Do you have a Facebook addiction? (Do you need a Twittervention?)
Side note: On FB there's a update area that lists "Recent Activity." Speaking for myself and in light of this holiday period, I can see a need for another category - "Recent Inactivity" (burp).
http://news.yahoo.com/video/tech-15749651/kicking-teens-facebook-addictions-17337632
Happy New Year to all!!
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
FMCG Brands, Retail And Social Media
As a follow up to the prior post below...
Many of the social media guru firms simply don't fully grasp/understand the business model dynamics of FMCG brands. (e.g. They think they know P&G and Unilever because they have met with the managers of 'new media' within those management organizations, yet I can guarantee that when they leave many FMCG offices, there's always a little bit of residual feeling that those touchy-feely media types really don't understand running and building FMCG businesses, thus, they are not in the position to help as they assume they are.) Yet, it's easy for those social media firms to take 'pot shots' at something they don't have the experience to understand. The clue, which almost nobody gets, is that ultimately, the center of the social media universe for FMCG brands will be with - retailers - not with brand suppliers, as retailers move to CRM (only then will FMCG brands have a better opportunity to be more engaged with those store shoppers in social media (but the retailers will control the dialogue).
While there are some examples of online FMCG communities (e.g. tampon-brand-sponsored websites for teenage girls with tons of questions about growing up) most low-involvement, fast-moving CPG brands simply annoy average consumers with dialogue about brands who are simply trying to save 20% with a coupon on cheese or soup or soap - hence the explosion of private label brands everywhere. Private label is the 'tell' that most consumers don't really desire to talk/twitter/post/read extensively about FMCG brands - more and more every day, it's the store that matters, not the brands inside.
The concept of a FMCG brand 'relationship' is overplayed (e.g. this is not the Apple brand, this is soap), and the brief relationship with FMCG brands occurs with every trip to the store, standing in the aisle. Just think about the proven fact that DISPLAYS, more than any other FMCG tactic, drive sales growth - sometimes +100%, or more - AKA, if they bump into it, they will buy it. (Ironically, all this new technology on our PDAs, etc., now leaves us even less room in our brains to think about FMCG products - life is moving faster than it used to be.)
None of the above is particularly poetic, but it's part of a practical reality known by brand managers, which needs to be understood by social media teams/agencies.
Many of the social media guru firms simply don't fully grasp/understand the business model dynamics of FMCG brands. (e.g. They think they know P&G and Unilever because they have met with the managers of 'new media' within those management organizations, yet I can guarantee that when they leave many FMCG offices, there's always a little bit of residual feeling that those touchy-feely media types really don't understand running and building FMCG businesses, thus, they are not in the position to help as they assume they are.) Yet, it's easy for those social media firms to take 'pot shots' at something they don't have the experience to understand. The clue, which almost nobody gets, is that ultimately, the center of the social media universe for FMCG brands will be with - retailers - not with brand suppliers, as retailers move to CRM (only then will FMCG brands have a better opportunity to be more engaged with those store shoppers in social media (but the retailers will control the dialogue).
While there are some examples of online FMCG communities (e.g. tampon-brand-sponsored websites for teenage girls with tons of questions about growing up) most low-involvement, fast-moving CPG brands simply annoy average consumers with dialogue about brands who are simply trying to save 20% with a coupon on cheese or soup or soap - hence the explosion of private label brands everywhere. Private label is the 'tell' that most consumers don't really desire to talk/twitter/post/read extensively about FMCG brands - more and more every day, it's the store that matters, not the brands inside.
The concept of a FMCG brand 'relationship' is overplayed (e.g. this is not the Apple brand, this is soap), and the brief relationship with FMCG brands occurs with every trip to the store, standing in the aisle. Just think about the proven fact that DISPLAYS, more than any other FMCG tactic, drive sales growth - sometimes +100%, or more - AKA, if they bump into it, they will buy it. (Ironically, all this new technology on our PDAs, etc., now leaves us even less room in our brains to think about FMCG products - life is moving faster than it used to be.)
None of the above is particularly poetic, but it's part of a practical reality known by brand managers, which needs to be understood by social media teams/agencies.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Forrester Research And Brand Management
Here's a take in Business Week on a new POV from Forrester Research:
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/brandnewday/archives/2009/10/are_brand_manag.html#c149648
Forrester's idea is designed to stir controversy, and thus (self-serving-buy-our-new-research-methods) attention. But it's inaccurate. Don’t get me wrong, Forrester has valued capabilities, but as a CMO, I just can’t salute such a self-serving POV.
Brand Management has ALWAYS been about listening to the customer and consumer - new technology as just brought new tools to this central business function. New methods may be an improvement in consumer insight over prior market research practices, but they are still just new methods of market research – anything short of talking to each and every single brand consumer, is merely another form of extrapolation research.
I must add, there also seems to be a related naïve new concept about customization (as a by-product of listening), as if letting the consumer determine - everything - is all that is required with new technology, if only tired old managers would listen and embrace the technology. Listing and customizing to fit consumer desires is definitely a point of competition, but it has (and adds) a cost to be measured in any final product or service. It is but one part of any successful strategy including considerations beyond that of the ‘Brand Advocate.’ Or put another way, for example, if the ‘Brand Advocate’ is the consumer, does the consumer name the price (even at a loss to the company)? (Note: any detailed response to the last question may identify the respondent as a brand manager, not a brand advocate.)
So, to the Brand Advocate, what about business accountability? What about operating for a profit? (A contrarian concept in the land of billions of flushed experimental VC dollars, where so very many ideas are tolerated to slide down the wall after not sticking.) Yes, we’ve all read about the ‘long tail’ and ‘crowd sourcing,’ but this new push to eliminate brand management ignores the role that brand management plays in ERM and steering profitable strategy for the entire enterprise (which is the GM/profit core to any successful business model, whether it’s practiced by a brand manager, the CEO, or Steve Jobs himself).
Consider that in a world of growing scarcity, the LUXURY of customization, after the recent economic bubble celebration, is about to collide with competitive margin pressure in business everywhere. The falling value of the dollar, will no longer mean that we can just go make (and sell) anything we can possibly dream of from China. We are soon to be served Hybrid automobiles, whether we don’t want them or not. …We are about to be taught a humble lesson that was overlooked in the recent easier economic times. As a harsh and extreme summary to the point, there was a reason why Henry Ford said, “they can have any color car they want as long as it’s black.” He was trying to run a ‘profitable’ car company. …Yes, that would have made a Brand Advocate sick.
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/brandnewday/archives/2009/10/are_brand_manag.html#c149648
Forrester's idea is designed to stir controversy, and thus (self-serving-buy-our-new-research-methods) attention. But it's inaccurate. Don’t get me wrong, Forrester has valued capabilities, but as a CMO, I just can’t salute such a self-serving POV.
Brand Management has ALWAYS been about listening to the customer and consumer - new technology as just brought new tools to this central business function. New methods may be an improvement in consumer insight over prior market research practices, but they are still just new methods of market research – anything short of talking to each and every single brand consumer, is merely another form of extrapolation research.
I must add, there also seems to be a related naïve new concept about customization (as a by-product of listening), as if letting the consumer determine - everything - is all that is required with new technology, if only tired old managers would listen and embrace the technology. Listing and customizing to fit consumer desires is definitely a point of competition, but it has (and adds) a cost to be measured in any final product or service. It is but one part of any successful strategy including considerations beyond that of the ‘Brand Advocate.’ Or put another way, for example, if the ‘Brand Advocate’ is the consumer, does the consumer name the price (even at a loss to the company)? (Note: any detailed response to the last question may identify the respondent as a brand manager, not a brand advocate.)
So, to the Brand Advocate, what about business accountability? What about operating for a profit? (A contrarian concept in the land of billions of flushed experimental VC dollars, where so very many ideas are tolerated to slide down the wall after not sticking.) Yes, we’ve all read about the ‘long tail’ and ‘crowd sourcing,’ but this new push to eliminate brand management ignores the role that brand management plays in ERM and steering profitable strategy for the entire enterprise (which is the GM/profit core to any successful business model, whether it’s practiced by a brand manager, the CEO, or Steve Jobs himself).
Consider that in a world of growing scarcity, the LUXURY of customization, after the recent economic bubble celebration, is about to collide with competitive margin pressure in business everywhere. The falling value of the dollar, will no longer mean that we can just go make (and sell) anything we can possibly dream of from China. We are soon to be served Hybrid automobiles, whether we don’t want them or not. …We are about to be taught a humble lesson that was overlooked in the recent easier economic times. As a harsh and extreme summary to the point, there was a reason why Henry Ford said, “they can have any color car they want as long as it’s black.” He was trying to run a ‘profitable’ car company. …Yes, that would have made a Brand Advocate sick.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
New Marketing Rules - Humble Is The New Black (part 2)
This recent story appeared on Reuters:
ECONOMY UNLEASHES "PERFECT STORM" for BOUTIQUE BEER
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE57G2VL20090817?sp=true
From the story:
"You can buy an exceptional beer for half the price of a mediocre glass of wine," said New York beer maker Kelly Taylor...
...Across the United States, craft breweries and shops specializing in artisanal and import beers are growing, with merchants betting that tough economic times will turn Americans who once favored wine or liquor toward premium beers.
"Even in this economy, people want to treat themselves to really extraordinary things," said Justin Philips, co-owner of the Beer Table bar in the New York City borough of Brooklyn. "People are recognizing that there is a diverse world of beer. And it tends to be less expensive than other drinks."
The number of boutique breweries in the United States has grown by nearly 5 percent in the past five years to 1,476 breweries, said Paul Gatza, director of the Brewers Association, a non-profit industry group based in Colorado.
...Catherine Saillard, owner of French bistro Ici, said private parties are increasingly requesting locally made craft beers rather than wine and spirits.
"I wouldn't say that (beer) has the same complexity (as wine), but it's not supposed to," said Saillard, who is French. "It's unpretentious. You don't need to know the grape."
(Beer), "it's unpretentious." That last quote is the key to the success of craft beer today. As noted before, the 'Bling' culture is now so out. In my opinion, consumers have shifted significantly, and will be saving more and spending more wisely for years to come.
It's interesting to look at the craft beer segment and wonder how much more might this segment grow if their marketers fully embrace this trend? In a sense, craft beers have grown on the basis of great product and a general shift in consumers' taste preferences (across many consumable food/beverage categories). But craft beers have also grown somewhat despite marketing that has sometimes missed on the concept of brand positioning and 'benefits' vs. 'attributes.'
'Beer Geeks' used to be a common term in the early days of craft beer. They were the early adopters. Highly-involved early adopters are more about product attributes. But the segment has broadened, and 'regular consumers' are more about benefits. Craft beer marketers can take their brands even farther - much farther - if they understand this shift. As the story above points out, craft beer is a natural value-alternative to wine and spirits, but even within adult beverage categories, it now pays to further position a brand in the consumer's value sweet spot. In loftier economic times, brand claims of superior attributes are more easily accepted by a broader consumer market - but not now - now a brand needs to convey perceived benefit, in order for the consumer to perceive value.
Shiner (well known in Texas for Shiner Bock) is one such craft beer brand that is now well-positioned for this new consumer market with its darn-good-but-folksy-down-to-earth image. Where Shiner use to be looked upon as a better beer, but not quite 'top-shelf' (e.g. "Yes, but vat abut das Hops un IBUs?") the brand is now doing quite well in this new value-oriented market environment. Frankly, and to be blunt, if you're spending your money nowadays on anything that is 'top-shelf,' and your seen doing it, you're not impressing anyone - often quite the opposite.
As for my poor attempt above at the question in accent, ask most Texans about Shiner and they'll probably say "I just drink it." Tomorrow is Friday, and I'm in Texas, so that may just be on my list too...
ECONOMY UNLEASHES "PERFECT STORM" for BOUTIQUE BEER
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE57G2VL20090817?sp=true
From the story:
"You can buy an exceptional beer for half the price of a mediocre glass of wine," said New York beer maker Kelly Taylor...
...Across the United States, craft breweries and shops specializing in artisanal and import beers are growing, with merchants betting that tough economic times will turn Americans who once favored wine or liquor toward premium beers.
"Even in this economy, people want to treat themselves to really extraordinary things," said Justin Philips, co-owner of the Beer Table bar in the New York City borough of Brooklyn. "People are recognizing that there is a diverse world of beer. And it tends to be less expensive than other drinks."
The number of boutique breweries in the United States has grown by nearly 5 percent in the past five years to 1,476 breweries, said Paul Gatza, director of the Brewers Association, a non-profit industry group based in Colorado.
...Catherine Saillard, owner of French bistro Ici, said private parties are increasingly requesting locally made craft beers rather than wine and spirits.
"I wouldn't say that (beer) has the same complexity (as wine), but it's not supposed to," said Saillard, who is French. "It's unpretentious. You don't need to know the grape."
(Beer), "it's unpretentious." That last quote is the key to the success of craft beer today. As noted before, the 'Bling' culture is now so out. In my opinion, consumers have shifted significantly, and will be saving more and spending more wisely for years to come.
It's interesting to look at the craft beer segment and wonder how much more might this segment grow if their marketers fully embrace this trend? In a sense, craft beers have grown on the basis of great product and a general shift in consumers' taste preferences (across many consumable food/beverage categories). But craft beers have also grown somewhat despite marketing that has sometimes missed on the concept of brand positioning and 'benefits' vs. 'attributes.'
'Beer Geeks' used to be a common term in the early days of craft beer. They were the early adopters. Highly-involved early adopters are more about product attributes. But the segment has broadened, and 'regular consumers' are more about benefits. Craft beer marketers can take their brands even farther - much farther - if they understand this shift. As the story above points out, craft beer is a natural value-alternative to wine and spirits, but even within adult beverage categories, it now pays to further position a brand in the consumer's value sweet spot. In loftier economic times, brand claims of superior attributes are more easily accepted by a broader consumer market - but not now - now a brand needs to convey perceived benefit, in order for the consumer to perceive value.
Shiner (well known in Texas for Shiner Bock) is one such craft beer brand that is now well-positioned for this new consumer market with its darn-good-but-folksy-down-to-earth image. Where Shiner use to be looked upon as a better beer, but not quite 'top-shelf' (e.g. "Yes, but vat abut das Hops un IBUs?") the brand is now doing quite well in this new value-oriented market environment. Frankly, and to be blunt, if you're spending your money nowadays on anything that is 'top-shelf,' and your seen doing it, you're not impressing anyone - often quite the opposite.
As for my poor attempt above at the question in accent, ask most Texans about Shiner and they'll probably say "I just drink it." Tomorrow is Friday, and I'm in Texas, so that may just be on my list too...
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
New Marketing Rules - Need vs Want: Healthcare
Times are changing. As discussed in this Blog late last year, marketing rules that worked as recently as last year are now also changing as consumer values are shifting. The spending motivations of 2007 are looong gone. Higher-order benefits, experiences and aspirational values, which marketers aim to associate with brands, are being reshuffled in the 'way way back' areas of the consumer's mindset. It's going to take new marketing communications (and maybe adjusted positioning) to get the consumer to spend again.
Simply put, to sell in this new environment, make sure the brand's positioning message has been revisited since last year, before you bring the media manager in with a new offline/online spend plan. And if you're working on new products or business lines, don't underestimate the pressure for value that's going be there (on margins), as you now project and price that business into the marketplace. It has never been more important to get your message right - don't just assume last year's advertising campaign is still worthy of investment. (If your business is struggling now, you'd be wise to hire someone who knows brand positioning before burning dollars on more media behind an idea that's become off-the-mark in today's new world of 2009 and beyond.)
The example below is humorous, but it wouldn't be even a little funny if it weren't also a little bit true:
Simply put, to sell in this new environment, make sure the brand's positioning message has been revisited since last year, before you bring the media manager in with a new offline/online spend plan. And if you're working on new products or business lines, don't underestimate the pressure for value that's going be there (on margins), as you now project and price that business into the marketplace. It has never been more important to get your message right - don't just assume last year's advertising campaign is still worthy of investment. (If your business is struggling now, you'd be wise to hire someone who knows brand positioning before burning dollars on more media behind an idea that's become off-the-mark in today's new world of 2009 and beyond.)
The example below is humorous, but it wouldn't be even a little funny if it weren't also a little bit true:
Thursday, April 9, 2009
The Corona Story - Transcending a Category
I suppose I could have shared this quite a while ago, but as easy as it is to paste this here, now seems like as good a time as any. Here a feature on my experience with Corona (from 1995-2007), the #1 Imported beer, the #1 selling SKU in grocery stores nationwide, and subject of a Harvard Case Study -- a brand that rewrote the rules for the beer category, and the consumer revolution of preference for new Craft, Specialty and Imported brands that followed in its wake.
Here is the story as it appeared in the book, America's Greatest Brands (click on images to enlarge):
Here is the story as it appeared in the book, America's Greatest Brands (click on images to enlarge):
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Brands And Strategies Are Verified Over Time: Years, Not Months
Sales goals, among others, have to be met day-after-day, week-after-week and month-after-month. That is at the absolute core of any marketing effort. But, how many times have you wondered if a marketing direction was really that strategically sound over the long-term, when it is quickly touted as being 'spot-on' immediately after being put into execution in the market? I see these new and untested claims for success all the time within the marketing universe, and I wonder about this point often when I see a new campaign effort.
There's a running joke in the consumer brand manager world, that all you need to do in order to find out what is wrong with your current marketing, is hire a new brand manager, and the answer will be that everything must change. Everyone wants to make their own mark -- and not always for the better regarding the brand involved. One of the consideration areas where I am proud regarding my leadership with Corona, and the time-tested success that we delivered, with the consistency that we employed against a very tight positioning strategy. Our Corona strategy was verified in the market over time -- said again, over time. Experienced marketing leaders have the perspective to recognize an enduring brand-building idea, when far too often, less experienced managers latch on to an idea and claim victory before the market can attest to the validity of their strategy.
Keep that in mind as I share two slightly aged marketing stories that I've been hanging on to for just such an occasion. As examples, let's pop the cork on these 2007 predictions. In fairness to these authors, I freely admit that hindsight is 20/20, but that doesn't mean learning by looking back at something over time should be avoided. The links are below, and I've provided a summary to spare you the click & read, if you so desire:
http://brandautopsy.typepad.com/brandautopsy/2007/01/starbucks_marke.html
This 2007 article claims that Starbucks is now somehow outsmarting the competition because it spends comparatively nothing on media, but it is among the top 6 QSR restaurant chains. This 'new thinking' is seemingly to be admired. They even had the distinct benefit in the comparison of being the only coffee chain among a sea of burger and taco chains. Yet, we all now know that Starbucks is presently in deep trouble, with store closings taking place everywhere (even before the credit crisis), and increasing pressure to reduce its pricing. Why? There are many reasons, but among them is that Starbucks failed to effectively defend it's value proposition to consumers -- they left themselves wide open by assuming they were invincible, without the need to communicate (in proportion to the scale of their business) and ignoring the potential the kiss-of-death question: Hmmm, why should I pay that much for a Starbucks coffee? We all know that Starbucks represents an amazing success story, but avoiding the use of media to support their position in the market was not reflective of the strongest part of their strategy, and now they face the difficult challenge of creating a resurgence.
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/TheEndOfTheWalMartEra.aspx
In this case, the title of this 2007 article says it all, "THE END OF THE WAL-MART ERA." Ooops. That pitch was juuuust a bit outside. Wal-Mart is now absolutely on a roll. It seems the time-tested and scale-driven consumer positioning strategy of enabling consumers to improve their lives by selling products that offer above-average value, just keeps on ticking -- and louder than ever before in this current economic environment. That's not to say Wal-Mart's is the only strategy to succeed and grow share in a retail environment, but theirs clearly works. It's a good thing they didn't abandon their strategy because some said they were at the end of an era.
The moral of this story: Viewing marketing and business performance over time is the only true gauge of brilliance or success.
There's a running joke in the consumer brand manager world, that all you need to do in order to find out what is wrong with your current marketing, is hire a new brand manager, and the answer will be that everything must change. Everyone wants to make their own mark -- and not always for the better regarding the brand involved. One of the consideration areas where I am proud regarding my leadership with Corona, and the time-tested success that we delivered, with the consistency that we employed against a very tight positioning strategy. Our Corona strategy was verified in the market over time -- said again, over time. Experienced marketing leaders have the perspective to recognize an enduring brand-building idea, when far too often, less experienced managers latch on to an idea and claim victory before the market can attest to the validity of their strategy.
Keep that in mind as I share two slightly aged marketing stories that I've been hanging on to for just such an occasion. As examples, let's pop the cork on these 2007 predictions. In fairness to these authors, I freely admit that hindsight is 20/20, but that doesn't mean learning by looking back at something over time should be avoided. The links are below, and I've provided a summary to spare you the click & read, if you so desire:
http://brandautopsy.typepad.com/brandautopsy/2007/01/starbucks_marke.html
This 2007 article claims that Starbucks is now somehow outsmarting the competition because it spends comparatively nothing on media, but it is among the top 6 QSR restaurant chains. This 'new thinking' is seemingly to be admired. They even had the distinct benefit in the comparison of being the only coffee chain among a sea of burger and taco chains. Yet, we all now know that Starbucks is presently in deep trouble, with store closings taking place everywhere (even before the credit crisis), and increasing pressure to reduce its pricing. Why? There are many reasons, but among them is that Starbucks failed to effectively defend it's value proposition to consumers -- they left themselves wide open by assuming they were invincible, without the need to communicate (in proportion to the scale of their business) and ignoring the potential the kiss-of-death question: Hmmm, why should I pay that much for a Starbucks coffee? We all know that Starbucks represents an amazing success story, but avoiding the use of media to support their position in the market was not reflective of the strongest part of their strategy, and now they face the difficult challenge of creating a resurgence.
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/TheEndOfTheWalMartEra.aspx
In this case, the title of this 2007 article says it all, "THE END OF THE WAL-MART ERA." Ooops. That pitch was juuuust a bit outside. Wal-Mart is now absolutely on a roll. It seems the time-tested and scale-driven consumer positioning strategy of enabling consumers to improve their lives by selling products that offer above-average value, just keeps on ticking -- and louder than ever before in this current economic environment. That's not to say Wal-Mart's is the only strategy to succeed and grow share in a retail environment, but theirs clearly works. It's a good thing they didn't abandon their strategy because some said they were at the end of an era.
The moral of this story: Viewing marketing and business performance over time is the only true gauge of brilliance or success.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
