Posts Tagged ‘advertising’

The Who Sell Out. They All Sell Out.

Monday, September 21st, 2009

The_who_sell_out_album_frontOriginally released in 1967, The Who Sell Out received the Deluxe Edition reissue treatment earlier this year –  and it could not have come at a more prescient moment.  As the music industry’s revenue continues to fall and fall and fall, some of the cleverer music marketers are seeking new ways to promote their artists and even create new revenue streams from them.  Who knew that a psychedelic classic from 1967 would provide the template?

Sell Out was The Who’s fourth LP and the band’s first attempt at a full-length concept album.  The schtick was that the album was really a radio show complete with interruptions for station IDs and commercials.  (This also made for a clever way to gloss over the production problem of the album’s schizophrenic body of songs – everything from Beach Boys pop to proto-metal.)  Underlining the “sell out” concept, many of the ads were for brands they loved with the hopes that Premier Drums and [ahem] Jaguar would shower the boys in the band with free product.

The album’s conceptual centerpiece is the track where it all comes together.  “Odorono” sounds like a sweet if overdone Byrds-y pop track with a curious narrative about a female singer’s big debut.  It’s not until the last line of the song that the curtain is pulled back to reveal that the whole 2+ minute song is an advert for deodorant.

Listen: The Who – The Who Sell Out

wrigleys-dumps-chris-brown-doublemint-gum

Of course that’s all performed as a sly joke.  But recent events have brought product placement in pop songs into the spotlight as a legitimate brand-builder.  Most notably Chris Brown’s “Forever” was revealed to be a jingle for Wrigley Doublemint Gum only after the track had already launched into the Top 10.  (Perhaps we should have noticed earlier because of the chorus: “Double your pleasure/double your fun”). “Forever” also shows in the most dramatic way possible the pitfalls and opportunities inherent in latching your brand to a pop song.  As anyone who has passed through a supermarket checkout lane in the last five months would have seen, Brown’s reputation is now tattered following a domestic violence incident with his then-girlfriend, Rihanna, and Wrigley subsequently pulled his spots out of rotation.

Out of the blue, “Forever” was hijacked by a viral video that has become one of 2009’s biggest hits, “JK Wedding Entrance Dance,” now standing at over 25 million views and providing Brown’s song an unexpected return to the iTunes Top 10 singles chart.  Reflecting on how the private lives of artists impact their professional output is often a fool’s game, so we should probably look past using a love song by a convicted girlfriend-beater for a wedding.  But one wonders if Jill & Kevin were aware how much of a role Wrigley played at their (now very public) nuptials and how much free publicity they would be giving the gum.  (Or do they work for Wrigley?  Now that would be brand dedication: product placement at your wedding.)  One thing’s for sure: Google noticed – and turned “JK Wedding Entrance Dance” into a case study for monetizing YouTube content.

Def Jam, meanwhile, is taking a different tack by reminding publishers that its products often have many more eyeballs than famous magazine and web brands.  To that end, Mariah Carey’s new album will include a 34-page mini-Elle magazine – while Elle will feature a 14-page spread about the album.  “We sell millions of records, so you should advertise with us,’ ” said Antonio “L.A.” Reid, IDJ’s chairman. “My artists have substantial circulation–when you sell 2 million, 5 million, 8 million, that’s a lot of eyeballs. Most magazines aren’t as successful as those records.” And, he might add, hit records have a lot more shelf life.  Just ask Chris Brown.  Or The Who.


Your Ultimate Problem With Social Media

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

I spent a little time the other day going through my LinkedIn connections and noticed that one of them, a deceased business school colleague, still had an active account.  Tracy’s blog is a testament to how fast her illness went from bad to fatal: a long reasoned post asking for privacy on October 13, 2008 followed just 16 days later by a death announcement.   But Tracy’s LinkedIn page still shows her as a Microsoft employee.   Whether this is an oversight or a tribute, I’m sure I’ll never know.  That’s fine, but I can’t help but be a bit spooked when I see Tracy’s name on my account.

I still stumble across the Contact entries of departed friends and family in my phone and my various electronic address books.  To delete them feels disrespectful, but honestly when will I need these again?  When is it OK to unfriend the dead?

Dolla was one of Twitter's hottest topics on May 19.  "Hmmm, how can we monetize that?"

Dolla was one of Twitter's hottest topics on May 19. "Hmmm, how can we monetize that?"

All of this unpleasantness brings me to this post’s real topic.  Especially in the face of 8.9% unemployment, there has been considerable discussion lately over online reputation management.  Sure, we know not to put up pictures of partying and other hijinks.  (Hi, Max & Luke!)  But the ultimate uncomfortable social network question faces all of us participants: blogging and micro-blogging our private lives and thoughts, registered and active on any number of social network sites, what happens to all this stuff when you die?  (And remember, death never comes at a convenient time.)

This is no small problem for media companies and people actively involved in self-branding and promotion.  The rapper Dolla, who was murdered earlier this week, had just opened a Twitter account and posted his first tweets.  His MySpace page (56,000+ friends) has no mention of his passing except RIP notes from his fan base, while a couple of telephone promotions still feature his voice hyping his latest single.  (Try dialing (678) 500-8475 to hear Dolla speak from beyond the grave.)  This is no small problem for his record company, which is still presumably going to try to shift a few units of his upcoming album.   The sheer volume of tweets after the news got out should be encouraging to those who still want to make dollas off Dolla.

Vote for Nick!

Vote for Nick!

Major League Baseball has a terrific series of unified web sites packed with all the information you could ever want (assuming you’re not a Baseball Prospectus type).  When Angels pitcher Nick Adenhart was suddenly killed earlier this season, the folks who run the MLB web sites were faced with the task of stripping all his information respectfully from the network.  Unfortunately there were a couple of embarrassing cases where his name was missed and remained on the site – most egregiously, as of May 19 on MLB’s official news site, Adenhart was still touted as an up-and-coming pitching prospect.

(MLB also made the curious decision to cease selling Adenart’s name on customized jerseys.  Possibly respectful, but also cutting off an avenue for fans to pay tribute.  In fairness, this also prevents using Adenhart as a political statement, having been killed by a drunk driver.  Imagine a ballpark MADD/Adenhart protest and you can (possibly) understand that MLB would not want its brands involved.  Beer is a pretty big sponsor of all things MLB.)

So what about the rest of us?  Looking over at my links over on the right-hand sidebar, I have nine social media sites that I actively use and there are several others that I’ve abandoned without pulling down my pages.  If I were to disappear tomorrow, what would be my legacy?  My tweets?  My blog?  I would hope not, but the reality is this is the best evidence of my existence, especially to friends and others that I don’t see on a regular basis (which is, what, 75%+ of most folks’ Facebook friends?)  And what should I do about it?

One company believes it has the answer.  Deathswitch promises to send out an E-mail upon your death, which could include your passwords, final wishes or (most tantalizingly) the last word in an argument.  A premium account would prompt as many as 30 different mails sent to your friends, enemies and other interested parties.

The simplest thing is to do what you should do for all your interests: make sure that your loved ones know what you want done with this stuff.  Recognizing that your reputation may be it when you leave – and that your reputation may be founded entirely on your public life – make taking care of your online presence an essential part of your tending to your legacy.  And since the health of social media depends on pages of user-generated content creating advertising platforms – at least that’s what it is today – you may wish to consider if you want an ad on your electronic tombstone.

Further Reading

Magazines Giving Up; Tabloids To Come?

Wednesday, April 29th, 2009

As an old print hand, the collapse of the magazine business model has been a sad thing to observe and play a small part in.  The typical big US title – think something you’d pick up at the airport or (tellingly) from a waiting area –has staked its business for decades on printing & distributing tens of thousands of unprofitable copies with the assurance that an attractive audience would be worth CPMs of $30 and up to advertisers.  The very largest titles could afford lower CPMs approaching television so long as there was enough demand for copies.

portfolio_As anyone who follows media knows by now, magazines have been hit with a triple-witching the last few years: collapsing CPMs for even the most difficult-to-target audiences (in light of the targeting capabilities of the Internet) and plus collapsing advertising page sales; slackening demand; and rising distribution costs.

The big bellwether is now upon us.  Conde Nast, really the last of the big-spending believers in magazine, first quietly packed off Domino and a few other titles and, more dramatically, this week closed Portfolio, for which the company had reportedly spent over $100mm to launch.  (Portfolio was a poorly-timed entry – a well-written glamor magazine about business caught up in, well, now.  But it was also schizophrenic.  Despite being targeted at business elite, it was also weirdly basic; a column in the first issue, for example, explained how interest rates work[?!?!].)

While most attention has been paid to falling ad pages, it’s really the CPM problem that most fundamentally egs the question of whether the magazine industry will get anywhere close to its old business model ever again.  Publishers formerly charged $30-100 to reach a hard-to-reach passionate target – say, ukulele players – while now that CPM on AdWords is not just catastrophically lower but also available by auction.  In other words, not just the price is better; it’s the buying process, too, with better information creating a more efficient market.

So what for magazines to do?  The most obvious choice is simply to start charging readers, which is what many of the newsweeklies are now trying to do.  Any subscriber to Wired can see that they are getting their magazines at a steep unprofitable discount.  ($12 for 12 issues written, designed, printed and mailed?  Probably more like $30.  Printing and postage alone is probably well more than $1.25 per copy.  I’ve long said that Conde Nast magazines are one of the great bargains of American life, like home plumbing and the US mail.)

But the reality is that it’s going to be a very hard road to convince readers to pay after being trained into receiving content for free (the Internet) or near-free (magazines) for their entire lives, no matter how great the reporting or photography.  In the face of low demand, we’ll see massive changes in how these magazines work in the next few years – maybe months.

Another possible answer could come from the manufacturing side.  The biggest challenge with magazine business models as they stand stems from their battleship-turning nature.  It takes a long time to build circulation to get to a saleable advertising proposition; it takes an equally long time to deflate that unprofitable circulation when the ads dry up.  (This is why you’ll see big circ magazines like George suddenly disappear.)

HP recently debuted a service called MagCloud that could potentially democratize the industry by allowing easy creation of micro-targeted magazines – for example, not just for the ukulele player but for left-handed ukulele players living in the Midwest. A more nimble manufacturing process could allow more short-term plays; imagine for example “100 Days” magazine to follow the excitement around the new President, killing it just as readers start to tire of it.  Magazines may survive in fact by forgetting about brand-building and going after hot content.  In short, a return to the tabloid times of our Founding Fathers.   More on this in a coming post.

The Quaker Oats Bellwether

Thursday, April 16th, 2009

Quaker Oats, one of America’s great venerable supermarket products, staged a complete relaunch of its brand over the last two months.  The campaign has won kudos both for its general positivity in these otherwise dark times – sick of bailout-themed ads yet? – but also for the way that it reframes oats as a “power food.”  That is indeed a new, compelling USP for the brand and subtly introduces the idea of value as a ‘bang for the buck’ food. 

Flickr: puppyboysukk

A closer look shows something else: a new emphasis on ‘bang for the buck’ marketing.  By bringing all of its product lines under a single campaign, however big or expensive, Quaker must be saving here, there and everywhere on its promotional and internal costs.  The most obvious way is the now-gone requirement to discretely support each of its panoply of Quaker Old Fashioned Oats, Quaker Quick Oats, Quaker Instant Oatmeal, Quaker Oatmeal Squares and on & on.  It also means potential reductions in tmarketing personnel, in-store marketing, graphic staff (fewer executions), agency support, and so forth.  One wonders once the initial advertising launch blast is over with where the savings will go: into the product (reaching consumers) or simply as a hedge against falling revenue.  

Either way Quaker looks smart.  The company gets a new convincing USP out there, it cuts costs and – as James Surowiecki points out in this week’s New Yorker – finds a way to keep innovating and marketing in the throes of the recession. 

…a major study, by the Strategic Planning Institute, of corporate behavior during the past thirty years found that reducing ad spending during recessions did improve companies’ return on capital. It also meant, though, that they grew less quickly in the years following recessions than more free-spending competitors did.

The Quaker Oats campaign may be a bellwether for the overall marketing economy. As long as we see only one campaign for all its many products – I count 30 currently on its web site – we’ll know that US brands are still in cost-cutting mode.  But when the company starts to support its individual brand lines again – especially though general advertising, not just couponing and in-store marketing – then we can surmise that it’s sufficiently confident that spending is rising again. 

Bad Behavior has blocked 699 access attempts in the last 7 days.