Auto marketing messages as weak as their business

Why do some advertisers treat people as if we had no brains?  One example of misplaced messaging is GM and Chrysler’s recent ads assuring people people about their business. Duh! You have to live in a cave to not know that these companies are in big trouble. Plus, don’t we all realize that “employee pricing” is a joke; it’s code for “we have a lot of inventory to move so we’re really cutting prices.”

This new Chrysler “assurance” spot even goes so far to end with this tag line: “At Chrylser the future is not only bright it’s electric.”  Oh puleeeze. We know you’re future isn’t bright, even with Fiat.


Ad Age’s Jonah Bloom wrote a great editorial on how these auto companies are mis-spendng millions on the wrong message.

Ads for assurance programs may seem soothing and may even increase foot traffic to some degree, but they strike us as pointless and the consumer as completely out of touch with reality. For instance, how can Saturn promise to make your car payments for up to four months when the brand itself is slated for disposal?…So however well those ads may be executed…they ring false.”

Bloom suggests, instead that these auto makers promote “deals of a lifetime” and use plain English to do so.

Excellent advice.

Best Emmy Awards ad


The best ad on last night’s Emmy Awards was this Macy’s spot showing the personalities behind the brands in its stores. Donald Trump in all his vainness blow drying his hair. Martha Stewart being her perfectionist self, making sure every little home ware product was perfectly folded. Sean Combs rehearsing the sales people, “Sean John is hot.” Kenneth Cole telling an airhead Jessica Simpson that to open the door she needs to pull, not push.Knowing the personalities behind brands — and being willing to spoof them — helps us get to know the brands. (And who knew Macy’s had all those name brands?)

One reason that Facebook is becoming so much more popular than Linked In is that we get to know the people behind the names — their photo albums, music and movies they like, etc. — not just contact and work history information.

People want to connect with people — on big scales and small.

“The Break Up” traditional advertising spoof


The Break Up
Uploaded by geertdesager

Don’t miss this great video, produced for Microsoft Digital Advertising Solutions by Geert Desager at Bring Back the Love. It captures the change in selling and telling marketing to conversational marketing, reminding all of us that the consumer has had enough with old style techniques.

Hat tip to Tony Bloomberg over at Diva Marketing for sharing.

Kleenex Let It Out: Beyond Buzz-worthy ad campaign

What makes good advertising today? Two things. It helps sell more products and provokes conversation — getting people involved in the ad and giving them something to talk to people about. Kleenex’s “Let It Out” campaign is succeeding on both counts. The person-on-the-street interviews also show just how much people want to tell their stories and be heard.


Bad Marketing Decisions: Have a Happy Period

Here’s another really crazy marketing decision. The brand managers at Always maxi pads decided to send a little message to women when they tear off the adhesive backing of the pad: “Have a Happy Period.”

A happy period? Do you know any woman who has ever had a happy period? Don’t you test out these ideas with consumers?

Wendi Aarons posted a hilarious, frank open letter to James Thatcher, the Always brand manager. She starts out complimenting Thatcher for some of the great features in Always over the years and then gets down to business:

As brand manager in the feminine-hygiene division, you’ve no doubt seen quite a bit of research on what exactly happens during your customers’ monthly visits from Aunt Flo. Therefore, you must know about the bloating, puffiness, and cramping we endure, and about our intense mood swings, crying jags, and out-of-control behavior.

“Last month, while in the throes of cramping so painful I wanted to reach inside my body and yank out my uterus, I opened an Always maxi pad, and there, printed on the adhesive backing, were these words: “Have a Happy Period.”

“Are you f******g kidding me? What I mean is, does any part of your tiny middle-manager brain really think happiness—actual smiling, laughing happiness—is possible during a menstrual period? Did anything mentioned above sound the least bit pleasurable?

“For the love of God, pull your head out, man. If you just have to slap a moronic message on a maxi pad, wouldn’t it make more sense to say something that’s actually pertinent, like “Put Down the Hammer” or “Vehicular Manslaughter Is Wrong”? Or are you just picking on us?”


If you go to Technorati there are 918 raving blog posts about “Have a Happy Period.” I still haven’t been able to find any response from P&G. Bad decisions happen. The best strategy for companies is quickly acknowledging mistakes and telling people how they’re going to fix them. Always.

$1.35 BILLION for Army Recruitment Ads?!

Yesterday the U.S. Army hired a new ad agency, McCann Erickson, according to Ad Age. The budget: $1.35 billion to be spent on ads to recruit for active duty and the Reserve. That’s right, more than a BILLION dollars.

This
decision comes at a time when the marketing industry recognizes that
conventional advertising is not effective, particularly if the value
prop is weak. (Or if you’re being recruited to go to Iraq, maybe a
non-existent value prop.)

Is there a better way to spend $1.35 billion of our money?

Use
a slice of the money to figure out how to get out of Iraq sooner; then
we wouldn’t have to recruit so many people. Despite its advertising and
aggressive recruiting, the Army missed its recruitment target this year by 7,000, according to a report in today’s N.Y. Times. Maybe no amount of advertising is going to work. Like Vietnam, people
don’t believe much in the military’s cause. And if they don’t believe,
they’re not going to join.

Create an online community where active duty Army professionals
can talk to those with a possible interest? Let the people who know the
value of being in the Army – and have the most credibility – tell the
story vs. ads?

The goal of the Army is to recruit 80,000 new soldiers a year. Divide 80,000 into $1.35 billion and you get $1,687.50. If the army upped the signing incentives by another $1,687.50 would that be as effective as advertising?

Reinstate
the draft. Give full college scholarships to everyone who serves. Make
the military reflective of a democratic society. The added benefit: the
middle and upper class would be mad as hell and would get more involved
in government’s decisions. (As the mother of a young son, I hate to
think of a draft…)

Maybe some of these things
are already happening. I’d sure feel better knowing that the Army has
looked at alternatives before committing $1.35 BILLION on trying to
market something no one wants to buy.