Lairig Marketing

Unwatering The Solution

If we dare point out one of the few light moments from the utter devastation of the past few days, among the most memorable was New York Governor Andrew Cuomo declaring his wish for Christmas – “a dewatering specialist.”

[Runner-up goes to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie who, when asked if he knew what people were saying about his budding bromance with President Obama, said “I’m not in a coma.”]

Governor Cuomo was referring at the time to the imminent arrival of four people (hydrologists and mechanical engineers) to the flooded portions of lower Manhattan, experts at getting water out of places it’s not supposed to be. The proper term is “unwatering,” but either way, Cuomo's use of "dewatering" most certainly caused any listener or reader to cock his head and say, “huh?”

And it should have given special pause to branding and product-naming practitioners everywhere.

Because, for a host of reasons, the services that companies provide and what they brand themselves have tended to move away from what they do and toward what the benefits are they deliver. For example:

- Instead of “garbage hauler,” we have the field of “waste management solutions” (and, indeed, a company named Waste Management Solutions).

- “Barber” becomes “hair styling solutions.”

- “Night watchman” becomes “security solutions.”

- “Auto repair” becomes “vehicle maintenance systems.”

- “Smartphone repair” becomes “communications systems AND solutions.”

The more syllables, the better…apparently. The more you can make yourself appear to provide a breadth of services – even if you don’t – the better your chances…apparently. And if you tag the word “systems” or “solutions” (or both !!!) at the end, the more advanced you will appear…apparently.

Following that logic, the unwatering specialists would be better off…apparently…if they were named:

• “Flood Water Solutions.”


• “Water Removal Management.”


• “High & Dry Systems.”

If you have a specialty, there is no reason to be embarrassed by it. The world can always use a few more “unsolutioning” experts.

Cause Marketers Still Twirling About

Another topic we come back to now and then is that of so-called “cause marketing,” whereby companies profess to care about society through various and sundry ill-conceived, often tin-eared promotions.

Here are some of the best of the worst we’ve been saving up (and believe us when we say there are tons more where these came from):

Cars & Trees Go Together Like…?
Earlier this year, the rental car company Enterprise promoted a “50 Million Tree Pledge” to, according to its press release:

“…show Enterprise’s appreciation for its customers by giving back to the community and our country.”

According to a MediaPost article, Enterprise was looking to “make an emotional connection by inspiring current and potential customers to choose Enterprise based on a set of shared values.”

The only emotion this stokes is resignation, as in “We need more trees like we need more cars.”

Ketchup & Trees Go Together Like…?
Not to miss out on a trend, Heinz Ketchup went the tree route also, with its “Join the Growing Movement.” The company promised to plant a tree for every customer who pledged to - seriously – “live a healthy lifestyle.”

But only 57,000 trees, mind you. A growing movement that apparently grows only so far.

Anyway, if there are really any tomatoes in ketchup, none of them grow on trees.

Kids & Trees…Never Mind
Instead of sponsoring trees, which kids used to love to climb, Midwest grocers Spartan Stores, Meijer, and Kroger signed up to support the Pure Michigan FIT program, “a nutrition and fitness initiative focusing on the health needs of children under five years of age.”

And every day, in the checkout aisles at all their stores, kids can grab candy from ground level.

Consumers are indeed morons, but even they can see through this nonsense. Cone Communications (whose research we’ve highlighted in the past) reports that three-quarters of consumers see cause marketing as “solely for corporate gain.” (Now we know whose “cause” the marketers have been referring to.)

Further, only one-quarter of Cone’s survey respondents felt the alleged support marketers have been promoting has done any good.

Say what you will about Apple's marketing recently, but the company understands the “cause” trend. A few months ago, the company decided to opt out of the “EPEAT” program – the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool – that allegedly certifies a computer as “green” (lack of toxins, recyclability, etc.).

Apple knows that “green” doesn’t even make the top ten of choice criteria.

Not to make light of the personal devastation that Cyclone Sandy is about to unleash, but here is a cause marketers could support. Enterprise could reduce its rental car rates by 50% over the next two weeks. Heinz could give away pallets of ketchup. And the grocery stores could stack the essentials that consumers will need out on the front sidewalk.

Instead, expect lots of stories about price gouging and lousy customer service. If your “cause” is to maximize profitability, those are the two oldest tricks in the book.

The Runner-Up Script To Facebook's "Chair" Ad

Chinese food.

Chinese food is made so that people can sit down and eat without a lot of conviction or interest.

Anyone can eat Chinese food – especially people who are not Chinese. Like Jews on Christmas Eve, for example.

And if a plate of Chinese food is large enough, people can sit down together…and tell jokes or make up stories about the food. Like the ones about dogs.

Chinese food is for simple folk, and that is why Chinese food is like Facebook.

Mai tais. Chop sticks. Those cute, tiny paper umbrellas.

These are things Chinese restaurants use to make us forget what exactly is on our plates. So we don’t ask how is it possible that sweet and sour can exist at the same time. Or who the hell is General Tso.

Dance floors. Basketball. A great fortune cookie.

A great fortune cookie is something people read so they can have something to post to Facebook later on.

The Chinese menu.

It is vast, and often illegible. And makes us wonder how we could be so hungry – and alone – one hour later.

So maybe the reason we use Facebook is to remind ourselves that we are not alone. Although we are definitely very hungry.

Branded Content: What Jerry & George Were Trying To Say

Readers are dying to know: (a) was Lairig Marketing hacked yesterday and (b) what exactly were Jerry and George trying to say?

(a) Yes. Somehow Larry David stole our password and posted a little Seinfeld skit about Evian’s new microsite – “Evian. The Source.”

(b) Although Jerry and George were harsh in calling it “a site about nothing,” here is their point: branded content should be on brand.

Branded content is a good thing, generally. It is a 180-degree turn on the God-awful user-generated content we have trashed in a million prior posts. It is supposed to be words, pictures, video, etc., that a brand presents to the marketplace in hopes of deepening its relationships with customers. Anywhere along the marketing funnel.

A root word within “branded content” not to be overlooked, though, is BRAND. Meaning, the content a marketer presents should have a very identifiable connection to what the brand stands for, how it is positioned.

In Evian’s case, the idea to develop a site experience around “wonder” is laudable (and it hopefully gets a thousand web designers off their collective ass to vastly upgrade the look and feel of sites all across the Interwebs), but it is nothing that Evian has talked about before.

The Evian brand has long been positioned around its “pure and mineral-balanced water” and how it supports a body’s youth. Over the past several years, that has been manifested in the “baby” theme. Roller babies, the baby inside, baby dance, etc. Evian’s YouTube channel is even titled “Evian Babies.”

“The source/wonder” initiative comes a bit from left field. It could have just as easily been a site about “magic,” “dreams,” “the quest,” “progress,” etc. And it could have been brought to you by any of ten-thousand other brands. As Jerry intimated in yesterday’s post – this just as inconsequentially could have been from Pepsi.

Here’s what we “wonder” – what happens to those Evian babies now?

Jerry, George & The “Wonder” Of Evian

[The scene: George rushes into Jerry’s apartment early on a Tuesday morning. Jerry is sitting on his couch staring at the ceiling.]

George: Jerry, I got it. I finally figured out what to do for Evian.
Jerry: Thank God, George. I can’t come up with anything that doesn’t involve a little, ugly baby.
G: Baby, Schmaby, Jerry. We have to get the client away from babies.
J: But the "roller baby" video was a big viral hit, no?
G: Yeah, but remember what the client told us – consumers are now starting to think Evian is a baby formula company.
J: Wow. Then the current “baby dance” contest can’t be helping. I mean, who are these people who would send in a five-second clip of themselves dancing like a baby?
G: Jerry – Evian has already collected NINE HOURS of consumer video for that.
J: My God, who could watch more than five minutes of it?
G: They can’t. Listen to my idea. No babies. It’s genius.

[Jerry gets up and walks to fridge, and pours himself a glass of orange juice.]

J: OK, “genius.” Go.
G: We start with the Evian tagline – “Live Young.”
J: Isn’t that Pepsi?
G: No, they went with “Live For Now.”
J: What’s the difference?
G: Nothing. Forget that for a minute. Next: we answer the question “What’s living young got to do with bottled water” ?
J: Babies on surf boards?
G: No ! Think older. Like young adults.
J: Why do “young” people need to be told to “live young” ?

[Jerry sits back down on the couch, seeming frustrated.]

G: You’re too literal. Think about what’s going on in young peoples’ heads. Learning…[pause for dramatic effect]…wonder.
J: What?
G: Wonder. W O N D E R.
J: I’m not getting the connection to bottled water, George.

[George sits on the couch next to Jerry.]

G: Jerry, you’ve heard of Pinterest?
J: Yeah. Who are THOSE people who have the time for that?
G: We take that idea and do it with video.
J: Interesting…
G: Evian builds a little website about “awakening your sense of wonder” and puts all sorts of strange, two-minute artsy-fartsy videos on it.
J: How do we get Evian into all those videos, George?

[George stands up and gestures.]

G: That’s the beauty part, Jerry. We don’t. No Evian in the videos. People will barely know it’s a site from Evian.
J: Wait, George. Let me see if I get this. To get away from crazy babies, we build a site for young people to look at strange videos, and tell them it is all about “wonder.”
G: Yes! You’ve got it, Jerry!
J: And this has nothing to do with bottled water?
G: Absolutely nothing.
J: [strokes his chin] Nothing.

[Jerry walks to the kitchen and puts his empty juice glass on the counter.]

J: And nothing to do with Evian.
G: Nothing.
J: And no stories?
G: No stories.
J: A website about nothing. I think you may have something there…[beat pause]…Why does this sound familiar?

[George breaks into a big grin.]

G: Who says you gotta have a story, Jerry?

JC Penney Earnings Call – He Said. She (Didn’t) Said.

Back in mid-February, Lairig Marketing examined the “extreme J.C. Penney makeover” plans announced by new CEO Ron Johnson, ex-Apple Store genius (get it?!?!). We raised three issues:

- The new everyday-low approach wouldn’t make it past this Fall
- The idea of 100-stores-within-a-store seemed more Dhaka than Dallas
- Was there no end to Ellen Degeneres’ spokesperson dilution?

The J.C. Penney Q1-2012 earnings call transcript is hot off the press. It is a great read. And, sorry to use this line again…but the transcript ensures that we have another Harvard Business case study underway.

JCP’s Q1 results stunk on ice. The big story was traffic, off 10%. This was the main driver for an astounding drop of 18.9% year-over-year in same-store comps.

But here is something no one mentioned, and not a single Wall Street analyst asked during the Q&A. Online sales were down – what’s a bigger word than astounding? – nearly 28%.

Just like that. J.C. Penney dropped out of shoppers’ consideration set.

Johnson and team spoke at length about how his team was on the right track, but investors took JCP to the woodshed yesterday, giving it a 20% beating.

One question future MBAs will deal with: was Johnson right in starting the makeover with his new pricing scheme? No more sales. No more coupons.

The bigger issue we feel is how it was executed. The three tiers – everyday, month long, and best – aren’t exactly self-evident. On the call, Johnson fell not just a little on his sword regarding the confusion:

- “One of the thing we concluded…is that our marketing…is not doing the work it needs to communicate our pricing strategy…”
- “You will also note we started to put the compare [of month long prices] to our everyday.”
- “We now have TV supporting [our best price promotions].”
- “…in June, it will be the third time we have changed our point-of-sale signs [in stores].”

There’s a lot of fixing on the fly to undo the erroneous notion that retail customers will embrace a “simpler” pricing structure. Still, J.C. Penney execs don’t seem to feel they need anything akin to the old “$X off for all purchases over $Y” coupon to replace lost weekend traffic. Expect to see them revisit that misconception soon.

As for Ellen Degeneres? J.C. Penney wasted millions. She was used to explain new “fair and square” concepts like easy returns, full-dollar pricing (none of the $x.99 thing), and coupon-free shopping. None of these attempt to address the biggest problem – the confusing pricing tiers.

Ellen would be the worst person to do it, anyway. Imagine her trying to explain the difference between “everyday” and “best” pricing in her sing-songy A.D.H.D-ish stream-of-consciousness manner. Whose head would explode first – hers or the viewer’s?

As for the 100-stores-within-a-store strategy, Ron Johnson needs shoppers, and investors, to wait four years to see that come to fruition. Which, in the retail world, is equal to two eternities.

In the meantime, J.C. Penney will need to keep reaching into its rabbit hat.

Jim Beam Branding – Something To Toast

For a long time, Fortune Brands served as an excellent example of a “House of Brands” – a company with no rhyme or reason from a marketing perspective. Fortune was a company with well-known but disparate brands like Titleist, Moen, and Jim Beam.

Wall Street typically hates mashed-up conglomerates as much as good brand strategists do. They hated Fortune Brands. After severe hounding by activist investor/hedge fund manager Bill Ackman, Fortune sold the golf-related businesses and created a new company for the spirits side of the “house.”

And, for what it’s worth, Fortune Brands is STILL a classic house of brands. The newly and imaginatively named “Fortune Brands Home & Security” includes classics like Moen (obviously), Kitchen Craft and Master Lock. Nothing named “Fortune.”

But this story is about Jim Beam, and how, from both investor and marketer points of view, being on its own would let it achieve its full potential.

In theory at least.

You see, even though it renamed its business within Fortune Brands as, simply, Beam Worldwide way back in 2006, this wasn’t going to be a “Jim Beam-only” story.

Back then, Beam Worldwide was buying up companies left and right, across the entire spirits spectrum, among them Courvoisier, Maker’s Mark, Teachers, Cruzan (rum) and EFFEN (vodka).

As a stand-alone company, now Beam Inc., the acquisitions continue. Two weeks ago Beam announced it would add ANOTHER two brands – Pinnacle vodka and Calico Jack rum.

So, here we are again. Beam has become a house of brands. On steroids.

Should we hate it as much as we hated Fortune Brands? No.

Beam Inc. is laser focused on the categories it should be in (and knows where it shouldn’t be, selling off its wine business years ago). The many Beam brands might not have any direct synergies – for example, EFFEN marketing programs aren’t going to help Courvoisier’s sales one lick (!!!) – but the marketing best practices, passion, and operations can be leveraged across the entire portfolio.

This is a house of brands that will indeed be greater than the sum of its parts. So much so that today we add it to the Lairig Marketing Index.

Late as usual. BEAM has already run straight up 50% since its October “relaunch.” (And we are down already 0.5% for today, due to the stock market’s once-a-week “Greek spasm.”) But that shows how confident we are.

There is much more potential value in and across Beam to “unlock,” as investors say. You can drink to that.

Your Tag. Your Line.

Two of Lairig Marketing’s most popular posts are here and here, in which we reviewed the big waste of time known as taglines.

The most recent was a 2010 takedown of Pizza Hut’s amazingly awful tagline, so bad it was launched in stealth mode. “Your Pizza Hut.” Duh.

As we predicted back then, that tagline has disappeared. The same way it came in – stealth mode. What’s next? “Pizza Your Way,” we predict.

You’ll note we kept the “Your” in the tagline, as it seems to be a requirement. Our friends at the Lifetime Channel – friends because they stepped up and took America’s Most Wanted off the chopping block – met the requirement twice.

“Your Life. Your Time.”

Get it?

Lifetime execs admitted this TOOK A YEAR to come up with.

To spare the other cable programmers from wasting time studying and thinking up names and testing, etc., Lairig Marketing has submitted the following taglines to the respective company managements:

- Your Arts. Your Entertainment.
- (Or, as an alternate, You’re A. Your E.)
- Your Home. Your Box Office.
- Your Animal. Your Planet.
- Your Comedy. Your Channel.
- Your Food. Your Network.
- Your Music. Your TV.
- (Or, as an alternate, You’re M. Your TV.)
- Your Sun. Your Dance.

Pizza Hut should take a page from sister company Taco Bell, which recently announced its new tagline. Not “Your Taco. Your Bell.” Instead – “Live Más.”

Take note, future “Your” tagliners – No Más.

What Does The USA Not Get About Microsoft ?

If you read yesterday’s post – and shame on you if you did not – you would have been linked through to an older story in which we highlighted how Microsoft was awarded the #1 ranking in the Australia “Authentic Brand Index” for 2008. (The world – or Australians at least – are still waiting for the results to be released from the 2010 index research.)

What’s up down under, oi?

There must be something funny in the water in Canada too. In late January, Adweek and researcher Ipsos Reid released their first ever (and, based on the results, maybe last ever) “Brand Influence Index” covering Canadian companies. Guess which brand is the most influential up dair, eh?

• Tim Hortons? No.
• Loblaw? Not even top ten.
• The Ottawa Senators? No. And please lose game 7 tomorrow night, you bums!

Once again, Microsoft. Eh.

Eh?

Better than Apple? Better than Google? Why don’t we Americans hold Microsoft in anything near the same regard?

The Influence Index was based on consumers’ ratings of brands in six areas, including “Relevant,” “Leading Edge,” and “Engagement.” Again we ask, how could Microsoft rank higher than Apple? Or Facebook, for that matter?

This really ought to signal the death knell for brand rankings. All of these attempts – Interbrand, BrandZ, Ipsos Reid, et al. – are just variations on a mash-up of objective and subjective “measures” that call for the loudest “So What?!!?” possible in response.

With these types of measures, a brand can only be compared to itself – a la “is our brand getting stronger and more influential over time”?

In other words, stop sweating over those brand rankings.

More “Brand Authenticity” Writ Grande

The social media and brand gurus must be eating up the Walmart Mexico bribery scandal. “Oh my, Walmart should have been upfront about its business practices in Mexico all along, and asking its Facebook fans for input on how best to work with Mexican officials.”

One of our most read posts was this one: “Brand Authenticity – Bullsh&t On A Stick.” The Walmart “scandal” gives us reason to update the point made then – there is no such thing as brand authenticity.

But let’s look at two others first. Start with Best Buy, one of the most touted brands vis-à-vis proper use of social media. Which ipso facto makes it an “authentic brand.” Yet, Best Buy’s CEO, now ex-CEO Brian Dunn, gets caught canoodling with the help.

It must have been something to see. Dunn with his pants around his ankles watching HP’s ex-CEO Mark Hurd go through the wringer for the exact same thing, yet obviously believing the Best Buy board wouldn’t ever know.

How “authentic” is the Best Buy brand now?

Or how about Goldman Sachs? Thanks to The New York Times Nicholas Kristof, we now know that Goldman was invested in a company that runs Backpage, the number-one enabler of sex trafficking of children and young adults in the U.S.

Makes the Goldman brand sound even worse than that chap who wrote his pissy exit letter a month ago.

So, back to Walmart. Doing business in Mexico the way all business gets done in Mexico. And China. And Russia. The only problem with this stuff is when you get caught.

There is business reality, usually quite ugly. And there are brands, built on lofty perceptions.

Never the twain shall meet.