As a fun way to head into the weekend, I thought I’d write a quick post on a TV commercial that I’ve been enjoying lately.

The ad is for Sprint Nextel and it’s called “What if delivery people ran the world?”  Here it is:

The reasons I like this ad (and some rules of thumb I apply, in general) are:

1. Product features are clearly represented

2. The benefit(s) of those features are presented in a thoughtful way

3. The ad is told as a story that isn’t so outlandish that it steals attention away from the product.  Callahan’s unfortunate adventure is a solid underpinning for the product itself – not the other way around.

4. It’s a positive ad.  Some products make it difficult to tell a happy story, but Sprint made a conscious choice.  Instead of, say, showing parents using their walkies while searching for their missing child, Sprint’s tale makes the viewer smile.  That’s not always possible and I’m no goodie-two-shoes but it’s nice to see a ”happy” message once in awhile.  I might also propose (with no research to back it up whatsoever) that positive ads may get more than their fair share of mind right now, given the economic environment. 

My only demerit would be that I think the voiceover swallows the name of the particular product (“Direct Connect“) while the card is up at the end.

While I’m at it, here is my favorite ad from 2008 that observes the 4 principles above.  Enjoy.

Did you see the Oscars telecast this past weekend?  Third worst-rated show in history.  Just painful.  I adore Hugh Jackman (duh), so I watched his interview with Barbara Walters before the ceremony started.  The first-time host told Barbara that he would indeed perform and that he felt the awards needed “more show, less business.”  I think we just needed less of everything.

Aside from Kate Winslet, “best performance” has to go to Glam Media, the women-focused vertical network boasting over 75 million users and 700 publishers.  comScore has named Glam one of the top 10 media properties on the Web.

While the likes of ABC (who did not stream the broadcast!), Twitter and Facebook wandered around trying to figure out how to make money on online Oscar conversations – celebs in the audience and at the parties were twittering, for cryin’ out loud – Glam just went ahead and hosted its own Twitter widget.  Glam then offered advertisers the opportunity to sponsor an edited version of the tweet stream during the telecast. 

Glam hand-selected which tweets appeared in the stream, thereby making it safer for brand advertisers who are always (and understandably) concerned about appearing alongside a conversation that veers into unacceptable subjects.

Aveeno sponsored the Twitter widget, and Glam says it will introduce widgets for both FriendFeed and Facebook streams running during future shows and other events. 

Poaching on other sites’ turf to generate ad dollars, when those sites haven’t figured it out themselves?   Nicely done!

This is the second in a series of posts about ads so weirdly out of tune with the public zeitgeist that they deserve your attention.  I haven’t found one every week (thank goodness), but this one definitely makes the (F) grade.

Say hello to Hawker Beechcraft Corporation of Wichita, Kansas.  Hawker ran this full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal last week.  Intended to look like a letter from James Schuster, Chairman and CEO, the ad begins, “Dear Starbucks, You still need to fly.  We’re here to help.” and goes on to say that “in an era where every dollar counts” and “you need to fly smarter,” the Hawker 4000 is the way to go.  The Hawker 4000 costs $18.8 million, according to Wikipedia, and can seat 8 (for the aero-enthusiasts among you).

The ad is part of the company’s campaign to “fire back at the media and politicians on business jets” and was accompanied by a press release in which the company’s Marketing VP claims the company is “puzzled” that the media and political community could so badly mistake private aircraft to be a symbol of excess.  This individual goes on to express concern that this “stereotype is damaging the ability of American corporations to compete globally and, at the same time, jeopardizing thousands of American aviation jobs.” 

OK, let’s start with the revenue potential represented by this campaign.

That would be zero.  A private aircraft is a highly considered B2B purchase with a long sales cycle.  Let’s say there are 100 people/organizations in the market for this product right now (at best).  Such a sale requires personal relationship-building at the CxO level over time,  extensive, expensive marketing and promotional efforts and community/industry participation.  A newspaper ad is a needle in a haystack.

After all, Hawker Beechcraft has sold exactly one commercial-use unit so far to Talon Air, a luxury air charter company.  None have been sold outside the industry.  And as a side note, thanks for pointing out that Starbucks uses private aircraft (perhaps to help executives fly around closing stores and getting rid of staff).  Starbucks investor relations department must have been delighted to be called out in this manner.

If anything, this ad may impede sales, as it does not make Hawker appear to be a prudent and discreet partner at a time when such a purchase might receive signficant scrutiny.

But beyond the lack of revenue potential, this campaign is so unnecessarily cold and snarky that it eliminates the potential for any good result at all.  The company coyly says it is “puzzled” at the public outcry about waste and excess.  Puzzled? I don’t think so.  Private air travel is the only efficient way to fly?  They know this is not the case, or that customers and shareholders of companies that may purchase private aircraft would not think that was the case.

Look, here’s my point:  no one in this country or any other will begrudge a worthwhile company trying to sell a legal product.  Whether someone is unemployed or put out of his home, everyone understands that a company is in business to sell and that sales create jobs.  But to play-act surprise, to clasp one’s breast and say that the media and politicians are trying to “destroy” America’s strongest industries… to spend money on a full-page WSJ ad that will generate only bad will and no sales – at a time when most companies, including Starbucks (the unfortunate target of this particular ad), are scrambling, and Hawker Beechcraft itself is laying off employees – is irreparably misguided and, frankly, sad.

And P.S.  An effort like this also draws attention to the company itself as well as its executives.  For example, a quick review of a few SEC documents reveals that the company posted a 2008 net after-tax loss of $139.9 million, while Jim Schuster’s 2008 bonus was set at (up to) $630,000 – the same amount he received in salary.  And upon his imminent retirement, Schuster will get $321,000 in severance, company-subsidized health benefits for himself and his family for at least 12 months, an additional $750,000 when the company buys back 75,000 common shares and another $1 million for no discernable reason at all.  Is this what Schuster meant in November 2008 when he announced an earlier layoff and told employees to “plan for the worst?”  He certainly appears to have done ok for himself.

Is that a low blow? Wrong question.  This isn’t personal: it’s business.  CEOs mustn’t get pulled off track by what they know about the inner workings of their own organizations.  It’s how things look in the current economic climate that must be factored into the equation.  Tell me again why Hawker’s executives and ad team deliberately drew this kind of attention to themselves?

In his memo to all employees last month announcing additional layoffs, Schuster offered concern, understanding and reflection on the economic conditions that are causing suffering, both within and outside his own company. 

A good media and crisis communications expert – and any marketer worth his or her job – would recommend to Mr. Schuster, Hawker Beechcraft’s Board and Schuster’s successor that perhaps this tone is far wiser and more welcome under the circumstances.
Hawker_Beechcraft

“New mover” marketing is huge.  Most banks and many other types of institutions have individuals or teams assigned to the art of capturing business from consumers who move from one home to another.  Banking, home improvement and security, auto repair, dry cleaning, groceries, pharmacy, electrical, plumbing, gardening… you name it and you need it in a new place.

17-20% of the US population move every year, and new mover total spending is around $170 billion.  New mover list rental is a huge and attractive business because new movers are highly responsive.

I have seen QSRs market to new movers (they buy their way into “welcome wagon” programs with coupons or send stand-alone postcards, etc.).  A Denny’s example pulled a 38% response.

Now comes a study from Epsilon pointing out that folks spend over 50% more on home decor and furnishings in the first year after they move than do people who stay put.  These same movers, however, spend 24% less than non-movers on apparel and personal accessories in that same year.

So… Do national department stores and clothing stores purposefully promote to new movers?  Nordstrom, Macy’s, Dillard’s?  Do they market a specific message (and offer) to existing store cardholders who change zip, and new prospects (cut by income) living in an X-mile radius of a store?

Well, this is pretty amusing.  Dick Fuld and his wife are flying JetBlue, and their fumbling at a self-serve kiosk in Florida last month has triggered some timely and clever work from the airline and its agency, JWT Partners.

“Welcome Bigwigs” not only invites former masters of the universe to “jet” with JetBlue anytime, it also offers some handy advice about how to fly – SHUDDER – commercial.  Click on the image to the left to see one of the ads.

Next up in the campaign:  instructional videos for confused titans who must learn to share armrests, eat teeny tiny bags of peanuts and stand in line for the most skeevy restroom experience of their lives. 

“Executives haven’t thought of JetBlue as viable for businesses and that’s wrong, because you can watch CNBC and CNN all the way to the destination,” says JWT’s Kristen Lenz.  Is that tongue in cheek?  If not, the ads serve up a hearty helping of satire and mock sympathy, cooing “Nobody will blame you if you just want to watch kittens on Animal Planet.”

This extension of JetBlue’s “Happy Jetting” theme does a nice job tapping into the current public zeitgeist, without going overboard one way or the other.  It’ll be interesting to follow the campaign and see how it performs.
JetBlue Dick_Fuld Welcome_Bigwigs JWT_Partners Lehman_Brothers

Well, that was quick.

Facebook recently felt the wrath of both its own members and privacy experts (again)after my beloved Consumerist published an article pointed out that recent changes to the company’s Terms of Service meant that the company would own a member’s personal information “forever,” even after a member deletes her account.

That didn’t go down too well with anyone so the company reverted to its prior TOS this week, saying that it would come out with a new version at some time in the future, written in “language that everyone can understand.”

Interesting.  It seems to me that Facebook’s problem is that we all understood the new Terms a little too clearly.

On a separate but related note, Silicon Alley Insider’s Business Insider graciously points out that – if we’re all going to start reading every website’s TOS – we might start with Google, Verizon, YouTube and AOL AIM.  This article is accompanied by a photo of a guy wearing a tin foil hat on his head while at his computer. 

I have no comeback for that.
Google YouTube Facebook Silicon_Alley_Insider Consumerist Eric Yaverbaum

Now that Google is laying off staff and its stock price is down, I have to wonder if perhaps it’s time to accept the fact that giving people scads of personal experimentation time may not be so, uh, productive. 

First it was the company’s effort to keep us from the 21st century version of drunk dialing:  drunk e-mailing.  Cute. 

Now it’s Latitude, a program that allows users to track others with their mobile phones.  Each user must opt-in and can select which of her contacts may be permitted to track them.

I find this to be neither cute nor safe.  Anyone could get a hold of a user’s phone and change the settings, or a person could give a Latitude-enabled phone as a gift.  And once a phone is enabled, a second party could mask his own phone’s ID, thus ensuring that the first party – or victim, in this case – would be unaware that she was being tracked.

Google says that individuals’ increasing willingness to share personal information, on sites like Facebook, have encouraged the company to create services such as Latitude.

This doesn’t really fly.  My willingness to change my Facebook status to reflect that I’m enjoying a cup of coffee doesn’t extend to letting the universe know that that coffee house is on Lexington Avenue at 77th Street.  And how that location might change minute by minute.

It’s also a potential Big Brother nightmare.  Location data that may be useful to friends and family could also be valuable to the government, your competition, an angry ex or thieves happy to rob your home when you’re not around.  And while Google says it won’t store the data (having faced criticism on its privacy policies in the past), the government or others could still ask Google to help track someone being investigated.  “As it stands right now, Latitude could be a gift to stalkers, prying employers, jealous partners and obsessive friends,” says Simon Davies of Privacy International.

I see no clear need for this: it’s simply not a case where the existence of technology creates a unique and meaningful improvement or advantage.

I like Google, but its fundamental drawback is that it grants no status to honest or credible content.  Perhaps this is par for the search engine course – at least for now.  But products that overtly weaken personal rights and privileges?  That’s a slippery slope that I do not believe is worth the trip.
Google_Latitude Privacy_International

Is this real?

On Amazon.com: PLAYMOBIL AIRPORT SECURITY CHECKPOINT SET

Amazon Customer Reviews
“I was a little disappointed when I first bought this item, because the functionality is limited. My 5 year old son pointed out that the passenger’s shoes cannot be removed. Then, we placed a deadly fingernail file underneath the passenger’s scarf, and neither the detector doorway nor the security wand picked it up. My son said ‘that’s the worst security ever!’  But it turned out to be okay, because when the passenger got on the Playmobil B757 and tried to hijack it, she was mobbed by a couple of other heroic passengers, who only sustained minor injuries in the scuffle, which were treated at the Playmobil Hospital.”

“Of course, since the Playmobil Dad could not remove his shoes or other clothing items, the Playmobil security agent became suspicious and, after waving her wand wildy a few dozen times, called her supervisor to wisk the Dad into a special body-cavity search room…  My advice – educating your kids about airport security with this toy may actually be more harmful to them than just packing them in the damn luggage with some bottled water and hoping they survive.”

“Thank you Playmobil for allowing me to teach my 5-year old the importance of recognizing what a failing bureaucracy in a ever growing fascist state looks like… I noticed that my child is now more interested in current events.  Just the other day he asked me why we had to forfeit so much of our liberties and personal freedoms and I had to answer ‘well, it’s because the terrorists have already won.’”

“I’ve heard that they were going to publish a coupon and code, to allow us to buy this for $9.11, they’re just waiting for the economy to drop a little more then it currently is. It’s a marketing thing I know…”

“This toy would be a lot more realistic with about 350 people standing in line for an average of an hour.  But it still makes a nice set with the interrogation room.”

Playmobil Playmobil_Security_Checkpoint Amazon

Last night, the first annual Shorty Awards gala took place in Brooklyn.  The Shorty Awards honor the best producers of Twitter content (tweets) in 26 categories including Advertising, Brand and Social Media.

And, Mon Dieu! - the drama!  Accusations of ballot box stuffing, paying for votes and other forms of cheating are rampant!  One of the biggest controversies has focused on the winner of the Advertising category, a woman named Carri Bugbee who tweets in character as Peggy Olson (@peggyolson) from the AMC TV series “Mad Men.”  When she won, a fellow Twitterer who owns a real ad agency actually got mad and spammed Bugbee with endless pop-ups of a Rick Astley music video (so random…).  He had hoped to capture the nation’s attention by winning the award, he said.  “She’s not real,” he cried!  Yeah, we get that.  But she’s good. Better luck next year.

In a charming twist, each winner used a tweet (all 140 characters of it) as his or her acceptance speech.  Maybe the Oscars should try that.

Should you be on Twitter?  There’s no concrete answer here, of course – and I’m speaking only about individuals at this point, not companies.  If you are interested in keeping up with and participating in the changing social media environment, you might give it a whirl. If you think you have something to say and can tweet 3-4 tweets a day (which is considered a decent volume and frequency) I’d say go for it.  And another huge advantage is that you can “follow” other Twitterers whose opinions you’ll see on your own page each day.  Just beware those who believe “Hmmm. Coffee!” is a good tweet. 

Fortunately, Twitter makes “unfollowing” easy, too.

Twitter @peggyolson

Anyone who knows me has probably accused me of burying the lede at some point.  More than once.  Whether it’s in writing or during a conversation, I will sometimes work up to the main point in a timeframe that’s somewhere between annoying and infuriating. 

But compared to these guys, I’m practically a hit and run.

A blind email has been making the rounds, inviting its recipient to get a tan from the comfort of her own desk via ComputerTan.  Only the agency, McCann-Erickson is mentioned in the email that delivers this clever video:

—–ComputerTan, the world’s first online tanning service, offers a deep, long-lasting tan from the convenience of your computer. ComputerTan’s revolutionary technology remotely manipulates the electrical impulses delivered to the Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamps present in every computer monitor, which transmit different wavelengths of light, from Infra-Red to Ultra-Violet. ComputerTan can control the level, intensity and exposure times of this light according to a person’s skin profile and usage history.—–

The video and viral quality of the work is quite good.  It’s a shame there’s no way to know who the client is unless you watch the entire video, go to the related website on your own, click around to “try” out the tanner yourself and then wait until a message comes up about the horrible effects of skin cancer.  That is just waaay too long to wait.  Too clever by half.  And too bad, too, because when your screen actually begins looking like the inside of a tanning bed, you do wonder, if just for a split second… 

A viewer on YouTube, Gutsy9, writes “This is a joke… right?”

Tantastic!

Readers know that I’m quite fond of a couple cartoonists and like to share their work once in awhile. On Stephanie Fierman – Marketing Mojo, it’s Tom Fishburne’s Brand Camp.  Here, it’s our funny friend David T. Jones and Adland. 

In a somewhat odd move today, Microsoft’s MSN launched a new celebrity site called Wonderwall.  One point of note is that the new site, launched in a very crowded space in which People.com has a vastly superior position, is the brainchild of Lloyd Braun.  We haven’t heard a whole lot from Braun, a lifetime TV exec, since he exited his job running “media” at Yahoo in 2006.

And, sidebar:  I put the word media in parentheses not to be snarky, but because no one ever really knew what that was.  Yahoo needed help and Braun, a very smart and talented guy, was available.  We can’t really know what happened, but Braun was either too big for Yahoo, or Yahoo was too irritating for Braun.  Either way, the result was the same and but a tiny, ephemeral embarrassment for him, if that. And on second thought, the episode probably raised Braun’s profile within Microsoft, so there you go.

Anyway, Wonderwall wuh?  I mean it’s seriously cool-looking, with it’s horizontally scrolling wall, huge, inviting pictures and a significantly visual feel: a piece of goodness one could happily expect from a Hollywood guy.

But Microsoft?  The place has not exactly been ground zero for online consumer content in the last, say, 10 years.  But the advantage of being, well, Microsoft is that they can continue to invest.  And they don’t bash us over the head with too much MSN branding on the site, which is nice.  If the site is a big success, there will be plenty of time to reassert the Microsoft/MSN nomenclature.

The revenue model revolves around advertising and, again, there’s crazy competition in this space, so we’ll see.  Next point of interest will be how well they promote and draw traffic to the site.  I hope to see them work the Hollywood access angle that Braun could potentially provide:  a few breaking news pieces at, say, www.twitter.com/wonderwall (which they may have to buy from someone who appears to own that username…) could get them big attention very quickly.

Microsoft MSN Wonderwall BraunBerman Lloyd_Braun

Do you remember the 1970’s Fifth Dimension song, “One less… FICO to answer.  One less… FICO to fry…”  You don’t? Well you may start singing it when you go to collect your three FICO scores and discover only two available.

As of Valentine’s Day, Experian will no longer make its credit score, or FICO, available to individual consumers.  So while you previously could have gone to myFICO.com and purchased any or all of three scores – from Experian, Equifax and TransUnion – there will now be only two.

Given what’s happening in the economy, it seems an odd time from a PR point of view to take such an action.  Lenders are raising their credit standards, and a yes/no decision can sometimes come down to a matter of a few points on your FICO.  If you are in the market for a loan, you want to see all the same information that lender is seeing:  particularly because individuals often find errors in their credit records that must be corrected.

The stakes are particularly high because Experian itself will continue to sell (your) FICO scores based on its data to lenders, such as banks.  This means that the lending institution will see a score that you can no longer see for yourself. 

Fair Isaac expressed surprise at the action at a time when consumers are particularly “concerned about their credit standing.”  Of course, there is some competition between all these parties, and Fair Isaac actually sued Experian in 2006 on an unrelated matter.  That lawsuit is still outstanding, which probably doesn’t exactly create a spirit of cooperation between the two firms.

If you are in the market for a loan or credit card, I would recommend buying your Experian-based FICO score while you still can.  And always pull your other FICOs once a year for free at www.annualcreditreport.com.

FICO credit_score Fair_Isaac Equifax Experian

Take about a buzzkill:

BBC Radio created a widget that calculates the food equivalent of your alcohol intake.  Try it for yourself by clicking HERE or on the image on the left.

Two regular beers and a cola (no zero calorie stuff) equals 420 calories, or the equivalent of one slice of pizza, a donut, a jaffa cake (a biscuit-like cake) and a fried onion thingy the Brits eat called a bahji. 

Some friends are having a pub crawl this weekend (yes, they are all over 30 years of age; it’s sad, really).  The event starts at 12 noon and ends who knows when – say midnight.  Let’s be conservative and say you drink one beer every couple hours, 3 colas and a tonic water.  Those 1,330 calories are equivalent to:
- 1 hot dog
- 1 burger
- 1 slice of pizza
- 1 donut
- 1 pastry
- 2 jaffa cakes AND
- 2 of those funky fried onion things

And those 1,300+ calories don’t include the stuff you need to absorb all the booze: food!  Think about college: four years worth of pizza, McDonald’s, pizza, subs, cheesesteaks, pizza, bar visits…  *Shudder*

In all seriousness, the BBC site and radio shows are part of a series about alcoholism and its devastating effects.  Both are connected to the Drinkaware Trust, an organization focused on changing Britain’s drinking habits.  Drinkaware is a non-profit that offers funding for education work and other projects dedicated to addressing the misuse of alcohol.  It is funded by “voluntary” contributions from UK’s alcohol industry (smart).

alcohol_abuse BBC alcoholism Drinkaware

Picture this, ladies:

You are in Store #1.  You try a pair of shoes in the wrong size because you want to check the color, the heel, etc.  You want them.  So you wait ’til you are at the front of the line, at which time you ask a clerk to “check the computer” for the shoes in your size at any nearby stores.  She can’t tell, so she pulls out this big old-school binder and offers to call around.  She dials Store #2, gets put on hold, describes your shoes and then waits again until the clerk at Store #2 returns to say she does not have the shoes in your size. 

Or instead of dialing for dollars, you attempt to short-circuit the process and ask the clerk to print out the closest 3 or 4 stores that appear to have the shoes in your size.  You leave.  Then you call or stop by one of these stores yourself, only to find the shoes unavailable.

In this era of instant information and gratification, there’s definitely something wrong with this picture.

Enter Lucky magazine with a great new iPhone app.  Lucky At Your Service allows you to browse shoes or specify those you want by trend, brand, color and size, then it uses GPS or a zip code to serve up the stores in your area that have stock at that moment.  There’s still al little bit of this that’s sneaker brigade – the magazine hired a call center full of humans who will confirm your selection and actually set the shoes aside for you – but it’s still a step (ha!) in the right direction.

The magazine intends to broaden Lucky At Your Service’s selection beyond shoes in upcoming issues.

This is clearly useful for shoppers and great for Lucky as it tries to keep advertisers happy during an economic slump. Lucky and advertisers could ultimately try to clear sale inventory via the app, and cross-sell other types of items (panty hose with shoes, scarves with coats) that would “go with.”  Offers could be served to the entire subscription base or only a select number of individuals based on their past behavior, involvement with the magazine, credit bureau characteristics, etc.  There are a lot of opportunities here.

This is a nice example of local mobile search, too.