Jaffe Juice

I just got off the phone with the "Fedex Furniture Guy, Jose Avila: a pink-haired, unassuming software engineer who could quite possibly be the marketer of the year (or at least the hour)

Perhaps it was the Wired article which caused this particular effort to tip, or perhaps Jose's creativity and genuine authentic approach. Personally, I think it's Fedex's moronic and myopic response and behavior that has struck such a chord with the blogosphere and beyond.

If you've been hiding under a rock, here's the story in point form summary:

Tom Hespos discusses the consumer backlash against registration based sites (including the petition to register fake information as a token of spite) and offers up 2 possible reasons:

1) Interruption (consumers don't like having to work for their free content)

2) Privacy concerns (big brother, where art thou?)

He offers up a great point re:2) about being more explicit and prescriptive about the registration process and its resultant benefits which one can only hope is a win-win.

Article in Ad Age this morning about additional circulation scandals engulfing the magazine industry with titles including Martha Stewart Living (perhaps if we put an ankle bellyband bracelet around it, it would behave itself), Family Circle and House Beautiful. According to the piece, it is being described by one publisher as an apocalypse.

I don't think this should be a surprise to anyone...bottom line: the magazine industry has been slowly sinking in the quicksand of change for a long time now. The sad thing is that most of the players have been in total denial. Instead of trying to fix the problem, they've sunk dollars into a laughable trade campaign.

Believe me, I'm not trying to kick this beast when it's down, but I do feel it's necessary to issue a pretty stern wake-up call to the print industry AND provide some kind of hope in the process.

Instead of the one page dedicated to "what's on dot com this week", you need to be going a lot further with respect to content integration and truly engaging your readers. Your integrated efforts (sales, content, innovation) are disgraceful; your websites are inexcusably oversimplified and shills to hawk subscriptions (which puts you right back behind the 8-ball) Your attitudes are obstinate and arrogant.

The so-called scandals with circulation are overdue red-flags that your business has changed and therefore, your business model needs to change as well. On the bright side, every other medium is facing similar challenges.

Instead of courting media buyers, court your consumers instead. Media buyers aren't going to help you solve your problems...you are. If you reinvent yourselves and create a more evolved environment through which to engage your readers, chances are the me-too media buyers will flock back like sheep.

The ad-edit relationship is contrived and backwards. Content is key...not getting an additional page from P&G. The answers to your problems are all around you; you need to open your eyes.

Consider major investments in technologies which go much further than Zinio. Think about selective binding. Think about advancements in home/office printers and how your magazines might very well be delivered through printers soon enough.

Yes, even think about the 3 Amigos: RSS, Podcasting, Blogs. Print should be the starting point of the conversation....audio, video, interactive/experiential plays.

Bottom line: be a part of the solution...or there will be none. Take control of your fate, or it will take control of you.

Ironically, the MPA passed on having me speak at their conference. Perhaps they might want to reconsider. Perhaps not.

The BBC (our abbreviated friends on the other side of the pond) made an announcement which frankly should have made heads turn over here...but I don't believe I've seen any from the networks, pehaps because they're buried under the sand.

Anyhoo, BBC announced that they're going to start letting their viewers download entire shows (TV + radio) MyBBCPlayer :) will let viewers catch up the last 7 days of programming.

According to a Reuters piece, there were 60 million online requests for video footage following the London bombings, so the demand is certainly there.

Now in fairness, the article does focus on downloading and purchasing music downloads (yawn...isn't everyone doing that nowadays), however the hint into what I think is an obvious business model shift makes me salivate.

Hooray for Lexus as they've given me a reason to dust off the cobwebs from my "experiential marketing" category with their US Open themed Podcast series. There are also goodies in the form of redeeming photographs taken at the Open.

Lexus has really embraced podcasting and in this particular instance pays off the very important concept of Brands as enablers (call me with questions) through the creation of long form content in a branded experential red bow.

In a conversation with Glen Sheehan, I came up with the concept of “Brand Rush” which I think works really well as an analogy or even conceptual reference point, against which to measure the relative health of a brand with its given audience.

The metaphor of love works really well in a branding dialogue. Think of the scenario in which a man (or woman) walks into a bar and proposes sordid sex with the first good looking woman he sets his sights on (target marketing) 99 times out of 100, he gets a good kick to the groin; the other 1 time he gets laid (that’s direct response for you) The other scenario involves getting to know the other person over a longer period of time, without the use of cheesy clichés pick-up lines etc. (that’s branding and more often than not, will lead to a commitment/long term relationship/even marriage, versus the “hey I lost my number, can I borrow yours” alternative)

So in the spirit of this context, I offer up to you the notion of “brand rush.” Think about the first time you gazed upon your now significant other or spouse; think about the time you touched for the first time; think about that first kiss; if you must, you can even recall the first time you made love if you like. The atmosphere was electric; the moment was unforgettable; the experience was both unique and completely distinct and original.

Now fast forward to present day…where the moment rests anywhere along the spectrum of “Married with Children” to “Fawlty Towers” In most cases, that unforgettable first contact is never achieved again and the reality is that it’s all downhill from there.

Sure there are exceptions and in these cases, the utopian moment of bliss is replicated and maintained through hard work, constant and consistent care, nurturing and to put it crudely, performance in the bedroom (or any other room, surface, object, animal, vegetable or mineral)

The parallel between “first contact” and branding is uncanny. It would seem that marketers exist as that guy walking into the bar; with their cheesy pick-up lines (in the form of the 30-second spot and it’s hyperbolic drivel); they play the numbers game, completely comfortable with an astronomical miss:hit ratio with their poorly targeting one-size-fits-all mass media approach…perhaps that’s why today, so many marketers are left with mass-turbation in a turbulent and unforgiving climate. I hate to take this further, but the kick in the balls doesn’t even seem to work (think Jeff Jarvis and Dell or the incredible story of the guy who decked out his apartment with FEDEX boxes and FEDEX’s resulting reaction [more to follow]) as most marketers today have none…they’re afraid to take risks; they’re unable to be truly creative i.e. original/different; they’re unwilling to change their ways and to embrace change.

Is it any wonder that consumers have become so fickle and loyalless? When a woman walks into a bank that she has been frequenting for seventy years to withdraw cash…and still has her signature checked for authenticity from a signature card from a teller that has been working there twenty years, what does that say about the sorry state of branding? The only rush that’s in play here is a rush to get the hell away from the brand in question.

Those are my first thoughts on brand rush. Is it real or not? What does it take to achieve, maintain and preserve rush? Is it ground for a sustainable competitive advantage? Why is brand rush so elusive and what should brands do to find their moments of truth and authenticity?

The rush begins…

Gap is making headlines right now with their daring and noteworthy 60-second spot in which employees and customers trash one of the stores: "Pardon our dust; the all-new Gap is coming."

I went to their website and saw "an under construction" message.

There are 3 scenarios in play here:

1) The site is under construction and has nothing to do with their TV campaign and/or store renovations

2) The online temporary closure is completely intentional and is designed to tie-in directly with the current campaign and in doing so, raise curiosity/intrigue about the changes (lord knows they need 'em)

As much as I wish the latter option were true, I know it's not for probably 3 reasons:

1) Practically....because of the e-commerce component (no one's going to close doors on sales, although if bricks 'n mortar stores are closing, why not the Web?)

2) The ad isn't national yet and even if it were...it would have to assume that people are watching TV ads (don't get me started on that) That being said, with a huge PR buzz, it could easily negate this particular challenge.

3) I just don't think the folks at Gap are remotely clued in with how their business is changing and it what it will take to reverse their steep declines of late (sorry)

So as it turns out, the Waste Management Business and Madison Avenue have a lot more in common than we previously thought. 100 years, a retailing pioneer by the name of John Wanamaker uttered those immortal words, “half my advertising is wasted; the only problem is I don’t know which half.” Enraptured by a hit to miss ratio of 1:1, the advertising industry took this saying to heart and seemed to get away with a 50% success rate…that is until Mediacheck in Omaha, Nebraska (the same place that brought you Omaha Steaks) revived the spirit of John in their aptly named Project Wanamaker. The findings, as echoed in a recent Business Week article are pretty stark:

• …at least seven new commercials reached 95 to 100% of the test's HH audience within the first week of airing.
• The company said many advertisers are better off having a commercial air for no longer than two-three weeks followed by a week off the air and then running a few days a week.

As echoed in MediaPost, the recommendation along the lines of cutting campaign duration in half are pretty damning both both the media and creative sides in the business. With the average production budgets of 30-seconds spots in the $400,000 range and frequency or camapaign runs extended way beyond the 2-3 weeks range, with limited creative, something’s gotta give…

Combine this with Project Wanamaker’s initial findings about completion rates i.e. of the ads that are viewed, what percentage (in time) of them are viewed to competion, and the results are even more alarming. In the test, featuring brands such as Colgate, DirecTV, Chevrolet, Pepsi and Burger King, Neutrogena did the best with 96% of consumers viewing the ad from start to finish. Other advertisers weren’t as lucky with only 11% of viewers coming along for the ride. The study also concluded that DVR homes are not necessarily skipping ads more than non-DVR homes. That shouldn’t necessarily surprise you. We’ve been skipping ads since the birth of the remote control. The only difference is that only now we can measure it. See you in Cape Town for that next shoot, Sarah Jessica Parker. NOT!

Yawn. Ain't addiction to devaluing the brand great?

Adjab reported nicely on this MediaPost piece, which in turn cites a FIND/SVP (huh?) research report that attempts to debunk some mystery around branded entertainment/product placement.

It concludes that the lowly 30-second spot (52%) beats product placement (23%) by a margin of over 2:1 when it comes to influencing a potential product purchase. The study incorrectly concludes that this means the 30-second spot isn't going away anytime soon, whereas myself (see post title) would rather interpret this prescriptive advice as going from the frying pan into the fire.

The study continues to drive a few more nails into Madison + Vine by concluding that:

1) Consumers are more likely to accept product placement in scripted versus reality shows - sorry, that ship sailed a loooong time ago

2) With reference to Oprah's uber car giveaway, only 44% (of the 36% sample who remembered seeing the episode) recalled the car she gave away. Worse still, the recall rate was higher amongst men (51%) versus women (40%) - now there's a reason to give away a Grand Prix Media Lion if ever I saw one...

After much nudging and prodding to produce another example of consumer generated content, I have finally given in and put this together. The inspiration once again is the magnificant Tiger Woods (and somehow Chris DiMarco) who - despite the commentary - just did it (again)

Like last time, I have taken the video uninterrupted, and with only minor audio editing right at the end, left the moment to your heart's interpretation...with one twist. Instead of my ending, I'm going to let you come up with the ending.

This is in fact a brand experiment in co-creation, which draws on the old print example of "choose your own caption," with the winner getting some kind of prize. My hope is that you'll submit your own captions and the winner will be rewarded by Nike in the form of completing the commercial and putting it on air (or at the very least on their website)

Just do it.

I got to thinking....which is a pretty dangerous thing to do I know.

The TV model is predicated on a Fall thru Spring season - September thru May. The best (arguable) content is committed to this period and bulk of the dollars are likewise invested against the programming.

Only just recently (led by FOX) have we seen a staggered distribution of new series, but this is still more so the exception than the norm.

So here's my thought: consumers don't stop purchasing between May and September. Sure they go away and take vacations; certainly schools are on break and yes, the weather is warmer and people tend to spend more time outside, but still...somehow products/goods/services get bought and somehow consumers are getting the kind of information and persuasive or influence necessary to make these purchases (just ask GM)

I'm not going to go to the obvious assertion, namely that they're on the Web consistently (even though I just did), but for now...I just wondered if this further underscores the lack of efficacy and/or efficiency of the TV model. After all, if the number 1 performing show during this hiatus pulls in a meager 11 million...either this shows that consumers are getting their media fix elsewhere or that the inflated sums of viewers during the rest of the year is just padded with waste, fluff and fat...or both!

Am I making any sense?

The good folks over at Adrants posted this interesting piece on agencies' websites (they suck btw) and suggested the blogging route. I had earlier posted this piece which draws its source from across the pond (credit to Adverblog) and basically states, you had better walk your own talk if you want to be taken seriously.

...but back to the Adrants piece. No question that agencies can and should do better, but is a blog the answer?

1) If you blog it, will they (dem clients) come? Yes, if its being written (NOT GHOST WRITTEN) by someone like Lee Clow for example.

2) How authentic is it really going to be? Part of a blog's attraction is its honesty and let's face it, advertising isn't exactly about telling the truth (at least until Dove tried it) My fear is that it would be self-serving with a capital BS.

A new study documents that all is not yet lost for the ailing 30-second spot at the hands of the carnivorous DVR predator.

As reported in the Hollywood Reporter, Frank N. Magid Associates revealed that more than half (55%) of DVR consumers have at some point stopped fast forwarding in order to watch a commercial message.

I don't know about you, but this tells me virtually nothing, except that from time to time remote controls that have too much fried chicken grease on them succumb to the occasional slip of the finger.

In all seriousness, this has obvious and important implications for creatives (are you paying attention?) in the way they produce and build 30-second spots or derivations thereof. The more iconic they are...and (ironically) the more persistent the brand identifiers and/or integrating elements are, the more likely they will be to capture the attention of the multi-tasking demons that we fondly refer to as consumers.

It completely destroys the traditional method of leading up to an a-ha type reveal, followed by obligatory logo flash and toll-free/website afterthought.

It also doesn't exactly help the brand sans rockstar status and/or a proven track record of commercial excellence.

I also wouldn't go betting the farm on just over 1 in every 2 consumers WHO HAPPEN TO BE IN A FAST-FORWARDING FRAME OF MIND. (Excuse the caps, but think about what we're up against)

Hey, but that's just me.

Bloglet was down since Friday, so in case you didn't catch these posts, here they are again:

Brief the impossible brief - BMW askes agencies to cure AIDS, Cancer and combat poverty in Africa (oh and also come up with a few ads that don't feature long and winding roads)

On the wings of a dove - Reality Advertising takes a turn for the better!

The Engagement Wars - Court TV moves beyond reach (which they never had in the first place) to offer their advertisers value in the form of delivering engagement

Comcast's Brian Roberts takes credit for jaffe's ideas - Not really, but he has zoned in on a massive opportunity - the "convergence" between search and video...on TV

The BIG Sessions - VISA's Jon Raj interviews Bigwigs in the industry (he made an exception with me) and delivers them to your ears via podcasts

To my loyal Jaffe Juice readers, you would no doubt have picked up on a semi-recurring gripe of mine when it comes to the hypocrisy of the ad business: If you're so damn good at building brands, breaking through the clutter, coming up with big ideas, integrating "down the line" (whatever that means), why the hell then do you so suck at promoting/advertising yourselves?

Case in point is the double-edged sword of a website: it is front and center and 110% transparent to all who may care to cast their wanton glances its merry way.

Here's a piece from The Independent in the UK which passes its judgement on a slew of UK-based agency sites.

Hmmm - maybe I'll do the same with the best that this side of the pond has on offer. Watch this space. It's not going to be pretty.

I've been following the Dove thread for a while now and truth be told, haven't blogged it yet because I've been too excited about it...and wanted my post to be "just right", but then thinking about it, realized that procrastination would be tantemount to the lies, misdirection and bullshit that has come from Madison Avenue for too long now through retouched photography, use of starving beautiful people (AKA models) and all the other falsehoods associated with portraying things not as they really are, but how they would be in Utopia (which when last I checked was not a town in suburbia)

Here's a good piece written on the subject in Slate.

I take my hat off to the folks at Dove for their honest (some might call it risky, but not me) incorporation of real people in their most recent campaign. How novel...use the very people that you would hope would buy your product. Doesn't take a genius to realize the value in migrating away from fooling people and insulting their intelligence to respecting them through authentic messaging.

It's part of a very strong trend which underpins the new consumerism brought about through/by new marketing: "consumers aren't as stupid as they used to be" iow, fool me once, screw you! You don't get a second chance anymore...

WOW, what a compliment! Not only has Chief Exective of Comcast, Brian Roberts, read my book, but he's actually taken some of my ideas (Pages 162-164) to heart (and taken credit for them, but that's ok...although I would like him to pay me my dime!)

In this Reuters article, Roberts talks about how search is coming to a TV near you. The digitization of all content (specifically video content on or off TV) is going to pretty much change everything.

"If you're going to bring Internet-like capabilities to television, eventually, search is going to be as critical to the TV as it is to the PC"

Engagement. A word that you had better get used to hearing over and over again. So much so that I've created a new category here on Jaffe Juice, "The Engagement Wars" so you're always just one click away from any and all things engagement-oriented.

Opening remarks to Charlie Collier, EVP and GM of Advertising Sales at Court TV, who in his interview with Brian Steinberg at the WSJ, talks about how he is dialling into 2 of the 3 nodes of the new marketing trinity: REACH, CONNECT (and EFFECT)

In a secretivesque pact with select agencies (apparently forged in blood), deals are based in terms of minimum audience size AND viewer attention. The methodology is based on Nielsen retention numbers and 11 other herbs and spices (read: you gotta pay to play)

Charlie...I'm engaged. Wanna do lunch? On or off the record. Give me a buzz.

Dear BMW,

I recently read the highlights of your RFP as per your confidential memo to a handful of agencies, thanks to our friends at Adweek, and I must say it was priceless. Almost as funny as Wedding Crashers actually.

Your brief is interesting to me as it contains a truly rich dichotomy of the verbiage which I think both extol what is wrong with the business today...and at the same time, what needs to happen in order to rescue and resuscitate it. So my question is...which one will it be? Will the real BMW please stand up. I'm eager to know whether - behind the Select Resources International facade (in other words, did the write the brief or did you) - there is a client truly committed to change and new marketing...or just one intent on lip service.

South Africa (my home country) has had a love affair with your brand for the longest time and not coincidentally, I recall some of the most creative, landmark advertising for BMW which I believe dialled into the very challenge you've cited in your brief i.e. creativity (which) has not kept pace with engineering, hence the perceptual parity which you refer to, but I digress...

Do yourselves a favor and check out the BIG Sessions - a fantastic set of Podcastable (http://bigsessions.sfbig.com/xml/bigfeed.xml) interviews, run and led by one of the truly best people in this business, Jon Raj (who continues to blaze the way forward and set the standards for all marketers to follow...on so many levels)

The BIG sessions is an initative by the Bay Area Interative Group and archives include high level interviews with the likes of AKQA's PJ Pereira, OMD's Mark Stewart and Sean Finnegan, Tribal's Matt Freeman, MSN's Joanne Bradford, Y&R Brand's Glen Sheehan and even me.

They're really great for commutes, business trips, cab rides...food for the head and the heart.

Well done Jon...it was an honor to be asked to participate.

Last year's Battle for the HeArt MC, Pete Lerma, wrote this piece on his observations from this year's show in Dallas.

Read it. Or Weep. But not necessarily in that order.

The Wall Street Journal wrote this piece on Gap's "Watch me Change" "viral" campaign created by Crispin + Porter.

For those of you that haven't seen it yet, I would say, "get out the dressing room, closet or rock you've been hiding in or under and check it out."

So...do you love it or hate it? I'm interested to hear your points of view, and in the interim, I'll give you mine.

I love it. But maybe not for the reasons you might think. I love it because its different...for Gap...especially in light of 2 major points:

1) They have been addicted to celebrity borrowed interest in the form of 30-second predictable creative and media execution.

2) Sales have sucked royally for the retail chain.

1) + 2) are not mutually exclusive!

So let's recap: We spend oodles of money overpaying celebrities and buying media and our sales go down (although Joss Stone is certainly benefiting from it) The only business where that kind of relationship is acceptable (and might even get you promoted) is the (gulp) media business....where audience numbers decline and rates increase. Hint: Go Google Giffen Goods (alliteration)

It's not really possible to intelligently debate the future of the 30-second spot (and/or TV advertising) without intelligently discussing the content in, around and through which commercials intertwine, intermingle, intermarry and inter-grate themselves to their heart's content (pun not intended)

Here's an article by Rachel Leibrock which appeared in the Sacramento Bee on Reality, Reruns and Summer viewing...with an interesting New Marketing flavor to it.

Full text below...

Jean Halliday wrote a good piece for Madison + Vine/Ad Age on how Detroit/automakers have embraced new marketing in the form of predominently long form content...but at the same time have also struggled to emulate previous efforts.

It's an uncanny catch 22 - innovation is a prerequisite, however even in unchartered territory, standing out from the crowd is extremely challenging. Them be's the stakes in play.

P.S. Editor to Editor...thanks for correcting my name from Jaffer to jaffe :)

A good article from Reuters on the intersection of Advertising and Music A.K.A. Music as a brand enabler.

It covers advertising in podcasting, product placement within music/lyrics (uugh), branded entertainment through music e.g. CoqRoq, and also brands as enablers i.e. brands launching bands (Hmmm, b(r)ands...would that be called "banding"? Just wondering)

It also makes a strong point, which is consistent with my POV, namely that content is king. Russ Klein, Burger King's CMO, talks about marketers as "purveyors of content" and how they need to "earn" their way into consumers (lives) through their playlists for example.

I wanted to take this opportunity to welcome ePrize as the second official sponsor of Jaffe Juice (along with AOL Media Networks)

They're silent, but violent...and when I say silent (I mean "powered by") and when I say violent I mean EFFECTIVE, with a capital ROI.

I first came across ePrize when they helped launch Palm Champions about 5 years ago...and the fact this program is still around today is evidence of its value. Bottom line is that they're tapped into a critical level of marketing - promotions, sweepstakes, incentives, lead gen, CRM and the list goes on....and now of course Jaffe Juice :)

My pal, Derek Hewitt, is now running the marketing show at Tracfone. One of their products is Net10 - prepaid wireless at 10c a minute. Now he could have settled into his job and gone back to the comfort and convenience of a litany of 30-second spots, but instead he really has put "new marketing" into play.

No more so than his latest campaign which - American Idol style - invites consumers to submit their own recording/rendition of "My perfect 10" (an expression of the brand, Converse Gallery style)

Winners (voted by the consumer community) become part of the next wave of advertising and appear in the new set of commercials (and hopefully if this takes, get extra value through publicity etc)

Take a gander...

Sign of the times my friends...sign of the times. Fallon closes their doors in New York, AKQA open theirs. Where are you Bobbie Dylan when we need you?

I went to AKQA's NYC roof-wetting partay on Tuesday night, which for a suburbanite like myself was such a treat. I had the opportunity of meeting PJ Pereira who is a flipping rock star, Ajaz, who co-founded AKQA and see the fantastic Kate, as well as Rei, Lars and Tom again.

These guys are cool. They're creative. Get to know 'em. You'll be glad you did.

Alexis Parker....so you don't work at Crispin, Porter + Bogusky, but perhaps you do work at a pr/buzz agency. Am I getting warmer? :) Either way, keep on keeping on...send me the stuff and I'll blog it....

...sent me "Reality Fame" - a viral/consumer generated play where you (the consumer) get to create your own Reality promo. Cute. Yawn.

What you soon realize is that this is an MSN promo and the goal is to get people to try to MSN Messenger. Case in point - when picking your setting for your Reality Show, you get to choose from 3 scenarios: Working, Living and Stranded Together...but Living and Working are only accessible through Messenger.

So it would appear that the "employee discount program" from those wild and crazy auto kids in Detroit is being extended thru Labor Day. The reason given of course is due to its continued sales success.

Do I have to spell out how this is not just similar but exactly the same as being addicted to crack cocaine? There are short term highs and long term dependancies, with severe health repercussions, and challenging and painful withdrawal symptoms and fairly grim behavioral side-effects due to the addiction and the cold turkey hangover that is the best case scenario at the end of the day.

Any takers on the likelihood this will be extended past Labor Day to Columbus Day...followed by Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year....and beyond?