When I give students my first lecture on media, the last item I cover is mobile advertising. It should really be the first.
Bloomberg reports that Facebook has announced its next billion users will be added mainly on mobile devices rather than computers. "By providing this opportunity on mobile devices, we can make the pie bigger and much more quickly," said Vaughan Smith, Facebook's director of corporate development.
Facebook now has 800 million users, but the shift is to smart phones and tablets, Bloomberg says.
I see it every day in my classes, in public transportation, on the street. It seems like every minute people aren't doing anything, or even when they are, they reach for their cellphones.
Students tell me who's going to be late to class, who's home ill. If we need a fact checked in class, someone always gets the answer on her cellphone. It's always distracting, though, when texts come in. Which they seem to do in a steady stream.
That's here in the U.S. In India and Asia, there are less computers, more cellphones.
Cellphone advertising advocates are making extravagant claims. They say that mobile ads are better than print because they can dominate the screen. But look how small the screens are. Who needs a tiny Tide commercial? These advocates also say people are more likely to act on cellphone ads. In many cases, I'm sure that's true, when the cellphone ad answers an immediate need.
I even predict that the time will come when we get cellphone service free, like radio and local television, because advertisers will be footing the bill.
As marketers, we have to figure out the best roles for mobile in the marketing mix. It great for sales promotion, but what about its role in brand-building? Is there one?
Once we get beyond the tech magic we can do on cellphones, what's the ideal content? Is it news, information, relationships, community service and/or entertainment? Much research has yet to be done.
Finally, how will we ultimately react to this rush to mobile advertising? Will we continue to be amused, or will people become angry, annoyed, grateful, dependent or disgusted? It's important we keep watching.
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Now who's going to replace Ron Johnson?
There's a very big retail job open and few people qualified to fill it. Maybe 30 in the world, tops.
Ron Johnson was the head of Apple's stores; the retail genius who brought us the genius bars, among other things. He recently joined J.C. Penney as president, and the search for his replacement at Apple is on.
There are three people at Apple who headed up groups under Ron, but Apple's store operation is global, and the immediate future seems to be expansion in China.
If you had the responsibility to replace the head of Apple's retail division, what would you do? Would you promote, from within, someone who's completely familiar with the Apple way of doing things?
Or would you look outside the company for someone who knows the computer business really well, including computer retailing?
Or would you look outside for someone beyond the world of computers who really understands global retailing --- someone from Ikea, for example, or Japan's Fast Fashion?
I would guess they're going to choose someone from inside Apple. A known quantity. Personally, I would look outside for someone who can bring new ideas, new thinking. It's way too early to settle for what they already know, and not try to stretch beyond.
I would look for someone entrepreneurial.Willing to take risks. Anxious for independence. Insisting on being in control. If they settle instead for someone with a "What would Steve do?" attitude, they'll fall behind. That's only my opinion; what's yours?
Daydream awhile about being Ron Johnson's replacement. What are the first six things you would do?
I think I'd offer Ron Johnson about three million dollars to come back.
Ron Johnson was the head of Apple's stores; the retail genius who brought us the genius bars, among other things. He recently joined J.C. Penney as president, and the search for his replacement at Apple is on.
There are three people at Apple who headed up groups under Ron, but Apple's store operation is global, and the immediate future seems to be expansion in China.
If you had the responsibility to replace the head of Apple's retail division, what would you do? Would you promote, from within, someone who's completely familiar with the Apple way of doing things?
Or would you look outside the company for someone who knows the computer business really well, including computer retailing?
Or would you look outside for someone beyond the world of computers who really understands global retailing --- someone from Ikea, for example, or Japan's Fast Fashion?
I would guess they're going to choose someone from inside Apple. A known quantity. Personally, I would look outside for someone who can bring new ideas, new thinking. It's way too early to settle for what they already know, and not try to stretch beyond.
I would look for someone entrepreneurial.Willing to take risks. Anxious for independence. Insisting on being in control. If they settle instead for someone with a "What would Steve do?" attitude, they'll fall behind. That's only my opinion; what's yours?
Daydream awhile about being Ron Johnson's replacement. What are the first six things you would do?
I think I'd offer Ron Johnson about three million dollars to come back.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Believe what you read in the paper.
My marketing students seem to know more about the San Francisco Chronicle than the Chronicle does.
Every term I buy 20 copies of the paper and pass them out to the class. Their job is to come up with ideas to save the Chron. American newspapers are in trouble. It's been estimated the last paper will be thrown on someone's front steps in the year 2043.
My students don't have any trouble with the exercise. They can see why newspapers have lost readers under 30.They also know how to change the paper into something desirable.
Most of what they suggest involves the product itself. It simply isn't helpful or relevant to them. They know how to make it interesting, and they say so. For example, if it looked and read like a magazine. If it was more about people, new ideas, and entertainment. Then, when I ask them if the Chronicle made all their changes and did everything they asked, would they read it...about half are not sure.
I love newspapers. When I was about seven and the paperboy slammed the Chicago Herald-American against the back door of our apartment, I'd quickly bring it in the house to read all the news that Hearst saw fit to print. It was fun. Most of the other people in our building got the Chicago Daily News in the afternoon, the liberal paper. Mine, with all its scandals, was far more exciting to a kid. That's when my love for writing began.
In sixth grade I published a newspaper, The Room 313 Flash. I didn't have any way to print it, so I just typed one copy and put it on the bulletin board. The best part was the gossip column. In high school I switched to writing plays, but in college I was a journalism major and editor of a humor magazine. I'm an avid newspaper reader to this day --- two and sometimes three papers a day.
Unlike my students. They check their computers every morning for the news. You don't have to fold them and you don't get ink on your hands. Then on to their cellphones, texting their way to school.
I hope that newspapers will look around at some of the media that are doing well and learn a few lessons. My students can also tell them 20 or so ways to survive. If newspapers would be willing to re-think their mission and delivery system for 2012, they might turn things around.
I'll believe it when I see it in the newspaper. And if anyone from the Chronicle is reading this, I'll set you up with my students. They have some terrific ideas.
Every term I buy 20 copies of the paper and pass them out to the class. Their job is to come up with ideas to save the Chron. American newspapers are in trouble. It's been estimated the last paper will be thrown on someone's front steps in the year 2043.
My students don't have any trouble with the exercise. They can see why newspapers have lost readers under 30.They also know how to change the paper into something desirable.
Most of what they suggest involves the product itself. It simply isn't helpful or relevant to them. They know how to make it interesting, and they say so. For example, if it looked and read like a magazine. If it was more about people, new ideas, and entertainment. Then, when I ask them if the Chronicle made all their changes and did everything they asked, would they read it...about half are not sure.
I love newspapers. When I was about seven and the paperboy slammed the Chicago Herald-American against the back door of our apartment, I'd quickly bring it in the house to read all the news that Hearst saw fit to print. It was fun. Most of the other people in our building got the Chicago Daily News in the afternoon, the liberal paper. Mine, with all its scandals, was far more exciting to a kid. That's when my love for writing began.
In sixth grade I published a newspaper, The Room 313 Flash. I didn't have any way to print it, so I just typed one copy and put it on the bulletin board. The best part was the gossip column. In high school I switched to writing plays, but in college I was a journalism major and editor of a humor magazine. I'm an avid newspaper reader to this day --- two and sometimes three papers a day.
Unlike my students. They check their computers every morning for the news. You don't have to fold them and you don't get ink on your hands. Then on to their cellphones, texting their way to school.
I hope that newspapers will look around at some of the media that are doing well and learn a few lessons. My students can also tell them 20 or so ways to survive. If newspapers would be willing to re-think their mission and delivery system for 2012, they might turn things around.
I'll believe it when I see it in the newspaper. And if anyone from the Chronicle is reading this, I'll set you up with my students. They have some terrific ideas.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Is advertising everyone's hobby?
Why is it so many people say they have expertise in advertising when they really don't?
I don't know any other field where so many people claim they have experience. I don't hear people saying "I have experience in being a prosecutor" or "I have experience in being a brain surgeon" or even "I have experience in selling cigars".
But advertising? Everyone's an expert. Everyone who wrote their own business card, sold raffle tickets, helped a friend write a want-ad to sell a bicycle, or done a poster for a lost kitty claims to have ability in advertising. Why?
For one thing, they've written letters all their lives. They know how to put a noun and a verb together to complete a sentence, so they're writers. Now computers make it easy for everyone to be an art director, too. Just download a photo or illustration. You can always tell a wannabee because they say "fonts", the incorrect Microsoft Word name for "typeface". (It was shorter.)
For another thing, now that "Mad Men" has been on TV, advertising is regaining some of its original glamor. Watch a few episodes and you can pick up the action, the moves, and the language. It all seems simple enough. Just have a brainstorm, put it into words and pictures, put on your "Mad Men" suit from Banana Republic, and sell your idea to someone. If you're not successful, just open the bottom right drawer of your desk and have a drink.
I want to stick up for the professionals in the crowd. The hard working, hard thinking people who have to face a blank computer screen and come up with good ideas not just one day a week but every day. Under the pressure of deadlines and meetings and the person in the next office. Plus all the usual worries everyone has these days. It looks easy, and advertising people are often naturally playful, so it's misleading. That smirk on a copywriter's face may be heartburn.
Try being in advertising. Write a commercial for a new toothpaste named Blitz, that's made with a new cleaning ingredient, B-F 20, from Switzerland. Go ahead. I'll be back in an hour to see how you're doing.
I don't know any other field where so many people claim they have experience. I don't hear people saying "I have experience in being a prosecutor" or "I have experience in being a brain surgeon" or even "I have experience in selling cigars".
But advertising? Everyone's an expert. Everyone who wrote their own business card, sold raffle tickets, helped a friend write a want-ad to sell a bicycle, or done a poster for a lost kitty claims to have ability in advertising. Why?
For one thing, they've written letters all their lives. They know how to put a noun and a verb together to complete a sentence, so they're writers. Now computers make it easy for everyone to be an art director, too. Just download a photo or illustration. You can always tell a wannabee because they say "fonts", the incorrect Microsoft Word name for "typeface". (It was shorter.)
For another thing, now that "Mad Men" has been on TV, advertising is regaining some of its original glamor. Watch a few episodes and you can pick up the action, the moves, and the language. It all seems simple enough. Just have a brainstorm, put it into words and pictures, put on your "Mad Men" suit from Banana Republic, and sell your idea to someone. If you're not successful, just open the bottom right drawer of your desk and have a drink.
I want to stick up for the professionals in the crowd. The hard working, hard thinking people who have to face a blank computer screen and come up with good ideas not just one day a week but every day. Under the pressure of deadlines and meetings and the person in the next office. Plus all the usual worries everyone has these days. It looks easy, and advertising people are often naturally playful, so it's misleading. That smirk on a copywriter's face may be heartburn.
Try being in advertising. Write a commercial for a new toothpaste named Blitz, that's made with a new cleaning ingredient, B-F 20, from Switzerland. Go ahead. I'll be back in an hour to see how you're doing.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
"Bling" go the strings of my heart.
A few Saturday nights ago in L.A., my nephew Jeremy Falk (MacMan, the Mac technician to the stars) arranged for our Southern California relatives to have dinner together. He made the reservations at Red O restaurant, Chicago chef Rick Bayless' new place on Melrose.
The place is so hip you have to have a reservation to even get through the outer gate. Inside the restaurant, a heavy wooden door later, the beautiful people were dining on exquisite Mexican cuisine. And yes, the people were beautiful.
The women's clothes were breathtaking, their eyes lilly pond liquid, their skin lubricated, and their hair swept, splashed, teased and tampered with. The men were L.A. casual, which is the same as Midwest casual except hundreds of dollars more going into cardigans. Their jeans had holes in all the right places, and looked well worn, like they had been chewed on for days by European aristocrats.
The food arrived and the guacamole was perfection, but every time I got a chip ready I was blinded by a ray-gun light from the next table. One of the two women was wearing a diamond bracelet that reflected every facet of the crystal chandeliers every time she smoothed her eyebrows. (The other woman at the table couldn't lift her arm to eat her tortilla soup because of her many bejeweled bracelets.)
At the table on the other side of us was a man in chains. On his wrists, around his neck, and who knows where else. His date was in chains, too; long ones that kept clunking on the table. It was daunting.
I loved every minute of it. Here in Northern California we're much more conservative. Personally, I always feel I'm wearing the right thing at the wrong place. In two weeks I'm going to a three-day meeting in Atlanta where they said the dress is business casual --- another wonderful opportunity to misinterpret the rules.
My curiosity and interest are always peaked by the energy and enthusiasm of people who are interested in fashion. My students are always up on the latest, and many have distinct styles of their own. I applaud them for it, and we use their fashion sense as the bases for many resounding discussions in marketing classes. We don't seem to spend time on bling, though. Maybe we should.
Clothes may or may not make the person. But they certainly make the person interesting.
The place is so hip you have to have a reservation to even get through the outer gate. Inside the restaurant, a heavy wooden door later, the beautiful people were dining on exquisite Mexican cuisine. And yes, the people were beautiful.
The women's clothes were breathtaking, their eyes lilly pond liquid, their skin lubricated, and their hair swept, splashed, teased and tampered with. The men were L.A. casual, which is the same as Midwest casual except hundreds of dollars more going into cardigans. Their jeans had holes in all the right places, and looked well worn, like they had been chewed on for days by European aristocrats.
The food arrived and the guacamole was perfection, but every time I got a chip ready I was blinded by a ray-gun light from the next table. One of the two women was wearing a diamond bracelet that reflected every facet of the crystal chandeliers every time she smoothed her eyebrows. (The other woman at the table couldn't lift her arm to eat her tortilla soup because of her many bejeweled bracelets.)
At the table on the other side of us was a man in chains. On his wrists, around his neck, and who knows where else. His date was in chains, too; long ones that kept clunking on the table. It was daunting.
I loved every minute of it. Here in Northern California we're much more conservative. Personally, I always feel I'm wearing the right thing at the wrong place. In two weeks I'm going to a three-day meeting in Atlanta where they said the dress is business casual --- another wonderful opportunity to misinterpret the rules.
My curiosity and interest are always peaked by the energy and enthusiasm of people who are interested in fashion. My students are always up on the latest, and many have distinct styles of their own. I applaud them for it, and we use their fashion sense as the bases for many resounding discussions in marketing classes. We don't seem to spend time on bling, though. Maybe we should.
Clothes may or may not make the person. But they certainly make the person interesting.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
What creative directors keep in their back pockets.
"Where's the ad? This is it? What else have you got? Nothing?"
When I first became an associate creative director, I was worried my group might let me down. What if they didn't come through? I'd better have something of my own in reserve, in my top drawer, just in case.
It was rarely needed. When you work for a living, something serious comes over you. The possibility of being fired was never lost on my writers and art directors. Plus they knew there are always 10 more people in line to take their places.
Over the years, I've had a lot of interesting people working for me. The guy who never came back from lunch, but always left a note on his door about which bar he'd be at in case I needed him. The guy who always came back from lunch, even though I told him not to. (One Thursday afternoon he came back so smashed that he threw all the potted plants from the lobby down an elevator chute.) The writer who always had twenty ideas for every assignment but could never decide which one was good. The other writer who cut off an art director's new tie because he wouldn't do the ad the way she envisioned it. And the art director who cried at meetings when the client rejected her ideas. (He couldn't take the guilt and changed agencies.)
It takes all types, and there's room for them in the ad agency business. But please know that the real ad-makers --- the ones who do the funniest, craziest, most mind-changing ads and commercials --- always meet the deadlines, always show up for meetings, always are respectful. Their talent is inside of them, and they protect it.
Jerry Della Femina said that advertising is the most fun you can have with your clothes on. I agree. But it's hard work and you're given a lot of freedom for a reason. People are counting on you and you have to deliver.
That's why even today I always try to have some ideas in my back pocket.
When I first became an associate creative director, I was worried my group might let me down. What if they didn't come through? I'd better have something of my own in reserve, in my top drawer, just in case.
It was rarely needed. When you work for a living, something serious comes over you. The possibility of being fired was never lost on my writers and art directors. Plus they knew there are always 10 more people in line to take their places.
Over the years, I've had a lot of interesting people working for me. The guy who never came back from lunch, but always left a note on his door about which bar he'd be at in case I needed him. The guy who always came back from lunch, even though I told him not to. (One Thursday afternoon he came back so smashed that he threw all the potted plants from the lobby down an elevator chute.) The writer who always had twenty ideas for every assignment but could never decide which one was good. The other writer who cut off an art director's new tie because he wouldn't do the ad the way she envisioned it. And the art director who cried at meetings when the client rejected her ideas. (He couldn't take the guilt and changed agencies.)
It takes all types, and there's room for them in the ad agency business. But please know that the real ad-makers --- the ones who do the funniest, craziest, most mind-changing ads and commercials --- always meet the deadlines, always show up for meetings, always are respectful. Their talent is inside of them, and they protect it.
Jerry Della Femina said that advertising is the most fun you can have with your clothes on. I agree. But it's hard work and you're given a lot of freedom for a reason. People are counting on you and you have to deliver.
That's why even today I always try to have some ideas in my back pocket.
Friday, November 18, 2011
What women want to know.
If you are an entrepreneur at heart, you know that the path to success is understanding your customer well enough to satisfy her unmet needs. But what are those unmet needs that women say are highest on their list?
Some of the answers are dealt with in depth in "Women Want More", the informative book by Michael J. Silverman and Kate Sayre of the Boston Consulting Group. Their source is mainly a survey of 11,747 women. Here's what they learned.
To begin, women have serious dissatisfaction in their role as customers. The worst categories are investments (47% dissatisfied); cars (47%); banking (46%); life insurance (44%); physicians (41%); and car insurance (39%). These are huge numbers.
Next, there are categories where women are perfectly willing to pay top dollar for better products and services: food (23%); personal clothing (16%); facial skincare (18%); bedding (14%); and perfume (17%). The key, of course, is what does "better" mean.
Before you set out to explore that question, there are major, overriding things that women want, according to the survey, and we marketers better listen.
First, they want love and connection. That includes a lasting romantic relationship; trust and commitment in a partner; connection with family, friends, colleagues and neighbors.
Second, they want fulfillment. Freedom to pursue happiness and satisfaction, however they choose; empowerment; flexibility; and encouragement to achieve.
Third, they're concerned about money as a marker. That includes increasing expectations about being valued; skepticism about claims; wanting more information and guidance about money.
Fourth, women surveyed want a balance of life and work. They've learned by watching men. They're time-stressed and looking for ways to get leverage. Women are taking on more and they're worried about making it all happen.
Those are the marketing clues of the day. If you can help in a meaningful and value-conscious way, you'll have a chance to make a difference and maybe get rich. And by the way, if you think women need a lot, be assured today's men need a whole lot more.
Where do you start? By listening. That's probably what women want more than anything.
Some of the answers are dealt with in depth in "Women Want More", the informative book by Michael J. Silverman and Kate Sayre of the Boston Consulting Group. Their source is mainly a survey of 11,747 women. Here's what they learned.
To begin, women have serious dissatisfaction in their role as customers. The worst categories are investments (47% dissatisfied); cars (47%); banking (46%); life insurance (44%); physicians (41%); and car insurance (39%). These are huge numbers.
Next, there are categories where women are perfectly willing to pay top dollar for better products and services: food (23%); personal clothing (16%); facial skincare (18%); bedding (14%); and perfume (17%). The key, of course, is what does "better" mean.
Before you set out to explore that question, there are major, overriding things that women want, according to the survey, and we marketers better listen.
First, they want love and connection. That includes a lasting romantic relationship; trust and commitment in a partner; connection with family, friends, colleagues and neighbors.
Second, they want fulfillment. Freedom to pursue happiness and satisfaction, however they choose; empowerment; flexibility; and encouragement to achieve.
Third, they're concerned about money as a marker. That includes increasing expectations about being valued; skepticism about claims; wanting more information and guidance about money.
Fourth, women surveyed want a balance of life and work. They've learned by watching men. They're time-stressed and looking for ways to get leverage. Women are taking on more and they're worried about making it all happen.
Those are the marketing clues of the day. If you can help in a meaningful and value-conscious way, you'll have a chance to make a difference and maybe get rich. And by the way, if you think women need a lot, be assured today's men need a whole lot more.
Where do you start? By listening. That's probably what women want more than anything.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)