Tom Asacker

Trevor Gay on simplicity

"Simplicity is the key. Real life is not about high flying business executives, management jargon and complex language invented to preserve the reputation of the people who designed the language. Real life is about well meaning and dedicated people who give up their own precious time to do something to help another human being at times of need."

Real life marketing is the same.  Once you've developed something of superior value, it simply works like this:

1. Listen to me
2. Try me
3. Talk to me
4. Come back
5. Tell your friends

And guess what? People will respond IF they believe that you're a well meaning and dedicated person who is giving up his or her precious time to do something to help them.

George Bernard Shaw on the reasonable man

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself."

I'm over at the Being Reasonable blog today. Please stop by and let us know your thoughts.

Or take a break and play: click here.

Ben Edwards on mainstream media

While mainstream media is led by profit, ratings and popularist culture and filtered by the current political climate, Alternative Media is lead solely by the convictions of the campaign and film maker.

Have you ever wondered about the current political climate relative to marketing? Well, you can stop. Simply grab a copy of yesterday's USA Today and turn to section 3B: "TV ads must be 'remarkable' for impact." Here's a taste:

TV broadcasters might be in a battle for ad dollars with newer mediums, from the Web to cellphones to movie theaters, but some marketers continue to find that TV ads with the right formula work.

"TV is not dead, but if you're going to do TV, you have to create stuff that people seek out," says David Lubars, creative director at ad agency BBDO. "Just because you buy 30 seconds doesn't mean you'll have an impact. You have to do something remarkable with it."

His agency's "Ecomagination" campaign for General Electric had an impact with consumers surveyed for Ad Track, USA TODAY's weekly poll on ad likability and effectiveness. The GE ads were the most-liked by consumers of all campaigns tested by Ad Track this year. Of those familiar with the GE ads, 49% gave them the top rating, saying they like the ads "a lot." The score is more than double the Ad Track average of 21%.

Likability I'll give them. Effectiveness? Effective at what? Perhaps . . . likability. How's that for some circular reasoning. Am I the only one who sees this for what it is? A $40 billion industry filtering the current marketing climate to save their own skin. So what industry do you suppose spends more than any other in the U.S. on TV advertising?

Automakers remain the biggest ad spenders, accounting for nearly 12% of expenditures for the first nine months of the year, according to TNS.

12% of $40 billion. Uh huh. You go GM!

Garrison Keillor on Christmas

"A lovely thing about Christmas is that it's compulsory, like a thunderstorm, and we all go through it together."

I received my favorite corporate holiday card in the mail today (click image at left to enlarge). It's from my friends at the law firm Garvey Schubert Barer.

I wish more marketers would realize that people are drowning in communication, besieged by deadlines, worried about being "rightsized," doing the work of five people, etc. and what they really want is some peace and quiet, a feeling of being in control, or a little bit of fun. Thanks for the laugh GSB. I needed it today.

Goethe on thinking

"Thinking is more interesting than knowing, but less interesting than looking."

Is it okay if I think out loud again? Thanks!

• Florida's Supreme Court forbade two personal injury lawyers from advertising their services on a billboard featuring a pit bull with a spiked collar because "there is no way to measure whether the attorneys in fact conduct themselves like pit bulls." Measurement being all the rage in marketing today, I'm sure someone, somewhere is working on it.

• According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average American now spends more money on entertainment than on gasoline, household furnishings, and clothing.  The most affluent 20 percent spend more on cable TV, high-speed Internet connections, movies, sports events, and other diversions - $4,516 a year - than on health care, utilities, clothing, and food eaten at home.  A friend emailed me to report (unconfirmed) that 2005 was the first year that people spent more on entertainment than advertisers spent on advertising. Looks like advertainment will be the big marketing buzzword in 2006.

• According to Harris Interactive, 42% of Americans are worried that China will wind up as a more powerful nation than the United States. Hmm. Well, as of September 2005, the U.S. government owes China $252.2 billion (and growing).

• Last quarter Apple's iTunes online store (Long Tail) surged past music retailers Tower Records, Sam Goody, and Borders to become the seventh-largest music retailer in the U.S. Yup. The Internet is a fad.

• Wal-Mart is selling upscale items on its website; e.g. a 60-inch plasma TV ($7,688) and a 1 3/4-carat yellow diamond ring ($9,988). But I thought they were a low-end retailer. Nope (see page 90 in A Clear Eye for Branding to understand why).

• Society affects commerce affects society affects commerce . . . ad infinitum. For example, a new study found that most adults can no longer receive injections into their butts because the layer of fat there is too think. The study recommended that doctors buy longer needles.

• "I am an information warrior and a perception manager." So says John Rendon, head of the Rendon Group, a private consulting firm that helps market wars and regime change to the American public, in Rolling Stone.  One of his best ideas, he says, was "embedding" American journalists with U.S. troops during the invasion of Iraq in 2003. That let the Pentagon "take control of the story." Now, though, Rendon says, news organizations are back in control, which is why the coverage has soured. "We lost control of the context. That has to be fixed for the next war." Wow! You see. Marketing doesn't kill. Marketers do!

• Half of cigarette smokers who are diagnosed with cancer continue to light up, according to a new study. As Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, thank to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

• According to the NY Times, Big Pharma increasingly finds drug salespeople in the ranks of perky college cheerleaders. Imagine that. Appealing to rational physicians through their libidos.

• I was thinking about last Sunday's New York Times magazine article about Texas Tech's coach, Mike Leach, and the subsequent blogs by Tom Peters and Grant McCracken that liken Leach's strategic moves on the gridiron to value innovation in the marketplace. Wonderful analogy, and I'd like to see follow up postings when No. 2 total offense (Tech) loses to No. 2 total defense ('Bama) in the Cotton Bowl. Final score: 24 to 21.  One person with a good idea eventually gets clobbered by a bunch of people whose only idea was to plagiarize it. We call this capitalism.

Albert Einstein on The Long Tail

"The ordinary telegraph is like a very long cat. You pull the tail in New York, and it meows in Los Angeles. The wireless is the same, only without the cat."

Okay, that quote wasn't about the Long Tail. So sue me. ;) But I would like to explore this "Long Tail" concept out loud for a moment.

Have you heard of the Long Tail? Here's how the Wikipedia defines it:

The phrase The Long Tail (as a proper noun with capitalized letters) was first coined by Chris Anderson in a 2004 article in Wired magazine to describe certain business and economic models such as Amazon.com or Netflix. The term long tail is also generally used in statistics, often applied in relation to wealth distributions or vocabulary use.

Chris Anderson describes it this way on his Long Tail blog:

The theory of the Long Tail is that our culture and economy is increasingly shifting away from a focus on a relatively small number of "hits" (mainstream products and markets) at the head of the demand curve and toward a huge number of niches in the tail. As the costs of production and distribution fall, especially online, there is now less need to lump products and consumers into one-size-fits-all containers.

In an era without the constraints of physical shelf space and other bottlenecks of distribution, narrowly-target goods and services can be as economically attractive as mainstream fare. One example of this is the theory's prediction that demand for products not available in traditional bricks and mortar stores is potentially as big as for those that are. But the same is true for video not available on broadcast TV on any given day, and songs not played on radio. In other words, the potential aggregate size of the many small markets in goods that don't individually sell well enough for traditional retail and broadcast distribution may rival that of the existing large market in goods that do cross that economic bar.

And here's an excerpt from the blog post that got me thinking about the Long Tail (again):

I'm on a mailing list (several, actually) where musicians across the world discuss stuff. Today, there was a message from a band that spent the last week as the "featured artists" on MySpace. They got placement on the front page, alongside Madonna and the Roots, for a solid week. One of the band members posted the numbers:

• number of times their music was played: around 20,000
• number of MySpace friend requests: 1200
• number of mailing list signups: over 100
• number of CDs sold: ZERO

Yep, a big whopping zero, null, nada, none. No CD sales! They're still waiting on a report from iTunes, though. The band didn't seem so much upset as curious — you'd think after 20K spins, someone would pony up for a CD.

I don't have any answers and I ain't a market analyst, but I'm just fascinated by this, and I suspect the clue is in the tagline — MySpace: A Place For Friends. I've always considered the currency of MySpace to be the Friend Request, which is easily converted into Ego Boost but not much else. It's such a low-risk, low-threshold action, too. You can never run out of Friend Requests; it's like a money tree. I can't believe the number of friends you have is any indication of whether they really like your music or not. Besides, when you're just one of a thousand friends, does it even matter anymore?

On the other hand, they got 100 mailing list signups without raising a finger. The band said most of the signups came from the same 1200 friends, so that's just over 8%, which is awesome. So long as they don't abuse their new subscribers with spam and stuff. (Do you have any idea how long it takes me to get 100 signups? Many, many months.)

Anyway, it kind of hammers home the lessons I've been learning for the past two years, namely that most of the time, exposure is just exposure. It's one thing to get in front of someone; it's another thing to keep them interested, and another thing to get them to care. It also gives you an idea of the numbers game the Big Labels have to play in order to make the bucks they need to stay in business.

Ahhh . . . The Long Tail. Or should I write . . . The Long Tale? So what's going on? Here's what I'm thinking.

The Long Tail business model appears to be about providing exposure to a plethora of marketplace offerings. Whether it's designed to expose products (Amazon), services (speakers bureaus) or people (Squidoo) the model works because the aggregator takes a small cut (sales, commissions, advertising, etc.) of many, many transactions. I write "appears to be" because this model isn't really designed to expose anything or anyone. How could it (e.g. 150,000 new books are published each year)? Instead, the aggregator relies on the producer to drive the traffic.

The value to the consumer appears obvious: one-stop shopping, a trusted source, search power, etc. But what precisely is the value to the producer (other than avoiding the headache and expense of shipping, billing, returns, etc.)? And what will happen to the aggregators when TypePad includes a slick, secure and fully functional shopping cart feature, and when content goes digital (books, movies, seminars, etc.)? My guess is the producers will say bye-bye to the aggregators. At least the most popular ones will.

Zig Ziglar on sales obstacles

"Every sale has five basic obstacles: no need, no money, no hurry, no desire, no trust."

Sales obstacles. Marketing obstacles. Whatever. Let's rewrite Zig's obstacles from the first person protagonist point of view: "I don't need it. I can't afford it. I don't need it now. I don't want it. I don't trust it (you)." Funny thing is, I don't see "I don't like you" anywhere. So what's with this whole likeability thing?

Last Friday I read a post on the Fast Company blog that made me shake my head (again). Here it is:

Interesting story in today's New York Times about how U.S. consumers don't trust big businesses. Yet, in the case of at least one company, Wal-Mart, that trust may have little or nothing to do with loss of business.

According to Wal-Mart vice chairman John Menzer, in an interview on CNN.com, the company has seen higher sales this November than the same time last year. Wal-Mart officials also expect December sales to be just as good. And yet, Wal-Mart is among the most negatively-covered big businesses out there -- there's a critical documentary in theaters now ("The High Cost of Low Price"); harsh books ("How Wal-Mart is Destroying America," "The United States of Wal-Mart"); and skeptical articles. You might think the retail giant would be impacted by consumers turned off by its business practices. Yet, holiday sales are meeting expectations.

So what does this say? Are American consumers just slavish devotees to a good, everyday-low price? Or is all the hype just that -- and a lack of trust irrelevant when it comes to doing business.

What? What's trust have to do with it? As I've blogged before, all of the negative press detailing how WalMart keeps its everyday low prices low helps increase consumer trust in the brand (said brand being Everyday Low Prices). The press is providing evidence that supports their brand. The last line of the post should probably read: "Or is all the hype just that -- and a lack of likeableness irrelevant when it comes to doing business." So let me try to answer that question?

First, I don't think it's all hype. But even if it is, it's irrelevant with regards to WalMart . . . today. IMO likeableness is irrelevant unless likeableness is what people are paying for. And I'm not talking about "liking" the product or service. I'm talking about liking the company behind the product. Do most consumers even have a clue about the companies behind their purchases? I don't think so.

How 'bout you? Have you recently checked out the working conditions, wages and benefits of the employees of your local pizzaria? Hair salon? Hardware store? Watering hole? C'mon. Have you ever met the Netflix crew? The Amazon.com people? The Google guys? Did people stop buying Martha the convicted felon's stuff? Do you think New Yorkers like George Steinbrenner's ruthless business tactics?

"But," you may insist. "If employees are treated poorly, they'll most likely treat customers poorly. And then customers will simply go somewhere else."  And I agree. If they can, they will. Because no one enjoys being made to feel insignificant, unimportant. Especially when they're exchanging their hard-earned money for that feeling. So where do you think those customers are most likely to go? They'll go to where the prices are lower. Think about it.

Tom Asacker on the nature of a strong brand

"It doesn't matter what people think about you or your business. What matters is how you make them feel about themselves and their decisions while in your presence."

I've just posted a PDF presentation that (hopefully) helps illuminate my views on creating a strong and enduring brand. Here's a link: Click here.

Please, please, please view it to "fit page," or you'll lose a lot in truncation. Enjoy and do let me know your thoughts.

Socrates on wonder

"Wisdom begins in wonder."

Do you mind if I think out loud for a few minutes? Great! Here are a few things I've been thinking about (in no particular order):

• 61% of clinically obese people surveyed recently in NYC don't think they have a real weight problem. Most said they were slightly overweight, and 16 percent said they were just right.
  
  People believe that they are better than they really are, and they want YOU and your people and your business model to validate those feelings. If you're really smart, you'll make them feel even better about themselves and their decisions.
  
  I wonder why, no matter how many times or in how many ways I explain this to clients, it seems to fall on deaf ears. Here it is again: Harley Davidson does not sell motorcycles. They sell identity. They sell esteem. They sell belonging. Ditto for Apple and Starbucks and the rest of the best.
  
  Did you hear what one college woman said when asked why she kept buying her coffee at Starbucks even after the professor agreed to purchase it for her (exactly the way she desired it)?  Are you ready for this? Are you sitting down? Here it is:
  
  "They'd miss me at my regular Starbucks if I didn't stop in."
  
  Self-worth . . . only $5 a cup.

• Do you think it affects your identity when you shop and find a deal on something? Of course it does. It makes you smart, savvy. Right? And that's the Wal-Mart brand. So I wonder, doesn't all of the negative press that details how Wal-Mart is able to keep their prices so low simply validate their brand?
  
  On another note, I heard that Wal-Mart is lobbying to increase the minimum wage in the U.S., and that it's viewed as an evil tactic to drive even more small businesses out of business. Talk about a puzzling thought.

• I wonder how much the pet-supply chain PetsMart paid Leo Burnett to promote its brand name change to PetSmart. Yeah. I had to read it twice too!

• So Oprah Winfrey buried the hatchet with David Letterman last week, which helped propel The Late Show to its biggest audience since 1994. I wonder if it had anything to do with the fact that the Winfrey-produced The Color Purple, which premiered the same week, is playing right across the street from The Late Show's studio?
  
  I also wonder if that's why bloggers are so darn nice to each other. Because we're well aware, as Peter Morville argues, that "findability is at the center of a fundamental shift in the way we define authority, allocate trust, make decisions, and learn independently." And make money.

• I wonder how many marketing metaphors there are today? Let's see, targets, funnels, eyeballs, campaigns (from war), blue oceans (I like that one), blah, blah, blah. Not to even mention the plethora of brand metaphors.

• I read a MarketingProfs article yesterday by Barry Silverstein of Arnold Worldwide fame. I typically highlight when I read, and in the white space of his article I penned a bunch of question marks. Maybe it's me. Does this make sense to you?
  
  "A strong brand truth involves both head and heart. The rational core represents the brand aspiration, or what the brand stands for. The emotional wrapping is how a consumer with the right mindset feels about the brand."  Huh?
  
  "Miller Lite is a classic example. At the time of its national introduction in 1975, Miller Lite hit on a unique, breakaway brand truth: "Tastes Great. Less Filling." Miller Lite found a way to appeal to the rational and emotional sides of beer drinkers at the same time: only Miller Lite could claim to be lower in calories (rational) while offering the taste beer drinkers wanted (emotional)."
  
  What? Calories is a rational attribute and taste is an emotional one? Hmm.  I guess it's because you can't lie about calories in your marketing and get away with it.

• In a letter to the editor of Graphic Design USA, art director Ashley Little writes:
  
  "I am surprised you devoted an entire article to being nice. Isn't being nice and having a positive attitude just common sense?"
  
  So I'm thinking that Ashley lives somewhere in the middle of the country.  Any way, I also happen to agree with her (for a completely different reason). Being nice is simply not a prerequisite for success in business. No doubt that it makes the world a better place in which to live. So thank you nice people (you know who you are). But Jack Welch would kick Gandhi's butt in business any day of the week. Right Martha?

• And last, but not least, I agree with all of the experts that have proclaimed that the middle is disappearing (the middle class, the middle of the country, the middle in between the high end and the low end product, etc.). I was just over my friend's house and get this: he owns a 5 foot wide plasma TV, and a video iPod with a screen about the size of a book of matches. There really is no "in between" any more.

David Allen on achieving clarity

"So in order to achieve clarity and be fully and positively engaged in what you're doing, you must (1) know the goal or outcome you're intending and (2) decide and take the next physical move to propel you in that direction."

I've never experienced so much noise and so little signal as I do in the present field of marketing. Marketing is a mess. Marketing is broken! Half of marketers are on autopilot creating award-winning, irrelevant media noise, web nonsense and events. The other half is paralyzed - measuring everything to death and covering their collective butts.

Is there a way to fix it? Absolutely. But it requires looking at the marketing task in a completely different way. I've tried to articulate this new way in a short article titled Clarity: Marketing's New Task. Please let me know your thoughts.