Jaffe Juice

The folks over at Apple are at it again, with their cease-and-desist bullying crap. I'm seriously beginning to wonder whether the brand guidelines specifically and explicitly include the personality attributes of arrogance, egocentricity and conceited superiorty as part of their "core" equity.

C.C. Chapman is pretty steamed (and rightly so) on Apple's pushback on the terms, "podcast ready", "ipod" and even "pod" itself (beware Senseo)

P-Dub's follow-up post is here (props for the image - above - and for suggesting that camera "tripods" will henceforth be known as "tr" 's)

Sigh. Instead of responding, Steve Jobs is just going to create another 30-second spot to rub it in a little more.

My take? One word: REVOLUTION

Goodby, Silverstein & Partners have teamed up with Google to create a rather interesting mash-up for their Saturn client.

New York Times reports on this new partnership, which is akin to MSN's custom- solutions initiative, i.e. allow agencies and a media publisher/vendor to create original ideas from a blank canvas.

What I like about it is the following:

• Invisible Technology
• Smart Targeting
• Innovative use of multiple assets such as Earth, Video/Click-to-play
• 3D modeling/viewing
• Personalization

Truthfully, it's not the best execution I've ever seen...a bit band-aided together (with some freaky privacy issues potentially), but it is a pretty good start in the right direction (after all, it's helped make Rich Silverstein 10 years younger - see below)

Here are some keeper quotes:

“Google wants to prove it’s an effective way to market,” Mr. (Rich) Silverstein said. “Saturn wants to sell Auras. And we want to show how we can tell good stories in a 21st-century way.

“The world doesn’t need another area to run a commercial; we’ve got plenty,” Mr. Silverstein said.

“I am so excited,” Mr. Silverstein, who is usually not given to hyperbole, said of the project. “I feel 10 years younger.”

Great article from Washington Post's Steven Pearlstein titled, "What happened to Creative Advertising?"

It reflects on many key points I raised in Chapter 10 of my book, "Life after the 30-second spot" (which you can download for free here)

Here are a few sound bytes of note:

...there is no financial difference between delivering a blockbuster ad and delivering a mediocre one.

Because so much time and money is shifting to the Internet, none of the old rules applies. Now, it is the clients who are pushing the agencies for change, and the agencies are finally examining how they are organized, how they are paid and how they conceive of their jobs.

The article concludes with the following quote: "As a result, after a decade of fighting changes, the industry is coming around to embrace them. Changes once seen as frightening are now being viewed, at least at the top of the ad business, as opportunities"

Personally, I don't think this is remotely close to accurately reflecting the mood, tone and more importantly, progress of the biz on both client and agency sides of the coin. There is a boatload of rhetoric, posturing and lip-service, but sadly or madly, the activation of intent and commitment is sorely AWOL.

I just got back from a great trip to The Netherlands, U.K. and Belgium. I spoke at eDay in Rotterdam, moderated (and podcasted) a CEO breakfast in Utrecht, met with a few ATS listeners/Jaffe Juice readers in London including Russell Davies and finally rounded out my trip with a Keynote at the Belgian Direct Marketing Association's "Challenge of the I" Conference.

Here's a little video clip with my European alter-ego (sorry, Mitch) - Jo Caudron. We hope to have the expanded chat on YouTube and Google Video some time soon.

I am in Europe at the moment on a bit of a whistle-stop tour in The Netherlands, UK and Belgium.

On Friday morning, I swung by Utrecht to lead a CEO breakfast hosted by Klaas Wiema and his online marketing agency, Energize.

At the last minute, I decided to podcast the session and its up for your listening pleasure.

Enjoy!

Great piece in the July issue of Wired on Creativity, which introduces two distinct groups of creatives: "conceptual innovators" and "experimental innovators".

The article introduces economist David Galenson's Theory of Artistic Life Cycles, an age-based methodology which essentially "reverse engineered ingenuity to reveal the source code of the creative mind."

The article focuses mainly on art/ists - for example, Picasso was a conceptual innovator whereas Jackson Pollock was an experimental innovator - but posits that the same theory should equally apply across a much broader array of disclipines, including - but not limited to - business.

It offers interesting ideas into the concept of "genius", as well as the importance and need to find happy mediums between left and right brain, and extreme classifications.

There are obvious implications for businesses, creativity, new marketing and experimentation. I trust you will see them as brightly as I do...

Coming soon, to a Doritos-heavy, testosterone-SUV charged small screen near you, the CGC Super Bowl. GM (Chevrolet) and Frito-Lay are charging (in varying degrees) their own consumers (gasp) with the challenge of creating their next Super Bowl ad.

MediaPost's Sarah Mahoney reports and my main main, Max Kalehoff spins his story here, with 6 questions:

Kirk Skodis just pinged me that he'd finally reviewed Life after the 30-second spot as part of my UNM2PNM initiative. I always intended this to be based on the honor system, and as a result, I decided that I would not chase up the 100+ people who requested free copies of the book in exchange for a bartered - honest - review.

It's great to see the long tail in action, not just in terms of the sprouting seeds of past reviews, but also in terms of "promise activation" which just goes to show...new marketing is not limited to technology, but applies to humanity just as well :)

Caribou Coffee picks up the ball that Starbucks so clunkily dropped, by accepting the voided coupons. It's a classic example of how being close to the conversation can allow marketers to capitalize on the lethargy, dysfunction, incrementalism and short-sightedness that is traditional marketing.

It also proves 2 points I've been talking about of late:

1) There's no such thing as local or regional (this was apparently a regional promo) or anymore. The world is indeed flat...

2) Marketers desperately look for signs of life from their customers...they want engagement and yet, when their customers raise their hands and/or reach out to them, they get slapped with disdain, disrespect and disapproval.

Starbucks worst case scenario i.e. the alleged abuse/misuse of an innocuous coupon was a blessing in disguise, but instead of capitalizing on this golden opportunity, they gifted it to a challenger brand and competitor.

It's a one-two sucker punch where the opportunity cost was the opportunity lost.

Seth Godin has a neat post about defending the status quo. Here are his 17 quotes and I've extended this a bit as well:

1. "That will never work."
2. "... That said, the labor laws make it difficult for us to do a lot of the suggestions [you] put out. And we do live in a lawsuit oriented society.""
3. "Can you show me some research that demonstrates that this will work?"
4. "Well, if you had some real-world experience, then you would understand."
5. "I don't think our customers will go for that, and without them we'd never be able to afford to try this."
6. "It's fantastic, but the salesforce won't like it."
7. "The salesforce is willing to give it a try, but [major retailer] won't stock it."
8. "There are government regulations and this won't be permitted."
9. "Well, this might work for other people, but I think we'll stick with what we've got."
10. "We'll let someone else prove it works... it won't take long to catch up."
11. "Our team doesn't have the technical chops to do this."
12. "Maybe in the next budget cycle."
13. "We need to finish this initiative first."
14. "It's been done before."
15. "It's never been done before."
16. "We'll get back to you on this."
17. "We're already doing it."

18. You have to understand...this is the [insert company name here] company

19. Be patient with us.

20. We move slowly, but we'll get there.

21. You've obviously never worked in the [insert industry name here] industry

22. There just isn't enough budget for change

23. Do you have best practices to go with that?

24. No one ever got fired for putting TV on the plan (yesterday's excuse)

25. No one ever got fired for putting (traditional) Interactive on the plan (today excuse)

26. Our marketing mix modeling doesn't incorporate the approaches you're suggesting

27. Well that might work in [insert country A here], but this is [insert country B]

28. What you say is terrific, but it would just be too hard to implement

29. We need a certain amount of reach in order to be successful

30. Change is good...but not on my watch.

Episode 53 of Across the Sound is up. With the exception of the B-K-G sponsorship vignette (this is becoming less of a sponsorship in my eyes as I feel vested and extremely passionate about them by th episode!), the entire episode is dedicated to dissecting the Curry Kerfluffle.

Here's the key to listening to it. The first 40 minutes or so represent my side of the story...think of this as the part that would have applied, had both sides been well and truly serious (at least one side might be) The last 15 minutes (the good stuff) speak to the real essence and even importance of the entire Kerfluffle....the marketing and social media motivations, implications and context.

Send in your audio comments and voice your opinion to +1 206 203 3255. You can take the concerned ATSizen, finger-wagging principal, impassionated defender of truth or marketing guru stances if you like...in other words, play along, rebuke or tackle the real essence and marketing meat of this live, organic and work-in-progress case study.

Love links: www.bkgpeople.com, www.dailysourcecode.com, www.dankojones.com

So unless you've been living under a podcasting rock for the past few days, you should be aware of Adam Curry's tirade against lowly ole me.

As I attempted to do my part to promote Adam's expanding empire, whilst respecting my listeners' wishes to keep my podcast to an hour, I split the 1 1/2 hour interview with him and Ron Bloom, Podshow's CEO, into 2 parts. I played part 1 as ATS #49, but decided to hold part 2 as ransom, given the fact he showed no love to me in terms of acknowledging part 1.

I have angered the Podfather.

He has withdrawn his permission for me to play part 2 (which I don't believe is actually possible in podcastingland) until I show HIM some love back in return.

He also made me his bitch.

Hear him rant and rave on DSC #456 and DSC #457

MarketWatch comments on it as well.

My response will be on ATS #53....

I have a chart which demonstrates the need to move from "message neutral" (advertising) to "channel neutral" (communications) to "campaign neutral" (conversation) to "solution neutral" (innovation)

In the May 1st edition of Ad Age, there was an interesting cover story (R&D vs. ads in battle for bucks) which focused on this very topic and whilst, I think it was a little too sensationalist i.e. "...the share of money spent on R&D increasing relative to the amount spent on advertising" which implies some kind of causal relationship, I do agree with the premise.

Here are the facts:

• 50 years ago: Advertising:R&D ratio was 3:1
• By 1970, this had dropped to below $2
• By 1995 it was down to $1.52
• Today, $1.34 is spent on advertising for every $1 spent on R&D

The article continues with a comparison of 18 Leading National Advertisers who disclosed both their worldwide ad and R&D spending and shows how ad spending as a % of revenue dropped 1.35 % points from 1995 to 2005, whereas R&D spending as a % of revenue increased by .32 % points from 1995 to 2005.

Here's my take. Think about some of the most prominent launches or success stories of recent times: The Motorola Razr; The Apple iPod; Toyota's Prius. They all have their roots in significant R&D innovation; they also have a strong marketing and advertising relationship.

The insight/implication is simple: R&D and advertising (let's call it communications) are - or perhaps should be - inextricably linked and the combination of both makes for an incredibly strong 1-2 punch.

Arguably R&D/innovation is a precursor to advertising (with the former giving the latter something actually newsworthy to talk about), however in reality the two are in fact part of a fluid circle - a closed loop - and continuous cycle.

In an age where R&D and advertising are quickly becoming synonymous with oil and water, I believe "new marketing" can play a major role in terms of not only bridging this gap, but indeed forging stronger bonds and interrelated dyamics or synergy points between the two disciplines.

Not really...just slammed, but I wanted to put in some worthwhile links:

1) MarketingSherpa's Practical Podcasting Guide for Marketers

2) Look out Hollywood, here comes Guy Goma. A really happy ending (or continuation) of the most unusual case of mistaken identity in a long time, courtesy of MSM.

3) YouTube shuns pre-roll ads. No link, but BRAVO! indeed. I for one, will never willingly advise my clients to ever purchase a pre-roll ad again.

4) Blogger Stats from Pew Internet (via MediaPost)

·        Thirty-nine percent of U.S. Internet users, or about 57 million Americans, read blogs; 8 percent, or about 12 million Americans, write a blog; and more than half of bloggers are under the age of 30.

·        Fifty-five percent of bloggers write under a pseudonym.

·        Fifty-four percent of bloggers say that they have never published their writing or media creations anywhere else; 44 percent say they have published elsewhere.

·        Seventy-seven percent of bloggers have shared something online that they created themselves, such as their own artwork, photos, stories, or videos. By comparison, 26 percent of Internet users as a whole have done this.

The final factoid was most interesting...bloggers are more likely to be in the CGC game which, if you think about it, is not surprising and yet, a very valuable insight.

Smirnoff's Raw Tea has now joined an elite club (to my knowledge they're the first): The YouTube Million View Club: 1.1 million views to be specific (and always growing)

It's the gift that keeps on giving.

It's the long tail wagging voraciously (and very early on)

Now how many bottles of raw tea are still on the wall?