It's all about you

Brand Easter

Lying on the sofa, semi comatose with an embarrassingly glutinous amount of empty foil paper around me, I had that all too familiar “why??” moment.

Although death by chocolate would be an embarrassingly weak, if delicious, way to go, I was also lying there wondering why I did it. Not over indulge, but wilfully receive a large amount of chocolate in bright coloured eggs and golden bunnies, on an extra long public holiday, for something that supposedly happened a couple of thousand years ago. It all seems a little bit confused to me but no one seems to act so. We get excited for the superficial aspects of a religious holiday that seem more appropriate for a children’s book than reality.

So it got me thinking. How did we get to this point? How did ‘brand Easter’ come about?

Some traditions involve parents telling their children that eggs and other treats such as chocolate eggs or rabbits have been delivered by the Easter Bunny in an Easter basket, which children find waiting for them when they wake up. The more religious ‘traditionalists’ go to church on the Sunday to celebrate Easter Mass. Who’s doing it right?

The Easter name and date

Although the Christian festival of Easter celebrates the death of Jesus on a cross and, especially, his resurrection, most people, including Christians, don’t realise that Easter is fundamentally founded in ‘pagan’ influences with the celebration of spring.

It took over 300 years before Christians established the date of Easter as the first Sunday after the full moon following the March Equinox at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E. The pagan Easter, however, was celebrated long before Christianity (although the festival went by many names).

In the 8th century, Christian scholar Bede claimed in his book, De temporum ratione, (The Reckoning of Time) that Easter derived from the Saxon Eostre (a.k.a. Eastre). The ancient Saxons in Northern Europe worshiped the Goddess Oestre at the time of the Spring Equinox. The Goddess Easter represents the sunrise, spring-time and fertility; the renewal of life.

A bunny

"Oester" was goddess of spring with all its fertility-symbols and fertility-rites, which included eggs and rabbits; the rabbit was the consort of the goddess and has remained so ever since.

In the ancient world, the rabbit has long been a symbol of fertility.  The rabbit is known for its reproductive powers; even today, we talk of couples who have many children as "multiplying like rabbits". The “lucky rabbit's foot” also goes back to this ancient religion. The rabbit’s foot, being a phallic symbol with supposed magical powers, related to reproduction.

The eggs

Although rabbits were the most potent symbol of fertility, the egg was viewed as the start of all life, and was often thought to have magical powers. Many ancient cultures, including Ancient Egyptians, Persians, and Romans used eggs during their spring festivals.

As far as the bible goes, there were no eggs in the Last Supper. In Christian times the egg had bestowed upon it a Christian interpretation, becoming a symbol of the rock tomb out of which Christ emerged to the new life of His resurrection.

There are numerous weaker references to where Easter Eggs originated from in a Christian sense but again it’s widely accepted that it was an attempt to adapt pagan festivals into Christianity to make the concept of Christianity more agreeable to the ancient cultures that worshipped other gods.

Decorating the eggs

The decoration of the eggs has a bit of a convoluted history. In the Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches, Easter eggs are dyed red to represent the blood of Christ, but different cultures have developed their own ways of decorating Easter eggs. Crimson eggs, to honor the blood of Christ, are exchanged in Greece but in parts of Germany and Austria green eggs are used on Maundy Thursday (Holy Thursday). Slavic peoples decorate their eggs in special patterns of gold and silver. Austrian artists design patterns by fastening ferns and tiny plants around the eggs, which are then boiled. The plants are then removed revealing a striking white pattern. The Poles and Ukrainians decorate eggs with simple designs and colors.

The most famous decorated Easter eggs were those made by the well-known goldsmith, Peter Carl Faberge. In 1883 the Russian Czar, Alexander, commissioned Faberge to make a special Easter gift for his wife, the Empress Marie. The first Faberge egg was an egg within an egg. It had an outside shell of platinum and enameled white which opened to reveal a smaller gold egg. The smaller egg, in turn, opened to display a golden chicken and a jeweled replica of the Imperial crown. This special Faberge egg so delighted the Czarina that the Czar promptly ordered the Faberge firm to design further eggs to be delivered every Easter.

Chocolate!

The inclusion of chocolate into the Easter experience is a fairly modern, and welcome, aspect.

The first chocolate Easter eggs were made in Europe in the early 19th Century. John Cadbury made his first 'French eating Chocolate' in 1842 but it was not until 1875 that the first Cadbury Easter Eggs were made, primarily due to the required technology being made to create the moulds. Eggs were a fundamental part of the Easter experience and the genius of Cadbury saw a unique opportunity here to sell a large volume of the fantastic new product. The decorative nature of the eggs and foil shortly followed to tie in with the European trends.

Anything else?

One of the multitude of random Easter traditions i stumbled across comes and thought to include comes from the Czech Republic and Slovakia. A tradition of spanking or whipping is carried out on Easter Monday where in the morning, men spank women with a special handmade whip. The whip is made from willow rods and is usually from half a meter to two meters long and decorated with coloured ribbons at the end. The spanking is not painful or intended to cause suffering. A legend says that women should be spanked with a whip in order to keep their health and beauty during the whole next year. I’m guessing the legend was devised by a man.

 

So Easter is another gloriously confused mix of symbolism and traditions, much like Christmas. But like Christmas it is one of those cherished holidays which are fun because they make no sense but they just work. They put smiles on faces, bring friends and families together, and, more than likely, cause a few merry sugar comas like mine.

Subjective Preference

Someone recently asked me what my favourite ad is. The answer I gave was the recent campaign by Nike in the UK with the CTA of #makeitcount. I love it for a number of strategic and creative reasons but if I had been asked in December what my favourite ad is then it would have been something else, and similarly if I had been asked in September it would have been something else again.

There have been a multitude of amazing ads and campaigns over time and everyone will have their favourite and that’s a reason I love this industry. I relish being part of an industry which is always striving to produce something better in harder and more competitive conditions. A great idea might drive great sales results and win awards but there will still be some target audience who don’t resonate with it and dislike it. Nothing can be ubiquitously popular and successful.

Maybe that also has something to do with the actual concept of an ad. Ads have always seemed a paradoxical conundrum to me as through a medium of moving images and sound you are trying to elicit an emotive and/or rational response through trying to stimulate relevant sensory receptors i.e. stimulate a craving for chocolate in the viewers cerebellum, which controls the taste buds, through showing an image of your brands product. Then from the nature of subjectivity one particular ad may have me making a mental note to ad that product to the shopping list but, for example, it won’t for my housemate. Bafflingly fascinating.

It took quite a bit to knock the Coke ad off its perch but the latest Toohey’s Extra Dry ad has had me improving their recent sales results. Where I loved the Coke campaign for its strategic and insightful genius and simplicity, I adore the Toohey’s ad for the sheer creativity of it and the directorial brilliance.

In the ad, real deer are used to replace humans – mapping empathic situations in deer-like fashion while metaphorically replacing the humans with ‘Toohey’s’ drinkers’

 

It’s so good I thought I’d include a “making of” video so we can appreciate all that went into it.

 

I can’t wait to see what my new next favourite ad will be.

Easy on the eye

Opposites attract and advocating less makes money. Ponderous paradoxes. This seems to be the case when it comes to the calorie controlled diets that seem to plague peoples subconsciousness, ever since Robert Atkins wrote a revolutionary research paper at about the same time another revolutionary idea was populating people’s homes with moving images and sound. In 2011 the US weight-loss market was estimated to be worth $60bn, with 25% of the country on a diet at some point of the year. In the UK the market is also thriving. Weight Watchers, the market leader, has quarterly profits of around $50m, doubling from the previous year.  

Consumer behaviour theories suggest that strength in the industry is not surprising as cutting back is prevalent in these economic times. Gym memberships are also well documented to be suffering as people look to cut expenses and an obvious simple (although not necessarily recommended)  substitution is dieting. Add to this the growing demographic of health conscious young men and over 50’s and the market has a lot of room for growth.

Another trend of note has been the steady increase of supermarket own label products. Go to the producer, cut out the middle-men (brands), create a few packaging designs and logistics plans and with a lower sales price it leads to a nice new revenue stream. Ok, that’s over simplifying things a bit but that doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been easy to do and effectively implemented, much to the detriment and frustration of brands such as Heinz. I think it was the Tesco Value range that first caught my eye to the trend a few years ago. Nothing screams value more than a simplistic white label with some red writing. It was shocking but it was effective as it identified the value oriented nature of the customer. And it leads me back onto the point of this blog and how attractive it all suddenly now is. Well, maybe not the Tesco items but Pearlfisher has created a new packaging design and brand identity for Waitrose LOVE life range. It’s called ‘you count...’ and is the supermarkets calorie-controlled range.

The new design uses a range of vibrant colours and enticing food photography and sets out clearly what the ingredients and calorie counts are. I think the designs are great and play well on some probable insights creating a look and feel aesthetically opposite of what consumers might well expect and feel:

“The whole notion of calorie counting is depressingly boring” = everything is vibrant and energetic

“All diet options feel the same” = Beautiful photography with ingredient list, highlighting what’s in it, not what’s not

“Often confusing – not clear what I can/should/shouldn’t be eating” = The calorie count font is significantly bigger than any other font. Only the images are larger

Then the whole notion of ‘you count...’ I love. It fits so wonderfully with the LOVE life main brand but also acknowledges that people’s bodies are their most controllable asset, and the way it looks, their most conscious vice. With the double entendre that the consumer also counts the calories it is almost an act of affirmative empowerment at a time when consumers resolve might be a little weak. Overall, it’s an attractive concept.

Nike says Make It Count

How many New Year’s resolutions do you have? How are you doing with them? A couple of weeks in and I’m still happily on course with my 3. I hate to admit it but previously I’ve been one of those people who have looked forward to a new year with a sense of motivation around resolutions only to waiver on one or two of them not long into the year. I still have a pretty 13” canvas I bought a year ago sitting in my closet along with a book of doodles that I’d love to bring to life with some oil paints. But this is a new year, and it could be a big year. And Nike are saying to make it count. It’s a great line, conceptualised by an old friend of mine at AKQA. It resonates. 

The launch at the turn of the year was inspired. I’m sure fitness is on a lot of people’s resolution list and this will create a nice little association with the sports brand. 2012 also heralds the big sporting events of Euro 2012, and, more importantly, the London Olympics. Wieden + Kennedy London have done a nice job using photos by Adam Hinton of sport champions such as Mo Farah, Mark Cavendish, Rio Ferdinand and Luol Deng amongst others on their sponsorship roster, accompanied by personal messages of how they’re ‘making it count’. I love the personal aspect to the campaign by our heroes who we are trying to emulate. It also highlights Nike’s association with making these champions perform the way they do, something that won’t be lost on the casual or dedicated athlete alike.

At the moment there are the yearly trend predictions going around and a key one which I think this fits perfectly into is one of EuroRSCG’s Wellness & Wellbeing trends of ‘Positive Psychology’. Research has shown that a positive mental attitude which focuses on personal growth or achieving personal excellence is what causes individuals and communities to thrive, rather than the hedonistic experiences such as spas, shopping or a great meal. Nike’s neat little motivational summation will fit in well with people’s thought patterns here, giving another nice positive association with the brand.

Another reason why I think it’s a great line is after a review of the competitive space they are in. I’m not really sure what I’m supposed to take out of Nike’s arch-rival Adidas’ “all in” line. It’s too inward focused and self indulgent. For me they’ve blurred the line too much between their sports and lifestyle lines – I’m not exactly going to wear their Classics range on my morning run  but it’s promoted under the same line as that of my Predators.

The same can be said of Reebok’s “Ree” campaign, which follows on from its predecessors of “Your move” and “I am what I am”. It might create some nice call-outs but as an athlete it means little to me.

But Nike have maintained the focus on the core aspect of their brand: performance. Adidas’ and Reebok’s lifestyle ranges might be what drives their sales but Nike have kept focus on that it’s not just about looking good but achieving while you’re at it. Which is why, this year, I will #makeitcount.  

Rudolph's Nose

As that magical time of year draws inexorably closer, the Christmas trees are up, carols are being sung with gusto, Turkeys being stuffed, presents being wrapped, stockings being hung, cards being sent and a naughty and nice list being finalised by a big, fat, white bearded jolly fellow in a red suit. I never fail to find it amazing how this all ties back into a baby being born a couple of thousand years ago. So how exactly did ‘Brand Christmas’ come to this?

My interpretation is that it started out as a church marketing ploy to popularise a religion and now it’s an amalgamation of various diverse traditions strewn together by people and brands over time. This isn’t a slur at Christianity but an attempt to show how, in order to make a concept ubiquitous, an adoption and integration method has naturally occurred over time. A top line analysis of some key (modern) Christmas aspects should help

The Date

Believe it or not, but Christmas almost occurred in April. Records are naturally sketchy but it appears that until about 400AD there was no general agreement as to when Jesus was born. The Bible doesn’t help much, almost alluding to a spring birth with anecdotes such as ‘Sheppard’s tend their flocks by nights’. This would have been an unlikely mid-winter occurrence, rather a spring occurrence when lambs were born and needed tending. Gospels Paul and Mark, which are believed to be the earliest writings, make no reference to the birth at all.  

A late December date seems to have been settled on as a form of marketing ploy to attract converts from other religions who have long celebrated feast days in late December.

This original hypothesis appears in the 12th century. A marginal note on a manuscript of the writings of the Syriac biblical commentator Dionysius bar-Salibi states that in ancient times the Christmas holiday was shifted to December 25 so that it fell on the same date as the ‘pagan’ Sol Invictus holiday which was when the Romans celebrated the sun god, and which was popular in the 3^rd and 4^th centuries with Emperor Aurelian making it an official cult in 274AD. This period has long been popular for large feasts, stemming back centuries and millennia earlier with the celebration of the Winter Solstice and then also the Saturnalia and Juvenilia during the earlier Roman periods. This was at a time when Christianity was battling the ‘pagan’ religions for supremacy (Christianity ‘winning’ only 40 years later when emperor Constantine making it the official Roman religion, banning all others). Christmas means ‘mass of Christ’ at there was nothing the Romans loved more than a good feast and festival! A study of their calendars shows a littering of them throughout the year. I suppose loose modern equivalents could be seen as mobile operators battling for contracts by sponsoring music festivals as a way to appeal to their trendy young target audience.

The Christmas Tree

Everyone loves a good Christmas Tree. The ‘turning on of the lights’ for many marks the start of the final countdown to Christmas, when we can properly feel festive. The popularisation of the Christmas tree took off in the 1850s after Queen Victoria, Price Albert and their children were illustrated standing around a tree in 1848. The tree was decorated with glass ornaments from Albert’s native Germany. The Germanic countries had been decorating fir trees since the 16^th century so Price Albert brought over this popular tradition to his new homeland. The Germans used to decorate trees with lights as apparently Martin Luther was walking home one December evening and was struck by the beauty of snow on an evergreen. He then went home and created the first ‘Christmas tree’ with candles.    

Santa Claus

The big man follows not long after the tree appears. The original Saint Nicholas was a popular Bishop from the Mediterranean port of Myra in the 4^th Century. He came from a rich family but used most of his riches to help the poor in his community, especially children. For many centuries Christian missionaries told the tale of the generous bishop and soon the story came to represent different things in different cultures. He died on 6^th December and this became a popular feast day for many. He was particularly popular in Holland and it is claimed that Dutch colonists brought their celebration of Sint Nikolaas to New York in the 1700s where Dutch children would leave their wooden shoes by the fireplace and they would be rewarded with treats in their shoes. His name evolved over the year to Sinterklaas and his generosity with it.

Stockings

The origins are claimed to originate when Sint Nikolaas dropped bags of gold down the chimney to land in the stockings of 3 peasants girls whose father was sick and dying. I guess everyone followed suit in the hope to catch some gold too.

The Sleigh and Rudolph 

In 1822 Clement Clarke Moore wrote a poem for his daughters entitled, "An Account of a Visit from St. Nicholas." (Twas The Night Before Christmas). He identified Saint Nick as a smaller character (an elf) with a miniature sleigh. And was the first to make us aware that he used reindeer to propel the sleigh - eight tiny reindeer to be precise. He also helped establish that the chimney was the favourite mode of entry to the home. Rudolph and his famous nose is one of the most modern additions to the fable. In 1939 Robert May, a copywriter for Montgomery Ward department store, Chicago, as a tactic to drive people to the store, wrote a poem about Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer. The store sold nearly 2.5m copies. In 1949 the song ‘Rudolph The Red-Nosed Reindeer’ was written by Jonny Marks, a friend of Robert May and recorded by Gene Autry.

The North Pole

Santa’s home seems to have a diplomatic conservatism background. Santa's home in the North Pole is identified in a poem by George Webster in 1869 appearing in the book "Santa Clause and His Works." Living in the North Pole made Santa a citizen of the world versus being a resident of any one country.

Carols

In 1223 St. Francis of Assisi began performing nativity plays in Italy. Parts of the story were told with songs that became popular and spread across Europe. These became the roots of popular carols.

The Turkey

This seems to be an adoption of the American Thanksgiving meal. For years countries celebrated the feasts with their local game meat, with England eating Pheasant, Goose, Boar or Peacock. As the American cultural influences spread, so the associations became stronger. Not that I’m complaining.

Red Santa

This is always my favourite part and shows the power of a good brand and marketing. Who to this day still doesn’t associate Christmas with the amazing Coke ads? Until 1931 Santa was a more earthly green. But Coke had a problem. Sales spiked in the summer when everyone went to the beach and needed to cool off but dropped dramatically in the winter. Coke had tried numerous times to associate Coke with Christmas and failed, but in 1924 the brief was given to Haddon Sundblom, a successful illustrator. The way he now tells it is that he was with his next-door neighbour Lou Prentice, a retired salesman and suddenly the phone rang; it was Coca-Cola. It wanted Sundblom to create a new Santa Claus campaign. Sundblom replaced the receiver and, deep in thought, looked up at his friend. Prentice returned the look with a jovial expression on his face. Sundblom looked again at his plump, white-haired, elderly neighbour and an idea began to form. The ‘Sundblom Santa’ is still what we all recognise today and his associations with the red of Coke have helped winter sales remain strong every year.

Merry Christmas one and all.

Pure Branding

To ‘brand’ something was to take a hot iron and mark symbols in your livestock so as to identify the owner. This technique has been traced back as far as ancient Egyptian times and my mind can only begin to imagine the myriad of symbols that have been used over the course of history. From this I thought it would be interesting to investigate where some of my favourite brands came up with their 'brands'.

An obvious first one I thought I’d start with is Apple.

The iconic Apple logo must currently be one of the recognisable brands out there at the moment. It is a logo held dear by many as it graces devices utilised in many people’s daily lives. But I wonder if many people knew its origin? Steve Jobs’ recent biography helped shed some light on this one for me. In the book, Jobs told Walter Isaacson he was "on one of my fruitarian diets" and had just come back from an apple farm, and thought the name sounded "fun, spirited and not intimidating." Surely it can’t be that simple? Writing in his 2006 book iWoz: Computer Geek to Cult Icon, Apple’s co-founder Steve Wozniak explains it this way:

"It was a couple of weeks later when we came up with a name for the partnership. I remember I was driving Steve Jobs back from the airport along Highway 85. Steve was coming back from a visit to Oregon to a place he called an “apple orchard.” It was actually some kind of commune. Steve suggested a name – Apple Computer. The first comment out of my mouth was, “What about Apple Records?” This was (and still is) the Beatles-owned record label. We both tried to come up with technical-sounding names that were better, but we couldn’t think of any good ones. Apple was so much better, better than any other name we could think of."

Apparently both Wozniak and Jobs tried out alternate brand names such as Executex and Matrix Electronics, but they didn’t like anything as much as Apple Computer. There’s a lesson in there for all brands I think.

If anyone is a bit of a fan boy/girl then this is an interesting read about the artist who gave Apple their friendly face.

Red Bull is another intriguing one for me. I love their logo and it still strikes a better chord for me than any other recent energy drink brand design.

Red Bull was created in 1987 by the Austrian entrepreneur Dietrich Mateschitz. But he was inspired by an already existing drink called Krating Daeng which he discovered in Thailand. He took this idea and adapted the taste and branding to suit the tastes of Westerners. Krating Daeng had been around since the 1970s and literally means ‘bull that is red’. Well it actually means "Gaur that is Red", and interestingly Gaur is not a cow but that must be one of the Westernisations that Mateschitz made to allow for adoption.

Although there is no design history around the actual logo I can find, the image of the charging red bulls fighting in the heat of the sun symbolises power, energy, strength and life; all the things the Thai held dear.

I like the history of Ferrari’s logos origin ; It has a typically proud background for an Italian brand.

First, the founder, Enzo Ferrari, named the company after himself (who wouldn’t) and the image of the prancing horse was the result of a personal request to use after one of his cars won a race in 1943.

The race was at the Savio track in Ravenna where he met the Countess Paolina, mother of Count Francesco Baracca, an ace of the Italian air force and national hero of World War I, who used to paint a horse on the side of his planes. The Countess asked Enzo to use this horse on his cars, suggesting that it would bring him good luck. The original "prancing horse" (Cavallino Rampante) on Baracca's airplane was painted in red on a white cloud-like shape, but Ferrari chose to have the horse in black (as it had been painted as a sign of grief on Baracca's squadron planes after the pilot was killed in action) and he added a canary yellow background as this is the colour of the city of Modena, his birthplace. The letters S F (for Scuderia Ferrari), with three stripes of green, white and red (the Italian national colours) were added at the top. The rest, as they say, is racing history.

But a car brand a bit closer to my heart (and home) is Aston Martin.

This company originated a few miles from where I grew up and is intrinsically British. Aston Martin was founded in 1914 by Lionel Martin and Robert Bamford and the brand’s name is a merging between the hill-climb circuit named Aston Hill, in Buckinghamshire, England, and Lionel’s surname, Martin.

The history of the Aston Martin logo is a little unclear. The emblem is currently composed by a pair of white wings, outlined by a black line, with the words “Aston Martin” in white over a green rectangle on top of the wings. However, it hasn’t always been that way since the company was formed. The first one, created in 1920, was basically a merging of the letters ‘A’ and ‘M’ in black, surrounded by a black double-line circle. It wasn’t until 1932 that Aston Martin’s symbol was completely reformulated to what it is now. Many speculate that the wings were inspired by Bentley’s and meant to suggest speed. Speed was the key characteristic of the Aston’s: The brand’s debut in international motor racing happened at the 1923 French Grand Prix with two Aston Martin cars entering it. The team also broke ten world records at the Brooklands race later that year. An Aston Martin car won the 1932 Biennal Cup at the 24 Hours of Le Mans.

However, I propose an alternative background to the wings. Economic difficulties and management crisis and changes were a constant for the Aston Martin company. At the time of the logo change in 1932, the company decided to reduce sports car production and instead focus on road cars, so the speed aspect diminishes as a priority. Also, with the looming threat of the second World War, their car manufacture once again shifted to aircraft accessories production, something they did for the time of World War I as car production was suspended and replaced by aviation machinery production to help the war efforts. It could be this proud history that they drew on.

What I like about these brands seem to be the emotive connection in their origins. I can understand all the ‘psychological’ strategies/ rationales with copious amounts of research support behind brands logo development/ redesigns nowadays but there is something so intrinsically pure about a logo derived from affective origins that the connections seem to spread to the customers. But as we all search for that magic extra dimension that makes a logo ‘sticky’, that ‘pure’ element might become more elusive.

ecommerce: the inexorable rise

Everything was easier when you were a kid. You wanted some sweets, you go to Woolworths. You wanted a book or magazine, you go to WH Smith. You wanted some new shows, you go to where the cool kids got theirs. Maths was a little tricky, but there was always the back of the textbook to ‘check’ the answers. Spelling (pre TXT language) was a little less simple to cheat on, but we were taught little helps such as the mnemonics ‘I before E except after C’. It was my favourite. And it popped into my brain earlier when I was thinking about ecommerce and how things have changed since I was a kid.

The Coke and M&S festive ads are on TV so that must mean the cyclical countdown to Christmas is entering its latest hyper period, so I better start my shopping list for the family. Should I bookmark the pages I find or just do it on my Amazon WishList as a reminder? This year I will be among the throng of customers who do all their shopping online. And why not, it makes sense. Putting my marketing brain on, selling the service with the Marketing Mix we can generalise in the following way: Product – I can browse through seemingly endless choice. Price – cheaper than the high street due to lower fixed costs. Place – I could probably do it all on Amazon. People – n/a! Promotion – many sites remember my previous search histories and aid me in my choice. Physical Environment – I’m going to enjoy the warmth and comfort of my sofa as I do it. I could go on. If this didn’t seem to remove an almost romantic element from the tiresome Christmas shopping I’d be rejoicing before I even start.

Shoppers have become very savvy, both out of need and convenience. The economy has been pushing frugality upon us and coupled with increasing internet connection speeds the trend has been obvious. And that’s why I thought of the little mnemonic. I adapted it to (I)n-store before (E)commerce except after (C)risis. A little weak but it’s my view of what retailers should have grasped right now.

Chris Webster, Head of Retail at Consumer Products & Retail at Cap Gemini sums it up by saying “Technology is evolving and so is the customer. Gone are the days where we were limited to the high street”. George Svinos, Head of Retail for Asia Pacific Consumer Markets KPMG clarifies my point by saying “Online shopping is transforming the retail landscape rapidly, sometimes unpredictably, permanently. Traditional retail business models will need to reassess their go-to-market model and fast.”

Ecommerce in the UK is expected to rise 14% during the five-week shopping month of December, to £7.75bn, according to new research. In Europe, Online retail sales are expected to post a double-digit increase this year reaching €213bn, presenting particular opportunities for travel, apparel and household goods brands. Apparently the typical participant had made 7.4 purchases through the internet during the opening six months of 2011, compared with 6.6 transactions in the same period in 2010. Although this is argued to be only a fraction of total expenditure, a notable rise is nothing to devalue, especially as many brands in the retail sector are seeing the reverse of this purchase behaviour. Added to this fact, Unilever believes customers buying its goods on the internet are both more loyal and more valuable to its brands. He points to the fact that online is still less refined that in-store so that you still tend to search for brands rather than browse around. He also points out that dwell time and the medium allows for more creative engagement which will then further aid brand loyalty if done well. Going back to Svinos’ point – this will be a major influence on retailer business models. Of course I’m not pretending this is anything revolutionary. Many have known this for a while. Tesco, UK’s largest retailer, has had an online store for a while and it is seeing sales soar from its Tesco Direct service. Amazon, believe it or not, took almost 10 years before they posted profit for the first time. They stuck it out, fully knowledgeable about the future up-curve.

And of course it’s not just in the UK that ecommerce is booming. Internet users in China are becoming increasingly engaged too, new figures show. Although it only targeted online shoppers, it found 45% bought something via the web at least weekly, and 44% did so between once and three times a month. Price and convenience, again, were the overwhelming reasons given for shopping online.

‘Convenience’ was one of the main success factors of the old high street model and the added irony that many ‘Convenience stores’ are now closing as they cannot compete with online monsters, such as Amazon and Tesco Direct, is not lost on me. So maybe I was wrong, it wasn’t easier when I was a kid.

6,999,999,999 and you

So apparently there are now over 7 billion people in the world (give or take a few tens of millions) and that the lucky baby was Danica Camacho of India. No surprise really that the baby was Indian with the country’s population exploding over the last few decades with a total population now over 1.2bn, doubling in size over the past 30 years, and which is the second largest in the world. Its economy has also been on the dramatic rise of late and in economical grouping it is part of the BRICS countries; countries with ‘emerging economies’ with the ironic twist that the ‘developed/ Western economies’ are now reliant on them to maintain economic balance. 

So Danica Camacho is the 7 billionth. The BBC did a popular article which allowed you to work out what ‘your number’ was. It was a bit of a lazy algorithm though as apparently I was born at the same time/ am the same person as my twin brother. Pretty sure he was born first. But it was a bit of fun and really puts the rapid growth of the world population into a bit more of a perspective. We can take the idea that, when I was born, I was the 4,764,499,173^rd person alive as a rough fact, so we can work out that the world population has grown an astonishing 32% up to today. And it’s still growing. National Geographic have done a cool ‘7 billion: how your world will change’ app which provides videos, photos, interactive maps and demographic profiles which allows you to troll through the impact on the planet.

But apart from the environmental implications, I was wondering what the potential marketing implications were.  

It’s not what I would have immediately thought. Apart from a massive new market for brands, Asian consumers seem to offer a more ideal customer in today’s world. First of all, for example, China’s burgeoning development has resulted in a lot of demand for Western products, especially in the luxury market. There has been a massive clamour for the ostentatious brands as a suddenly wealthy Chinese demographic look to mimic their affluent Western counterparts in everything from cars, to clothes to whisky. Such is the surge in demand and resultant profit this has led to, coupled with the downturn in the recession hit West, Prada’s step of their flotation at Hong Kong stock exchange earlier this year is astonishingly indicative of the new balance of power. And it seems that this is then marketing made easy for them. They just need to keep representing themselves as an iconic Western brand and the demand will follow.  

Coupled with that is the recent findings from research firm Colloquy that customers in BRICS countries like China and India are more loyal to brands than countries such as America and Australia. Also that a majority of customers relied heavily on word of mouth when buying goods in sectors from grocery to financial services. So, to summarise in a positive way: there is the potential of brand loyalty from free marketing in markets eager for your products who have disposable income. Yes, not everyone will have it so easily (look at M&S) but is it any wonder why brands from Starbucks, KFC, Apple, P&G and Walt Disney amongst many, many others are striving to get a firm foothold in there?

For me, the ironic thing is now that for brands such as Apple and Gucci the markets that offer them so much promise are the countries that have traditionally provided them with the largest headaches through the provision of counterfeit goods.

Medieval Branding

I was a little ridiculed this weekend. On a long train trip for a lads end of season football tour I chose the new publication of ‘Exploring History’, National Geographic’s new magazine, to add to my beer and crisps for the journey. Worth it. I’d like to see some articles of recent discoveries rather than just rehashes of known stories but it’s a well presented concept which I’ve now subscribed to.

The articles were great but it was one of the first ones which prodded my curiosity for a number of reasons. It was of a painting titled ‘The Family of Henry VIII’ and was pained c.1572, about 14 years into Queen Elizabeth’s reign. The painting anachronistically shows Henry VIII, his three children, and Queen Mary's husband, Philip of Spain, alongside figures from classical mythology. What’s important for the background to my interest is the context this was painted: Elizabeth was constantly fighting legitimacy claims for the throne and this was one of the many propaganda tools she used which stresses her legitimate descent from the Tudor dynasty. It also is meant to show her positive aspects as queen, with her role as a bringer of peace and prosperity to the realm. What I thought curious resulted from a further contextual examination of the period.

Her father, King Henry, is notorious for breaking England from the papacy and founding the Church of England. Henry’s reign is also synonymous with the time of Luther and the rise of Protestantism. Elizabeth is known as a religiously tolerant and pragmatic queen, but her half-sister, and predecessor, Mary, is known as ‘Bloody Mary’ for her purging of the ‘heretical’ Protestants during her short reign. Elizabeth’s reign, then, was during a great religious struggle for the Catholic papacy to maintain its position as head of the religion amongst many fractions. What should be noted is that all the fractions, despite their differences, were still Christian and they all seemed to take an especially brutal view of any non-believers. So what then, were images of “pagan” gods doing on a picture that was being used, in effect, as a marketing tool, to win over the vehemently, and often violent, English populace and European monarchs?

Viewed in modern times, the picture is a gorgeous blurred snap shot of a dynasty that helped shape England as we know it today. We can appreciate the family tree and the clever classical images of Mars, god of war, positioned with the aggressive Spanish (Philip and, due to a Spanish mother, Mary), referencing Elizabeth’s military victory over their Armada (which, ironically to my point, should be noted as a religious war) and then, in polar opposite to this, Elizabeth with the Roman goddesses of Peace, Pax, and Plenty, Copia, referencing her diplomatic handling of matters at home and abroad. In Tudor times, however, I’m less convinced that the majority of people who saw this would understand the allegorical context over the fact that it shows images of a non-Christian religion, never mind Catholic or Protestant, and the queen making associations with them.

So is this a clever bit of branding or a bit of kindle that could have led to the feeding of the fire?    

It's all about you: As Shown By Coke

Do you ever get those moments? The moments when some visual cue just tingles the brain? It can be for any reason. My personal favourite time was when Tim Robbins escaped Shawshank prison. I’ll always remember that first time I saw it. I’m unashamed to say that my latest one happened when I saw the latest Coke promotion.

It happened the other day when I was on the bus. I was reading the latest GQ and stared out the window and saw their billboard. Maybe the circumstances played a role as I was just reading Dan Rookwood’s articulate subjecting of the profanity of over profiling the modern male. He lampoons the numerous attempts to define modern masculinity: lads, new lads, metrosexuals, retrosexuals, heteropolitans, übersexuals, himbos and SPURMOTs (Single Proud Unmarried Man Over Thirty – in case you wondered). And he’s right. If I tried to put some of these in my consumer insight sections on my creative briefs, who knows what the team would make of it. But this is how people think of themselves. So I was thinking how, as marketers, are we supposed to successfully target our consumers when there is such fragmentation?

Then I saw the Share a Coke promotion.

I have a constant challenge with one of my clients in that they are one of the top 10 brands in the world who love to throw into the brief that they wish to target xyz in their next promotion, forgetting the fact that their consumer base ranges from 6 to 66 year olds and everyone else as well. Broad targeting? Sure, doable. Specific marketing? Wise? And that’s why Coke’s new promotion is so delightful. It’s targeting to the n^th degree yet they have a global audience. It’s so outrageous in its approach but simplicity in its design. It breaks all the rules of packaging and brand design that it succeeds where no one else could. There are 150 designs where normally there is one. Then coupled with the volume, it's staggering.  

Coke are investing a lot of money in delivering original content, moving from creating creative excellence to content excellence. A major focus will be on social media so they can keep the engagement fresh and relevant, with connectivity possible 24/7. This promotion is a perfect step in this direction.

Cannibalising the accessibilisation

As always, a nice article from Mark Ritson in Marketing Week about a new era of what he has coined ‘accessibilisation’, using Apple’s announced new strategy of offering low and mid tier pricing for products to allow the mass, recession hit, money poor consumer access to their product through lower priced offerings. This is a dramatic change of Apples ‘price skimming’ strategy to a ‘market penetration’ strategy. ‘Accessibilisation’ is the opposite to the boom inspired premiumisation where consumers willingly and wantingly traded up and so brands happily launched products to meet the demand.

So the shift is sensible as in the current recession hit climate there are few who have not been squeezed and seen their relative disposable income diminish. Frugality has been the catch word but people are naturally becoming bored of this. The recent protests and riots can be seen as an expression of anger and frustration that the negative climate still exists. We all want to return to the pre-08 climate and this new 10 year prediction until that returns is but the latest of a constantly increasing timeframe.  

As much as you can generalise consumers to recession resistant/ resilient/ responsive/ risk averse you can say that self indulgence has been curbed but still exists. People still spend but the amount has changed. So with the changing spending patterns the business results are affected and that is what drives the reaction and planning. What has gone on, as highlighted by Apple, is that everyone is basing strategy on a downward trend, starting on a low point.

But as much as current sales are important, so are brand perceptions which will also drive future sales. Of the more premium brands looking to ‘accessibilise’ competing in a lower price market means they come up against new competitors, such as the private labels, who are doing this space well and others who are also fighting hard for sales. This is a new threat for them. However, the danger for me lies in the devaluing of the brand image by associating their label with lower price goods. It’s like in 2009 and when there was a permanent air of ‘sales’ messages. Perception is all important for the premium brands. As much as you need to go to the consumer in today’s climate, the consumer still wants to be able to come to them, but just has less ability to do so. If you diminish the perception of the brand without keeping an air of exclusiveness with a higher priced range/ chain then you risk moving your brand positioning to a more cluttered area and it will get all the implications that come with it. Apple naturally do this well with their range, so it is up to others to follow this good example.

 

What's In A Name?

What’s in a name? For me it’s all in a name. In this over cluttered world maybe the only real cut through you can get is in a name (spoken with a bit of reverence if you’re lucky!). So you really need it to mean something!

I don’t know why but names appear to be a bit funny to me at the moment. It’s like when you say a word you’ve said a million times before suddenly doesn’t look/sound right. I’ve had that with ‘bowl’ recently. For about 2 minutes I was thinking “is that right??!!”. Maybe it’s all down to the celebrities, mocking us with our ‘normal’ names by naming their offspring after fruit, places, fantasy names or ones their PR agencies thought would get cut through after a brief was put to them. Who knows. But they are elevating the naming process to a whole new competitive sphere! My brother once mocked me when we were kids as his name appeared on a top 10 popular boys name list and mine didn’t. Oh how the tables have turned!

So I think in today’s world a brand or product name needs to be ‘different’. The older requirements of easy to spell/pronounce, easy to recall, short, not used by others and trade mark-able are all still relevant as well as the one about checking that you aren’t offending someone in a different dialect! You should probably also put ‘available as a .com’ in there too.

In general, naming is hard (except for Apple who can ‘i’ up anything). Which is one of the reasons why I love this story about the VLA asking the public for a new name. The boffins are self admitting that they haven’t really stretched the IQ levels when it came to naming the contraptions in the past. I like this as naming is such a personal thing, that to invite others to do it is just plain great marketing. People will then become more aware and captivated with all the amazing outputs it produces (FYI A3: Astronomical Attention Array is taken!)

Then I also like the story I read back in May about some opportunistic Disney worker who exploited a name which ‘didn’t exist’. I’m talking about SEAL Team 6, the team that took out Osama Bin Laden. According to the US Military, this team didn’t exist, but 1-5, 7, 8 and 10 do! On checking around this the employee submitted the necessary permit paperwork for all that is Disney. This meant that they owned the rights to merchandising, films, anything. Nice little money earner! Pat on the back for ingenuity. However, after a negative PR backlash, Disney withdrew their request. ‘The Daily Show’ host Jon Stewart joked "Putting a trademark on SEAL Team 6 is like copyrighting 'The guys who stormed the beach at Normandy’. It belongs to all of us".

And in the end of that quote lies the elusive reverence that all brands strive for. The name ticks all the boxes listed and has the positive associations to deliver that cut through and earn those pennies that Disney saw the opportunity for. I’d say it was a good case study but how often do those unique moments occur? But maybe that’s why it is a good case study – add emotive connection to the list.   

The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool

Today’s customers can shop around the globe, find out more than ever before about the organisations they’re dealing with, and share their views with hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of fellow customers. The expectations of consumers are soaring. IBM undertook a study to delve into three new realities:

• The empowered customer is now in control of the business relationship

• Delivering customer value is paramount — and an organisation’s behaviour is as important as the products and services it provides

• The pressure to be accountable to the business is not just a symptom of hard times, but a permanent shift that requires new approaches, tools and skills.

I don’t really argue with the first two generalisations but it is the third point that is the standout point for me.

It is prevalent that Marketers are becoming increasingly "stretched" thanks to the flux of paradigm changes and rise of new technologies in today’s evolving world, and many lack the tools to understand or counter these trends. The report highlighted that 79% of the top CMO’s agreed the situation will become more complex in the next five years but just 48% felt ready to meet such challenges, leading to what was termed a capability "gap".

I’m definitely an advocate when it comes to professional learning in the marketing field. And that also permeates to all professions. The good thing is that, as marketers, we don’t usually operate in silos and we can pool together knowledge to tackle different areas, but it’s when we need to pool together knowledge on the fundamentals of what we are doing is when we run into problems.

I know we’re not like Doctor’s who need to know all the intrinsic details of what we are doing or the consequences could be dire, but we are in a profession where we are trying to influence human behaviour. The human brain is the most amazing, intricate and, more often than not, stubborn creation ever, so a base understanding of our tools and their (possible) results should be not only advocated but championed by the employers who lead the charge.

More Like Google B+

So how is Google+ coming along? It all seems to be a bit quiet for a social network site. Excuse the bad pun as I’m sure they’re not wanting to be too vocal about a reported 60% drop in traffic but a base of 43 million users isn’t something to be bashful about either. Sure, they wanted to be the ‘Facebook killer’, and so they haven’t been thus far, I don’t judge them. Their goal was (even for Google) wildly optimistic but I liked the approach.

But there are thoughts out there that maybe confidence isn’t what it once was. Facebook have continued to develop its position and aspects from the tie up with Skype, new interface layout, and the new metrics for brands show that Facebook have stepped up its game further since Google+ launched. And then there’s the embarrassing revelation that the majority of of Google’s senior management with don’t have a Google+ account or barely use it. Only 3 of them have posted more than 10 times. I think if they were more resolute about pushing Google+ to the front of the social media world they would be a little more engaged?

So where next for Google+? Well I can think of one pretty easy thing they can do and talk about?

Making Sense Of Social Media Metrics

A Warc review states that almost 75% of US companies use social media to engage with their customers and that 94% of these firms listed Facebook among their top 3 social priorities, with Twitter on 77% and YouTube on 42%.

And this makes sense, doesn’t it?

And they go on to say that a majority of these companies have reservations about establishing a ROI. I suppose that’s why an average of just 5% of their marketing spend is allocated here.

This also can be viewed to make sense.

Social media has been a bit of a marketing quandary of sort. As a marketer I look at Facebook and go “Blimey! All my target audience in one place.... with all that dwell time and visitation frequency... all those engagement possibilities...but how to make use of it to make me look good to my bosses”.

And I suppose that’s why brands can be semi-forgiven for using their page just like their own personal pages and try and rack up the number of friends to look popular and put up some cool pictures to get some gratifying comments.

I say semi-forgiven as we all long for the brief that uses the medium in a bit more of a daring manner, to drive some rewarding (if less quantifiable) results and, if we are honest with ourselves, we all live in a spreadsheet run world.

So that’s why Facebook’s new metrics could be good for marketers to make sense of them. At last we have some new outputs that we can extol to our bosses/ clients. At last we can broaden the objective option list which can give a wider scope to work in.

Facebook have announced new metrics as part of its Insights capability, which will allow companies to measure user engagement in terms of ‘Engaged Users’, ‘People Talking About This’, and ‘Friends of Fans’. These can give a more in-depth understanding of reach beyond the simple ‘Like’ button, for instance ‘Friends of Fans’ is the actual number of friends your fans have, and weekly total reach is designed to be an accurate assessment of how many total people have posted something about your Page, how many news organizations (within Facebook) have referenced it and how much viral distribution elements of your Page has gotten. They will allow a greater understanding of who interacted with a message and how. This can allow us to analyse engagement and optimise going forwards, to evolve our social media strategies with greater precision and on a larger scale.

So good for brands and good sense for Facebook. Don’t be surprised to see that 5% proportion taking a positive direction. However brands still need to review the data accordingly. Facebook, for me, have mainly just diversified their ‘Like’ data as there is no real dissemination of positive and negative without some rigorous deep dive of the raw data. But at least we can.

The World behind the World of Steve Jobs

 

I don’t think anything I write here will be anything new or novel about the life of Steve Jobs. I’m a user who has strayed, being one of the many who has rebelled against the ‘auto sync’ and forced update. I swear he used to do the updates at the point that would be most frustrating to me! My myriad of technological devices would be humming to my carefully tweaked tune and then a little update message would have me looking forlornly and disbelievingly at that greyey-blue box and all that it meant.  

But there is no denying that like the classic hero’s journey, Steve Job’s extraordinary accomplishments in life will be long remembered by devotees and detractors alike. So it is with great genius. 

His vision was simple - create powerful tools and put them in the hands of everyday people who value creative expression and they will change the world. And so that had me thinking, where did all the products come from? I mean, Jobs designed the first iPod but since then millions have been put in expectant hands. And that’s when I discovered the company that everyone should have heard of but hasn’t. Why should everyone have heard of them? Well, simply because they make HALF of all the electrical products in the world (cue theatrical music). The computer you’re reading this on? Made by them. The fridge that has cooled your drink that you’re sipping on as you think ‘who is he talking about?’ Made by them. Oh, and the Apple product that is in your pocket? Yep, made by them.

Now, I’ve been keeping their name from you so far as I am continuing the mystique that seems to surround them, a mystique that can maybe only be matched by the way Apple operate. They employ almost 900,000 workers yet little is really known within. Created in 1974 their founder is now in the top 50 wealthiest people in the world with a fortune of $2.2bn. Their main factory employs 400,000 people. To try and realise how many people that is we can try a little visualisation game. To feed that many people it takes 25 cafeterias. Each cafeteria has 4 serving benches. Each bench is 100m long. And each bench is serving 24 hours a day and is always busy. Reverse out again to get the idea. This is part of a complex which holds 15 factories and sprawls over 3km². It’s less a complex, more a city. Most employees tend to live in this ‘city’. This ‘city’ is in Shenzhen.

When your product says ‘Made in China’, it really means ‘Made in Shenzhen’, a city just north of Hong Kong. Its population is over 10 million. When this company started out in the 1970’s it was a small fishing village. This growth is the result of the Western brands pouring in its manufacturing business.

But back onto the Apple focus. This ‘city’ is also referred to as ‘iPod city’ due to the control and scale of the manufacturing of Apple’s most prevalent product amongst others. For me, the secrecy, scale, links to all the largest brands in the world and simple, yet strong logo of this company for some reason has me thinking of how they would make the perfect foil for Jack Bauer if they ever did a new series of 24. This company is called Foxconn.

Amazon, Apple, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft, Dell, Nintendo, Nokia, Motorola, Sony Ericsson are all known customers. All make products known and used throughout the world. None, however, have left a mark as of the products conceptualised by Steve Jobs. Its products scream desirability and is the main lifeblood of the brand. When they are rumoured to be launching a new product the internet strains as the Apple fanboys scrutinise the possibilities. As for the future product innovation of the Apple brand in life after Jobs, who can know these things? There are many incredibly smart, talented and dedicated people within Apple who will carry on with the work of Steve Jobs vision.  The Apple brand will always be grounded in the “think different” mantra that has made the world different. Foxconn will continue to work in the background.

It's a question of choice

I like shopping. Shopping is fun. However, shopping is not easy. Recently I’ve had a theory that we, as consumers, have a lot of choice. Maybe too much... This thought struck me as I meandered the supermarket aisles looking for inspiration for the evenings culenary attempt.

Recent movements in the supplier/ consumer power index have definitely swung more to the consumer, with ‘consumer empowerment’ a key buzz note of late. For a host reasons, we have pretty much all become more empowered in the information that we receive and the choices we can make for ourselves (RedLaser app being noteworthy example for me). However, there seems to be an unforseen consequence on the consumer.

In what has been called 'the tyranny of small decisions', consumers are now finding the choice of what to buy to be almost overwhelming. Guess how many products McDonald’s sells then go into a restaurant and count. You probably wouldn’t have even got to 50%, and all you want is a beef burger. Go into a technology shop and there will be cabinets full of shiny cameras, all with a myriad of numbers and anagrams to describe what they contain. Too much. Then there is alcohol. Has there ever been more choice in any industry for a consumer? There are aisles, shops and sometimes warehouses dedicated to providing consumers with choice. My friends actually despair when it’s my turn to buy drinks as I’m forever perusing the array of bottles behind the bar to see what I fancy. Is so much choice necessary?

There is an emerging paradox between this power shift and the way people want to live their lives. On the one hand consumers are being seduced by the siren call of power (the power to choose, the power to exert authority and control), but on the other everyone wants their lives to be simpler and cleaner.

But you can’t have one, as someone once said, without the other.

Add to this the fact that we don’t always (often?) know what we actually want and we have the recipe for anxiety.

As marketers it is our job to provide the choice, so here in is the Catch-22. They want the choice, we provide choice but they are struggling to handle it all. Maybe we will soon see a shift from providing choice to more consolidated offerings or maybe we will see numerous brands just fall away as consumers look to streamline the number of brands they buy as the ultimate cull for simplicity.

Whatever happens, with the current basis of power leaning more to the consumer, it is the supplier (and the marketer) who will probably need to blink first

Chariots of Fire and IOC wrath

Let's start off with 2 little facts:

1. There is something called Freedom of Speech

2. Some of my favourite, and most memorable, ads during the FIFA 2010 World Cup were 'ambush' ads (most notably the Bavaria beer escapade)

OK, point 2 might have been what has led to this, but point 1 definitely still stands!

This is a radical change to the rules of marketing of which the full implications haven't begun to spin out yet, and it's easy to understand where the pressures are coming from. The large multi-nationals are forking over tens of millions for IOC affiliation and I'm sure the metrics are pointing to diminishing returns as the FIFA partners can probably corroborate. Money talks, especially when it's the money needed to create the event in the first place.

I just hope that the IOC are corelatively slackening their notoriously stringent guidelines so that if the sponsors might finally be getting the space they want, they can also do the ideas they want.

Interbrand's best of the best 2011

Interbrand have released their yearly best global brands list for 2011 and no real surprise that Apple have powered into the top 10 at last. It's a brand never far from our lips (or pockets) and if free media value was received then I'm sure it would be number 1!

Interesting for me is that Apple's continuous rise is largely down to the product innovation they do, correction, lifestyle innovation, and the only other top 10 brand to make a significant gain is Google whose product innovation is also well noted but with less of the aura that seems to accompany the Apple logo. Scope for both to work on.

Coke took top spot (again), powered by Interbrand's formula which includes role in creating demand. I think we can all understand that, as can anyone who has seen the big red logo or heard the distinctive pop as you open a can. Coke have invested MILLIONS on their sensory branding all with the focus to drive demand and, for the 12th year running, they can be sitting pretty with their results.

But what's interesting is that we all still want the Apple, and they're only 8th. But they're pushing hard on Coke's spot. If all the brands made the same % increase year on year then it would only be 2 years until Apple takes the crown. Who would put it past them? Of course that relies on a lot, but with the iPhone 5 now not landing until next year (probably) and Coke Zero heading down the path of Cherry Coke, Lime Coke, Vanilla Coke and I've-forgotten-what-else Coke, then Coke are relying on its portfolio to drive growth. And don't reply on Google to rest on its laurels or Microsoft to take its decrease in value lightly. It will be fascinating to watch and I can't wait for next year's list already!

Brand Building requires empathy for the customer

This is a nice little piece by Brand Strategy Insider, espousing the notion that, in order to connect and understand the customer, Brand Managers should be really 'Brand Builders', advocating the a deeper dive into the customer to get to an empathic level that really lets you know what makes them tick.

This of course is the idealistic level. The Holy Grail of marketing. What marketer doesn't want to intrinsicly know their customer - to have all the required insights to hand? A frequent issue for me, often compounded by a series of internal pressures, is that new marketing campaigns can often be just a continuation/adaptation of a previous campaign that met targets, or maybe a reactive change due to post analysis or competitor activity. The customer is forever changing and evolving so a question we should be always asking ourselves is that are the insights we last devised, and basing our ideas on, still the same/relevant? Do we want to admit that we might not know what the current insights are?

So yes, I am definitely an advocate for empathetic understanding and up to date insights. In order to be a market leader you need to go beyond just a basic understanding. The article points out that in today's transparent world, customers are a lot wiser and knowledgeable about us as a brand than ever before so we need to return the favour.

But that is obviously easier said than done. I'm a 20-something year old male and my last two campaigns were for a new range of chocolate biscuits aimed at women in their 30's and a new promotion for a global fast food restaurant targeting anyone and everyone between the ages of 14-60. My empathy levels can only take on so much! But no-one said it was easy. And for me the important thing is that we are looking forward, not basing ideas on what the customer used to think.