (more than coffee)
Apple Computer becomes Apple (obvious)
Kentucky Fried Chicken becomes KFC (downplay ‘fried’)
Boston Chicken becomes Boston Market (broader menu)
Jo-Ann Fabrics becomes Joann (whatever they are, not just fabrics, apparently)

In these cases, the ‘new’ names clarified the company’s position and formalized names already commonly used.

Quincy Dunkin' DonutsQuincy DD - external Quincy, MA Dunkin’ Donuts – 1950s

Dunkin’ Donuts started as a coffee and doughnut joint around 1950 in Massachusetts.  It was customary in those giddy post-war years to actually ‘sit on a stool’ at a ‘counter’, eat a doughnut served on a ‘plate’ and ‘dunk’ it in a heavy ‘ceramic mug’ of coffee from time to time.  Ah, those were innocent times with a cavalier attitude toward carbs.  You can’t really dunk while driving.  No one dunks.  It is a meaningless word.

From these humble beginnings it has now joined the name game and just announced a halving of its name to now just ‘Dunkin’’.

just call us dunkinThe reasons stated are to support their beverage-focused strategy, as well as to simplify the brand (they’ve already pared their menu 10%). Makes sense.

Dunkin’ hold-the-Donuts gets 60% of their sales from beverages, mostly coffee, but they want more.  Don’t worry, they will still sell their irresistible (or irresistable, depending on which website version you buy into) doughnuts.

Dunkin Irresistible.png

(In fact, Dunkin’ has been using largely the same menu for years, from time to time adding things like the healthier ‘DD Smart’ offerings, which will now likely have to be just ‘D-Smart’, which is a Turkish satellite TV company and no doubt trademarked.  These things do get complicated.  But we digress.)

The question is, is this a major step forward?  Is it worth the trouble and expense?  By itself, does Dunkin’ mean anything?  Is the value proposition really changed?

Considering that their locations, menu offerings, awesome circa-1973 logo font and color and pretty much everything else is staying the same*, it seems that this may be a very expensive PR play, nothing more.
*
apparently display fixtures will be undergoing a makeover.

Dunkin’ has long used ‘America Runs on Dunkin’’ as their tagline, and in their native New England, they apparently are fondly known as ‘Dunkin’’ or even ‘Dunkies’.

However, in the Midwest or Southeast I don’t recall ever referring to this chain as just ‘Dunkin’’ (or hearing anyone else do so).

It sounds a bit awkward and contrived, like when Radio Shack, in a last heaving gasp for survival, wanted to be known as ‘The Shack’. (it’s painfully true).

shack_promoSo, not sure that the name Dunkin’, by itself, is a game-changer.

Considering the vast franchisee-borne expense involved in re-outfitting 12,000+ international outlets, as well as rebranding pretty much every sign, coffee mug, drive-thru kiosk, menu, sign, placemat, napkin, rest room signs and heaven only knows how many other things, you have to wonder how the calculations worked on this at some point being profit-positive.  (and this follows the relatively recent ‘Coffee & More’ signage).Dunkin Coffee & More

And ultimately, profit is the point. 

It comes down to whether the absence of the word ‘Donuts’ will subconsciously, Jedi-style, draw new users in for non-doughnut beverage offerings as they drive past, or persuade current customers that it’s also ok to buy those other things on the menu.

Penetration vs buy rate, the primal existential growth question.

Dunkin traysIn the case of Weight Watchers, Boston Chicken and Jo-Ann Fabrics, a name change seems justified to align with a broader brand premise.  For Apple, Starbucks and KFC, arguably it formalizes what people already know, lets the CMO sleep at night knowing the brand is aligned, and is more of a check-the-box move.

Dunkin’ has tested this idea for more than a year so apparently the equation works.

I’m not so sure.

Advertisements

Don’t Be Something You’re Not

This week a woman named Federica Marchionni was eased out of her position as CEO of Lands’ End after only 19 months on the job.

federica

Federica Marchionni

This illustrates (fairly predictably) what can happen when a brand tries to be something it’s not.

Ultimately, brand-building success is driven by meeting customers’ needs, not by trying to teach them to want something different. And loyal customers have this peculiar habit of resisting (resenting) signs that they’re being taken for granted.

lands-end-1981

Lands’ End 1983

landsendgroup

Recent Lands’ End

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the case of Lands’ End, since its 1963 founding by Gary Comer as a sailing supplies business, it developed a heritage as a casual sportswear business that was eventually bought by Sears (and spun off in 2014).  Mr. Comer was fond of saying “Take care of the customers, take care of the employees and profits will take care of themselves.”

But Lands’ End had recently been stumbling, so Ms. Marchionni, with a background at high-style retailers Dolce & Gabbana and Ferrari, was brought in and offered an experienced, glamorous executive who could help reshape Lands’ End “into a meaningful, global lifestyle brand”.

That’s when the trouble started.

federica-kate-hudson

Marchionni and actress Kate Hudson

New lines were immediately introduced, meaning loafers were sold alongside stiletto heels. Ms. Marchionni dropped low-profitability catalog shoppers and hired prominent fashion photographers to shoot elegant catalogs at exotic locations. She insisted on working out of New York City rather than the corporate headquarters in Dodgeville, WI, and was often seen hobnobbing with celebrities.

lands-end-canvas

New Lands’ End Canvas Line

lands-end-shoes

Lands’ End shoes – traditional and new

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All of this alienated not only customers but employees, who were used to casual access to top management in Dodgeville and who would be critical in execution of plans. And unfortunately sales lagged spending, creating a lot of red ink. Ultimately the board decided it was time for another change.

old-spice

Successful reposition – Old Spice

While there are success stories about brands repositioning to catch a younger/new demographic (think Old Spice or Target), this is not the first time a brand has suffered from trying to fly too close to the sun.

JCPenney famously failed recently; going farther back, the breeding ground (figuratively) of nerds, Radio Shack, tried and aggressively failed to get more hip by calling itself ‘The Shack’. And even staid Dolly Madison snack cakes invented a character called the ‘Snackin’ Dude with a Snackin’ attitude’ to try to become somewhat more hip. Another whiff.

radio-shack-the-shack

Radio Shack unsuccessful reposition

Back to Lands’ End, the acting CEO (COO James Gooch) spends all of his non-traveling time in Dodgeville and is odds-on favorite for the permanent role.

We’ll see how the company and customers respond to an expected return to tradition. On the other hand, Mr. Gooch was recently CEO of the S.S. Radio Shack. Hmm…

Conclusion #1- – ignore loyal customers at your own peril.

Conclusion #2 – – just because a brand isn’t hip, doesn’t mean it isn’t great

First Ever Battle of the Super Bowl Ad Reviewers!

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.

SuperBowl2014

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.