DECEMBER 3, 2008

In the past few years, deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) has become a hot commodity, saturating the fashion, jewelry and art worlds.  Indeed, from microscopic blueprint to trendy household commodity, the image of the double helix has permeated the consumer consciousness - not without implicit social consequences.

“Spit parties” like the one recently organized by 23andMe have become the latest social-networking craze.  Hereditary blueprints are now being turned into personalized perfumes and colognes.  For a perfectly accurate, 21st-century self-portrait, you can even map your – or your pets’ – genetic coding in a one-of-a-kind work of art that resembles columns of blocks.  All you have to worry about is which material – canvas, sheet aluminum or photographic paper – will look best on your living room wall.

It’s easy to say that personalization and narcissism are the forces driving this trend, but I do not believe those are the only forces at play.  In a sense, DNA-related products have become, purposely or not, propaganda-like tools for the health and pharmaceutical industries.

For example, orchestrators of the Personal Genome Project cannot steal your DNA while you’re sleeping at night, nor can they make you submit a sample against your will.  But what they can do is position their products and services so tactfully in the marketplace, and into the consumer consciousness, that we may actually find ourselves wanting to upload a DNA sample to a public database.  “The Perfect Unique Gift Idea for the Person who has Everything!”  DNA11’s tagline almost sounds like a subliminal advertisement from Huxley’s Brave New World or Orwell’s 1984, doesn’t it? 

Let me be clear: I’m not saying that our current DNA craze is the result of a premeditated, nationwide conspiracy (I don’t want to get arrested, you know).  But the fact that de-ox-y-ri-bo-nu-cle-ic acid has successfully made its way into the pop-culture marketplace can only better serve those individuals who seek it – and satisfy those companies that crave it.

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

NOVEMBER 25, 2008

In 2004, vintners and wine store owners commonly referred to the “Sideways effect,” whereby the Oscar-winning film directly influenced consumer impressions and purchases of pinot noir, a once relatively obscure red wine.  According to ACNielsen, sales of pinot noir reached an impressive 370,000 cases between October 24, 2004 and January 15, 2005, an increase of nearly 16% from the same period a year earlier.

It still came as a surprise last week, however, to learn that the “Sideways effect” may have actually reached Japan. Seriously. In an article in Variety magazine, I read that Fox Japan and the Fuji TV network recently announced the details of their joint Japanese remake of Alexander Payne’s 2004 hit movie.  “Wait,” I thought.  “Japan remaking Hollywood?  Usually it’s the other way around!”  This time, though, it wasn’t.

Curiously, as Cinematical’s Peter Martin reports, Japan doesn’t have a native wine culture equivalent to that of the United States, mostly due to weather and soil issues, not to mention a scarcity of land.  In the past year, however, California wine imports have significantly increased in Japan.  Martin writes, “And the comic Kami no Shizuku (translated as The Drops of God; pictured) has become a phenomenon over the last couple of years, read by 500,000 Japanese weekly, according to Telegraph (UK), and sending wine sales skyrocketing across Asia.  The series details a young man’s quest to identify the 12 wines described in his father’s will.”

Set to release in Japan next fall, the remake, which is already shooting on location in California’s Napa Valley, will likely spark a new Asian interest in American wines.  And, if I were a Napa Valley vintner or wine seller, I would already be personalizing my website and my shop for the massive wave of Japanese tourism that is sure to seek my business next winter.

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

NOVEMBER 18, 2008

When I was in high school, I shopped at the Gap… a lot. Most of the kids in my high school did.  It was actually considered a “hip” store in 1995.  I’m not exactly sure when or why I stopped shopping there – maybe it was because my style changed over the years and Gap’s didn’t – but, apparently, I’m not the only one.  A recent article in The New York Times discussed the troubles Gap is facing, and questions whether the clothing company, famous for its holiday commercials, has lost its edge.

I think that Gap’s troubles extend beyond losing its edge; it appears to have lost its focus too. One thing is for sure: when I was a Gap shopper, the chain was not attempting to sell $6,000 Vespas or $500 bicycles!

Last year, Gap partnered with Vespa to offer consumers the “Crazy Stripe” Vespa LX50 for $6,000. And this year, I suppose in an attempt to be “greener”, it decided to partner with Electra bikes and sell “The Gap Argyle Cruiser” – an actual bicycle with a blue argyle pattern – for $499.  Wait…what?!  I don’t get it.  I mean, I’m all for companies branching out, reinventing themselves, and being open to change, but this just doesn’t make sense to me.  A bicycle does not scream “logical extension of a clothing brand” to me.

At TMG, we believe that the most important thing a company can do is listen to consumers, in order to design and offer products and services that meet their wants and needs.  I’m not so sure that Gap is listening. What do you think?  “The Argyle Cruiser” - good idea or bad idea?

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

NOVEMBER 5, 2008

I really like JetBlue. Not just because of the comfortable seats, in-flight DirectTV, or even because of the cool events the company sponsors (although I was lucky enough to have one hosted near me recently). I like them because of this:

Subject:  Our Apologies…

Earlier this afternoon, I had received a JetBlue promotional email - a fairly regular occurrence as part of my membership in the company’s frequent flier program, TruBlue. I thought the subject line was great and suited JetBlue’s typical, laid-back style. But, when I was opened it, I was disappointed to see who it was addressed to:

Subject: It’s been awhile… we miss you.

I initially wondered if the company was making some bizarre attempt to be cute & random by addressing to me as ”Soandso”. (Some marketing can be a little out there.) But, the “Mr.” confirmed that there was no way this email was meant for me. I’m not particularly sensitive, but this lack of personalization bothered me - and evidently it bothered a few other people as well. I immediately shared the email with my co-workers, looked up the email address of a friend who works with the company, and contemplated sending him an note about it. 

That is until I checked my email again and found the apology.

Maybe it’s because I’m still coming out the election day haze - a time when we all were bombarded with messages revealing alleged secrets and half-truths - but I find this prompt apology incredibly refreshing.  Received just about an hour and half after the Mr. Soandso message, email #2 was simple and refreshingly straightforward: We screwed up and we’re sorry for it.

I don’t always expect companies to be perfect, but sadly, I do expect that most companies would try to cover tracks and bury mistakes. That is why acts of honesty and transparency stand out. You’re having a hard time? Tell us. You messed up? Admit it.

Because in most cases, we’ll like you even more.

[Comment(1) »] [TrackBack »]

OCTOBER 29, 2008

  Wedding planning – a topic that currently consumes my life.  My fiancé, Chris, and I have been engaged for a few years but recently set a wedding date for next summer and have been devoted to wedding details ever since.

I’m not the type of girl who’s been dreaming of and planning her wedding day since birth.  Honestly, I never gave it a single thought until someone got down on one knee and handed me a diamond ring.  And then, it was like the flood gates opened.  I looked through every magazine, scanned every web site, and watched every TV show having anything to do with getting married (I’ve linked to a few favorites).  Little did I know there were so many shades of white, so many types of flowers, and so many variations of favors.

With the overwhelming number of choices a bride has to make, which products actually break through?  Wedding purchases are slightly unique in that they are decided upon most times by emotionally-driven people who are willing to sacrifice a lot (including money) in order to get what they want.  That being said, I’ve personally been trying to take a more reasonable approach.  I don’t have an unlimited budget and I’ve come to terms with the fact that while our wedding day is important, it’s still just one day and going overboard isn’t necessary. 

These economic and environment-minded times have made me downsize from an SUV limo to a sedan limo.  I won’t be overdressing the Church or carrying a bouquet of orchids or using two foot tall flower table centerpieces.

So, how do I decide?  I separate extras from necessities and determine what Chris and I can’t do without, then I apply our budget.  A vendor or product that’s going to stand out is one that seems sensible and legitimately serves a purpose – one that ultimately I find value in. 

Today, consumers are saturated with choices and information.  Consumers have adapted to this overload and now, for example, I can effectively flip through a 150 page bridal magazine in less than half an hour and earmark a handful of items or styles I like without letting the nonsense of other ads or articles distract me.  A careful understanding of what appeals to a consumer will surely breed success.

What product or service have you been consumed by lately and what ultimately gets you to open your wallet?

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

OCTOBER 21, 2008

Here at TMG Strategies, we place a lot of value on public opinion research as a tool to help our clients understand how their products and issues are being perceived and understood by the average consumer.  And, as the social media team here at TMG often says, social media provides some of the best market research out there - it’s free, it’s authentic, and it can be accessed by anyone.

One of my favorite sites for free, authentic public opinion research is the Compete blog, which takes a look at traffic metrics across the Internet to answer various questions, like: 1) how is a particular marketing campaign doing?; 2) how do two companies’ marketing strategies compare, in terms of success?; 3) how effective are various online tools at driving sales or traffic?; or even 4) what’s on people’s minds these days?

A recent Compete post addressed question #4, above. Given the news of late, it’s not surprising that people are worried about the economy and are keenly interested in the presidential election.  But, according to Compete’s list of the fastest growing sites for September traffic, last month people were also interested in storms (the second fastest growing site was stormpulse.com and the fourth was FEMA’s home page); Halloween (costume stores held the sixth and seventh places on the list); and tennis (usopen.org was #11).

Maybe it’s just me, but I find this kind of information fascinating. How are we coping with all of the bad news around us? Are we bravely, solemnly trying to understand the crux of the problem, thus propelling the FDIC site to #5 on the list? Or are we escaping into fanciful traditions like Halloween or old standbys like sports? Or is it some combination of both?

I believe that people are in a natural state when they are online, meaning they do pretty much what they want and spend time in the places and communities that truly interest them. The Compete list is just one small piece of a world of online data waiting to be explored and analyzed.

[Comment(1) »] [TrackBack »]

OCTOBER 6, 2008

Technology is awesome – and at the same time, technology wears on me.

Most days I am grateful for all the ways I’m connected — however, there increasingly more moments lately when, like Gayle with her email, I’m ready for a break. Tools meant to make my life easier leave me feeling overwhelmed; social bookmarking is amazing, but I tag more articles and posts than I could ever read, and my Google Reader is overflowing with unbelievable art, can’t-miss events, insightful stories and statistics - if only I could get to all of it.

Which is exactly why this advertising campaign by Dentyne is brilliant.

It’s not very often that I see an ad and want to put it on my wall, but when I saw the entire collection for the first time on AdFreak, I immediately wanted a copy of them. Something about their straightforward simplicity perfectly captured exactly how I felt.

Several years ago I wrote a post about wondering if my generation, Gen Y, would eventually shift away from technology and into lifestyles that do not revolve around constant connectivity. I’m certainly not the first or only person to ever suggest that too much technology might lead a generation to say we’ve had enough, but several reactions to this campaign brought me back to that post from three years ago. And others, like Columbia grad student Kate Rosenbloom, are wondering if the ads might be an indicator of that larger phenomenon:

[T]he ads and the reading do make me wonder if we are reaching a saturation point in terms of people’s willingness to embrace the idea that technology equals progress. What does it say about the state of American minds today when the advertising industry, which has been so eager to embrace new technology, is encouraging people to ‘log off’ and ‘power down’ (and chew gum)?

I feel like I know more and more people who are refusing to join social networking websites, use instant messaging services, or text message friends. Could these Dentyne ads be just another sign of an impending backlash?

And while we’ll have to wait and see if this larger shift materializes, this thought-provoking campaign has one major shortfall.  MediaBistro hits the nail on the head when it wonders how Dentyne could create a campaign encouraging people to connect offline, and then support it by creating a website:

[W]hy didn’t you just go all real world? Do nothing online. Perhaps you create flash mobs of hugging via snail mail. Perhaps you hold spontaneous concerts on college campuses or bike rides though small university towns at midnight. How about a real world choose your own adventure game?

Dentyne may not be perfect in its execution, but it did successfully create a series of ads that captures my sentiment of the moment. I’m tired of technology controlling my life… and this company beautifully acknowledges — and encourages — my life beyond Facebook. I only hope balancing it all turns out to be as easy as buying a pack of gum.

[Comments(2) »] [TrackBack »]

SEPTEMBER 18, 2008

About a year or so ago, I had my first opportunity to try Verizon’s FIOS service. A bundle package that included phone, internet, and TV, was priced comparably to Comcast, which was my provider at the time.

It took me about five seconds to realize what a good decision I had made. My internet connection speed just about tripled. My (standard definition) TV looked remarkably crisp and clear, and the DVR was more responsive and functional than the one I had traded in from the cable company. Phone service is phone service, but we had the added convenience of a single bill for all of our telecommunications, including our cell phones, which we also obtained service for from Verizon. To top it off, customer service seemed responsive, and when we had trouble, it never took long to fix it.

Then we moved. FIOS wasn’t available at the new place.  We had to go back to Comcast, and after a fiasco with their billing system that left us fighting with them over obstinately charging us for services we had long since canceled, we were none too happy about it.

Our install didn’t go well. It was done clumsily, with cable strewn across the living room. The DVR didn’t work. On top of it, we were charged an outrageous install fee, amounting to several hundred dollars.

I made a complaint about the quality of service we were getting from Comcast on a blog, and I was surprised to get a response from a Comcast executive named Frank Eliason.  He wrote:

On behalf of Comcast, I would like to apologize for the service that you received. When someone is moving, the last thing they need is to “fight” with the cable company. I will be reaching out to you to see if I can assist further and learn more about your experience.

Thank you for being a Comcast Customer!
Frank Eliason

I thought it was a scam at first, so I Googled him. I found him doing the same thing on a number of other blogs. Then, I got an e-mail from him. I responded, told him what was wrong, and within 24 hours he had people from our local Comcast office hopping to get things fixed. He issued a credit that took care of our billing, and gave me a personal number to reach him in case we had more problems (which we did). Every time, he was willing to help - quickly and cheerfully. He even called me from his home phone one night  and talked to me for the better part of an hour about reputation management, his reasons for helping customers complaining on blogs, and the willingness his company was beginning to demonstrate to right their customer service wrongs. He was a lone crusader, it seemed, out there fighting to improve his company’s image. And with me, at least, it was working.

You couldn’t find a better brand ambassador. Frank Eliason single handedly restored my willingness to work with a company that I had all but sworn I would never do business with again.  Over time, he’s begun to earn a reputation for working to restore trust with consumers who were simply fed up with the service (or lack thereof) they were receiving. Customers aren’t stupid - they know when a company like Comcast is the only provider in their area, and it’s insulting when representatives act like that means good service is optional. Having someone with the power to fix it reach out to you instantly changes your relationship with the company - you go from powerless to powerful, and that leaves a strong, positive impression.

Now my family and I face a new dilemma. Having found an opportunity to live closer to work, school, and all that we do, we’ve moved yet again (hopefully the last one for a while). This time, Comcast isn’t an option, but FIOS (and another cable provider) are both available. The decision to choose FIOS was easy. They offer better product, better service, and better price than the competition.

But there’s a catch: The customer service end seems to have gone downhill.  Our original order somehow never got processed, and our new order will take 10 days to fulfill. That’s 10 days without essential communications in a family that does a lot of business over the internet and telephone. My wife, who works from home, has had to drag the kids to the local McDonald’s parking lot every morning since we moved in just to pick up a free WiFi signal so she can check her e-mail. When I’m at home, I can’t access my work e-mail, the blogs I contribute to, or my grad school course materials. (And for heaven’s sake, we missed the season premiere of House.)

And yet, this time, I’m willing to put up with it, instead of going to the competitor. FIOS may not be the only provider I have available, but they’re the only provider who can give me what I really want in terms of product. I’m getting the feeling that they know it, and that means good service is optional. It’s not a position that I, as a customer, like to be in.

Although I never thought I’d say it, perhaps Verizon should borrow a page from Comcast’s playbook. That, or make an offer to Frank Eliason.

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

SEPTEMBER 4, 2008

It must be hard owning a brand these days. Everywhere you turn, you hear about how consumers are taking over, how control has shifted away from the owners of products and brands and into the hands of the people who use those products and brands, regardless of whether they love or hate them.

From a consumer standpoint, however, these are exciting times. Last week, I read on a few blogs(subscription needed) about some Twitterers who had shown up using the names of characters on AMC’s sophomore drama “Mad Men.” For those of us who follow this addictive, intense drama, this was exciting news! Don Draper on Twitter? Never mind that for a show with an obsessive eye to detail and factual accuracy, this made no sense - Don Draper is an advertising executive in the 60s, when the delivery of a new copy machine was met with complete and utter befuddlement. It didn’t matter - the “Mad Men” characters on Twitter were simply a very cool extension of the “Mad Men” franchise into a new medium, one that would only encourage fan intensity for this show.

Well, as it turns out, Don Draper on Twitter wasn’t in fact created by AMC, or the writers of “Mad Men”, or anyone else connected with the show. And AMC’s first reaction was to have the accounts taken down. Luckily, they (thanks to their digital agency) changed their mind a few days later and allowed the accounts to be reinstated. As the Silicon Alley Insider said:

What happened? Deep Focus, the Web marketing group that works for AMC, tells us that they gently nudged their client into rescinding the DMCA takedown notice they’d sent to Twitter. See, in Web marketing parlance, the Twitterers assuming the names of Mad Men characters are actually “brand ambassadors” meant to be cultivated, not thwarted.”Better to embrace the community than negate their efforts,” says a Deep Focus spokesman. We agree!

I can understand AMC’s reticence. They’ve spent millions of dollars creating these complex characters, imagining their wardrobes, their anxieties, their ambitions. Why would they be comfortable with these unknown Twitterers hijacking these finely honed identities and tweeting all over the blogosphere?

On the other hand, though, in an age where mass media is rapidly fading and traditional advertising simply doesn’t work, what could be better than having bunch of people love your programming so much that they want to assume the identities of your characters and spread the word about them over the Internet?

Take a deep breath, AMC. It will be OK. Just roll with it. If this doesn’t get you new viewers, I’d be very surprised.

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

AUGUST 22, 2008

I recently went out to dinner at a relatively upscale restaurant in the area.  My husband and I were leisurely enjoying our dinner when I looked up and noticed that there was a TV directly in my line of vision, broadcasting a baseball game.  While I have nothing against baseball or TV in general, I was annoyed by the fact that there seems to be no way to avoid it. It used to be the only place to watch TV was at your house or maybe local sports bars — now, there is no escape.

And it’s not just restaurants.  Have you noticed that everywhere you go these days there seems to be a TV blaring the latest advertisements, infotainment segments or election news?  TV screens are now ever-present at airports, doctors offices, gas station pumps, grocery store check out lines, the gym, the office, and definitely restaurants.  Can you even remember the last time you ate at a restaurant that didn’t have a TV on at the bar?

A recent study by Arbitron media found that one in three people watch television outside of their own home on any given day.

Is it that we are so used to being bombarded with information and entertainment that we can’t tolerate being alone with our thoughts?  Or perhaps marketers and entertainers feel they have no choice in today’s saturated society but to try and reach us at all times and places.  Do we really need to be entertained for the three minutes it takes to fill up our gas tank?  Will we lead a less fulfilling life if we aren’t aware of the latest Hollywood breakup immediately via the mall TV channel?

A recent Fast Company article touches on this phenomenon, stating:

In a DVR world, advertisers are reaching outside the home for today’s most desirable audience: a captive one. Anywhere people might be waiting equals an opportunity to air short-form content and advertising.

And according to a recent New York Times article:

There are at least 37,000 shops, offices and health clubs across the country that broadcast ads on TV screens…and are also in 20 percent of all groceries and 11 percent of all office  buildings.  The Wal-Mart TV Network now includes more than 125,000 screens in 2,850 Wal-Mart stores.

What do you think?  Does it bother you to have TV programming everywhere you go in today’s society? Or do you welcome the distraction and entertainment?

I, for one, could do without it.

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]