Comments for IABC Branding & Marketing Commons

Comment on Welcome to Web 3-D! by Better Communication Results

Better Communication Results — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 22:52:42 +0000

[...] Anders Gronstedt from the IABC’s Branding & Marketing Commons blog: “After holding our first weekly learning event in Second Life, it’s easy to see why this [...]

Comment on Welcome to Web 3-D! by Sam Smith

Sam Smith — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:21:17 +0000

I was one of the attendees and was really impressed. Your 2L space is nice, but what most struck me was the interest of your visitors and the expertise some of them had. Obviously 2L is very real for some and a lot more people have concluded that they need to get on board.

As I said then, I’m going to be fascinated to see what happens when Linden Lab rolls out fully integrated VoiP….

Comment on Somebody in West Bygod gets it by Richard B Barger ABC APR

Richard B Barger ABC APR — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:08:11 +0000

Well, I “get” it. I understand Rick’s POV, of course, but, just like those who don’t like the approach, others like it.

Is it too “cute”? Depends, doesn’t it, on what their research says and how their specific target publics reacted in tests and how well the campaign helps them meet their measurable objectives?

If it works, it doesn’t matter that Rick wouldn’t use it; if it doesn’t, then my opinion is of no moment.

I guess it would be too “over the top” for the “Don’t come to West Virginia” crowd to really go out on a limb with something like [insensitivity alert!] “Blacksburg is in the other Virginia; you’ll be safe here!”[/alert]

Comment on Somebody in West Bygod gets it by Sam Smith

Sam Smith — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 03:37:20 +0000

Nothing personal, Rick, but this is one where you’re simply wrong. The very idea of going to WV on vacation is a joke to most - really, if the Clintons and Wal*Mart hadn’t elevated Arkansas’ national profile WV would still be the butt of EVERY hillbilly joke in America. So the only way to credibly promote around that is to begin by acknowledging that yeah, we know the stereotype. Establish common ground with the audience, and in doing so, you de facto demonstrate that, by the way, maybe you aren’t like the stereotype would suggest.

This buys you a fresh look, and that’s exactly what you need.

Are there better campaign ideas out there? Maybe - probably. My suspicion is that there’s ALWAYS a better idea that nobody came up with. But that doesn’t diminish the fact that this is a campaign that helps a state address its image problem. I’ll be interested in checking back in a couple years, because I expect this campaign to prove my point in measurable tourism dollars.

(And there was no “analogy” to Menu Foods. I was noting that people who think a certain way tend to manifest in a particular set of ways.)

Comment on Somebody in West Bygod gets it by Rick

Rick — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 02:18:38 +0000

When I’m badmouthing advertisers, I usually am badmouthing how in the pocket of their agencies they are; this West Virginia Tourism ad might be exhibit A of dumb campaigns they’ve been convinced to use by their agencies. Sometimes I badmouth agencies for not understanding their clients and only wanting to win awards; this ad certainly sounds tilted towards the awards shows, and not to the clients business.
The typical reader of those ads would look at the headline, think for maybe 0.1 second, and conclude, “Okay.” They then make plans for having their vacations in other states.
Smith’s analogy to the Menu Foods crisis is false in that, until the advertising ran, no one had any reason to avoid going to WV for their vacation: no one ever died from going on vacation in WV. The ad gives its : WV doesn’t want them.
I suspect that there’s some kind of politics going on here: the WV Tourism Director will get a lot of flack from the tourism industry for this ad, but since (I guess) he’s appointed not by WV tourism businesses but by the governor, he’s probably pretty insulated from those pressures. Maybe the WV Tourism Council is funded by a tax, and he’s trying to get rid of it–this ad could do that. Maybe the Tourism council supported the loser in the last governor’s election, and this is the way of the winner getting back at the industry for that support.
While there’s a lot of dull and unoriginal travel and tourism advertising, doing something stupid isn’t the cure for that, and Smith seems to confuse “stupid” with creative.

Comment on Somebody in West Bygod gets it by Sam Smith

Sam Smith — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 01:39:45 +0000

No, but it’s a good question.

Comment on Somebody in West Bygod gets it by Jana Schilder

Jana Schilder — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 01:20:38 +0000

Any idea how many IABC membrs have anything important to do with advertising of products and services?

Andhow many have anything to do with corporate advertising, perhaps even knowing what the diffrence between corporate advertising and product and service advertising is?

BAK

Comment on Branding vs. Impressionism by Mark Weiner

Mark Weiner — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 14:24:09 +0000

Lorenzo and Merry,

There are a lot of over-used terms in marketing and communication, and “branding” is one of them. In my opinion and using your example of the calf who is branded by the rancher, the “branding” is not to protect the cow, it’s designed to have an effect on anyone who might mistake the calf as their own. In other words, as Lorenzo says, the calf is certainly not the beneficiary; the rancher benefits because poachers stay away.

And this is the key to “branding:” as Merry says, “Branding” exists in the mind of the consumer, not so much as what we choose to put on a label. It is most often a arduous, strategic process based on solid research, creativity and follow-through, a marriage of the science and the art of marketing.

Rather than abandoning the word, I choose to use it correctly and to suggest its true meaning to those who use it incorrectly.

Comment on How about a definition of brand equity? by Merry Elrick

Merry Elrick — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 19:50:42 +0000

It’s important to make a distinction between “brand” and “brand equity.” In Kris’ example above (comment #1), she is measuring the perception of the “brand,” not “brand equity.” Measuring brand equity is much more difficult because, as Jonathan says (comment #5), the value of the brand is embedded in the company’s performance. That will be reflected in all kinds of metrics involving employees, customers and sales. I think you need to determine what you’re trying to achieve by building brand equity and then measure that, as long as you are trying to achieve something reasonable, like a shortened sales cycle or increased customer retention. In addition, I think most people would agree that increased future cash flows, as Gary Ward suggests above (comment #4), would certainly be a desired outcome of increased brand equity. This is where Reichheld’s Net Promoter Score comes into the picture. How loyal are your current customers, how many more can you acquire and what kind of future cash flows can you expect to generate?

Comment on How about a definition of brand equity? by Jonathan

Jonathan — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 16:39:09 +0000

It seems to me that no measure of brand or brand equity is separate from business performance, primarily sales or profitability (brand supposedly helping move products or services more often and for less expense). No other corporate department has the luxury of inventing some ‘box’ into which is funnels heaps of money without any fiscal responsibility to justify. Ideally, the value of the brand is embedded in measures of business performance, from employee retention and productivity, to sales efficacy, don’t you think? If we continue to focus on measuring brand as something ’separate’ from all that, aren’t we just waiting for the next economic downturn to tag all of our complicated, esoteric math for deletion as budgets tighten? That’s maybe the best measure of brand value…negatively, of course.