The Musings Of An Opinionated Sod [Help Me Grow!]

after a great post on wooster about a nike ad that’s been jammed, i think i have a bit of a clue as to why those in adland are not as regarded as you might hope, rob.

people see ads only as the company they represent. so when you see a nike ad, you don’t see it as an image of a nike product, you see it as a nike product. or a stereotypical image of a blonde with a huge rack wearing a cougar shirt is not an image of a cougar product, but a blonde with a huge rack wearing a cougar shirt.

unfortunately, it’s a bit of a dichotomy because you want brand recognition through this phenomenon. you want people to associate sony with a film about exploding paint, but as a result, advertising writers, directors, planners, etc, lose their creative mark on the whole thing by forgoing their signature for the brand.

and because of all of this, those companies are unwilling to let go of their control, because whatever solution is used, will ultimately reflect on the company as the company, not as an ad/promo/how’s-it-going-i’m-alright-jack for the company. plus an economic rationalist will always love a quantifiable solution and what’s quantifiable about creativity and passion?

did i just regurgitate the obvious there?

Hurrah … debate without the ‘s’ word in sight.

Keep going … keep going …

[For the record: I do see both sides of the argument, not because I like sitting on the fence [I think we all know that’s not something I am good at] but because there is always more than one way to look at things.

Without doubt too many agencies and companies think their brand has a disproportionate importance in people’s lives … which is why so many products and advertising end up as faceless crap … however there are some out there who understand how to really build a brand ‘image’ and ‘association’ – and whilst it tends to start with a great product it also is about engaging on a cultural level rather than a blatant product and category focus.

Sure this still is ‘advertising’ as opposed to a more purist approach to communication, but then the line is so thin these days I could argue the iPOD was also a fusion of these 2 elements.

Fucking well done Marcus – great viewpoint and no mention of the ‘s’ word either.

I am in complete agreement that quite often, agencies and clients talk completely different languages.

Not all of them [you can tell who because they tend to be the ones who do the most interesting stuff] but quite alot.

Why? Well there’s quite a few reasons but the ones that instantly come to mind are …

1. Some agencies are arrogant enough to think they know everything – meaning they don’t understand, appreciate or respond to what the real issues are. [The art of ‘asking questions’ seems to be diminishing]

2. Many marketing people are not versed in the realities of life – basing all their knowledge from an out-of-date … or out-of-context … research paper/book.

3. The industry has cultivated a ‘them’ and ‘us’ attitude [often based around fees] resulting in both parties not trusting or respecting each other.

4. Despite comments to the contrary, companies DON’T appreciate mistakes so job security is often manifested through conservatism and duplication rather than pragmatism and liberation.

5. Despite comments to the contrary, many agencies DON’T really care about solving the clients fundamental problem, they just want short-term profit explosion and/or the opportunity to produce self-indulgent creative expressions aimed more at the ad community rather than the general consumer.

6. The training given … both from client and agency sides … is generally terrible and so comments like ‘It’s Off Brand’ are often expressed by people who actually don’t know what a ‘brand’ actually is. [I’ve met people who regard the brand as the bloody ad template design!!!]

Hell, it’s even harder in Asia … because not only do you have the language barriers, but also the fact the place operates on myth and legend so the implication of any idea has to be evaluated by individual country – which often leads to ‘lowest common denominator communication’ which work more at putting people OFF a brand than attracting them.

Then there’s the fact that culturally Asia
‘follows’ rather than ‘leads’ which means selling a new category direction takes literally years plus the attitude towards client side ‘brand management’ tends to be one of ‘process control’ rather than real brand development. It’s about pleasing their boss rather than the consumer.

Saying that though, enthusiasm does go a bloody long way and given we were told we’d not achieve anything in Asia, we’re doing pretty well so far – even though I say it myself.

Why?

Well as I said, enthusiasm does go a long way but then so does empathy, trust, cultural awareness, business and consumer knowledge, idea and channel nuetrality [sell on ‘ideas’ – never just individual words], perseverence and sheer bloody mindedness & cheekiness.

Well, it’s either that or my looks. Ahem.

Dear Marcus.
Thank you very much for keeping your word and apologising to Billy. It’s so nice to see people with honour.
Billy is actually away at present, but I will ensure he is aware of your act.
We all hope to meet you one day, you have been quite the topic of conversation in the office as of late.
Kind Regards, Katerina

A terrific post and one that Piers at PSFK who is nuts about branded utility would probably be very excited with. I can imagine Thailand’s largest optician ‘Top Charoen’ being very interested in sponsoring those transparent bins rather than producing the very negative ad campaign they last did through JWT. There’s a bundle of other very good ideas that could work round transparency and being visually alert.

Incidentally the new airport is probably going to be shut down as the cracks in the runway are not going away. I went on the pilots forum and they said they are getting round them in the traditional Thai manner, by steering round them 😉 Back to Don Muan I say.

Katerina, I would love to meet you all too. Lovely lot that you all are.

Rob M, you need a very special space for trust to happen. It’s a magical place. Only really happens when knowledge, skill, daring, passion etc are on both sides of the table. Hence, a rare thing.

True Marcus, but its very sad that more clients and more agencies dont at least strive for it.

Dear Marcus, you have made me blush despite that compliment being aimed at all of us.
Kind Regards, Katerina

Karterina, don’t blush.
Rob M, I was with them when he visited but never met him. I do have a signed limited edition Zelda box set though.

Now back to the subject of the post.

Jesus … an intelligent debate – am I dreaming???

K you are a total sweetie and Marcus I am very impressed you were true to your word.

I agree that ‘trust’ is the most important word in advertising … however the problem is too many agencies go in thinking they deserve it from Day 1 whereas our view is that you have to go out and earn it. [especially as many clients just want you to solve a problem rather than become a trusted ‘partner’]

The way we do this is starting with some ‘blunt honesty’ … telling clients hard truths … whilst also offering up some real options that can help fulfil their fundamental short and long-term business issues/aspirations – which often have nothing to do with advertising at all. [The mobile signal blocker for a chain of luxury hotels – “Because A Holiday Should Be From Everything” being one example!]

Sure it doesn’t always work out … but the clients who tend to come to us do it because of who we are and what we believe … it’s never because we charge less, have more offices, more staff or greater propriety reasearch tools.

Hell, one client hires us because ‘We Keep The Others Honest’ and all because our attitude is PEOPLE COME FIRST.

As we say in our manifesto – our goal is to protect humanity from communication and brands that have no meaning, relevance, enjoyment or values.

It won’t make us super-rich, but we can sleep at night and look our friends in the eye.

To suggest the GameCube failed in Europe because of the advertising is absurd. It is true that Nintendo are one of the blunter tools in the advertising tool kit, but that really wasn’t the problem. When you launch a console there are a few “magical” things that need to be in place to make it a success. First up is Christmas. You’ve got to hit Christmas simple as that. Secondly the console has got to be right. The GameCube is a great console, but it wasn’t the right console. That was the Xbox. Finally you have to launch with the right games. No other console on the market (except, historically, with Sega) has games that are so intertwined with the console. Nintendo launched with Luigi’s Mansion, which was a good game but it wasn’t Mario. And it was a single player. Nintendo tried to make a console that would fit into the console war instead of focusing on what it was good at; family, party funny GAME PLAY.

I’ve written, at length about why Wii is so good, so I’ll stop now.

So Rob M, I believe that no matter how clever, good, innovative the GameCube advertising could have been it was always going to fail. Because it was the wrong product at the wrong time.

and it was purple.

lol.

Yes, that was a big mistake. Though it was still better looking than the PS2 or Xbox! The silver one was nice though.

3rd party support was its big flaw.

if I remember rightly I think we sold about 4 units in oz.

Yes, which makes the success of DS and Wii there all the more impressive.

They needed a consistent image, and a consistent campaign.

Whilst Sony were at the height of their advertising weirdness, and Xbox was looking powerful and bulky; the Cube was left looking scattered, unsure of itself and as kiddy as some people mistakenly believed.

Both LB and Nintendo needed to come up with a solid consistent campaign and stick with it. Instead of partially hitting one big target they missed lots of targets all over the place.

Depends on whether they would have changed anything, and whether you mean a delayed launch.

If they had advised them to:

Change the colour
Get more 3rd party support
Get more floor space (i.e.: pay game like Sony/MS supposedly did)

or

Give the system a must have launch game (Mario, Zelda…)

or even

Go away and make a more powerful system to launch next xmas, thereby providing a differential.

Then maybe they should yes. They should have seen how hard it would be to differentiate the system in a positive way, especially with the colour/games/support issue; and told Nintendo.

The good thing is that Nintendo now appear to have learnt their lessons from the Cube.

Yep … I’m with you about ‘hold the launch’ Marcus.

I remember being asked to pitch for Michelin and our response was DON’T ADVERTISE [well, spend about 15% on ATL ads just to maintain brand creds]with the rest spent on car manufacture associations as well as tyre fitter / distributor programs & promotions because tyres are a distress purchase and the majority of the purchase decision is based on reccomendation rather than specific request.

We were asked to leave.

The issue was we were talking to people WITHOUT bottom line responsibility [marketing people] so they WANTED an ad and didn’t care about it’s effectiveness.

To be fair to Rob, it’s all well and good saying the agency should have said DON’T LAUNCH but the realities of business tends to mean it is a tidal wave you can’t just stop.

Sure they should have [and maybe did] say the product wasn’t good enough for the market [we now have been asked to advise SONY on consumer expectation levels to ensure they don’t fall into this trap as they have numerous times] however if they were told ‘IT’S GOING TO HAPPEN SO MAKE IT WORK’ then I think on top of many other key areas, they should of definitely had a clear, concise and focused strategy rather than the scattergun approach they chose to adopt. Who knows what was going on in the background – I hate it when the agencies get all the blame because someone, somewhere approved all the work/thinking so it should definitely be shared blame / shared fame … though maybe I’m living in dreamland.

Yes.

Like I said:

“Go away and make a more powerful system to launch next xmas, thereby providing a differential.”

In essence I meant the same thing, cancel the product as it is. Thereby involving them in the dev process to ensure a successful launch of what would come next.

My word I’ve enjoyed reading this stuff. Marcus, fully fledged bastard of a good point on clients.

By the way, if it’s a fact that agencies and clients speak a different language, why the hell do so many agencies pretend they do? I happen to beleive that everyone can bring something to the table, but while smoke and mirrors and hidden agendas stalk the corridors of this industry it won’t happen, we’re all too busy pretending to agree.
Behind closed doors, agencies slag of clients and berate them for not listening their advice – which is fine, they know communication. BUT clients know business. Lets all be honest about where good at.
Rob, that’s why I like Cynic, you set out you’re stall from the offset.

To use a rubbish analogy, its like football.

If you have two strikers who both want to score and dont work together, they will never be as effective as two who work together.

Shevchenko vs Henry

Absolutely Marcus.

R+D is about making something consumers want to buy, so why on earth would you not want to involve the people who talk on your behalf to those consumers?

What I love is that agencies tell clients to be differentiated from their competition but then are just like all the others themselves.

They obviously rationalise this approach by saying if they were to have too strong a philosophy, they could alienate a potential big piece of business. Hypocrites and liars …

What’s interesting is more and more clients ARE seeking agencies with strong values and philosophies because they obviously feel the bigger agencies don’t stand for anything and are more focused on getting the cash they need to survive [with their massive overheads] than doing something they truly believe in.

Hell, we’re now being approached by very un-cynic clients and whilst that doesn’t mean we’ll end up working with them [the Huggies debacle left a weird taste in our mouths] it is very promising for us and every other opionated boutique agency.

Right, DEFINITELY off to bed.

I mix ink.

I’m not qualified to answer pantone questions sorry.

in your attic. Your old GC WaveBird works with Wii.

I knew it couldn’t last – now we’re in Wavebird conversations.

The Huggies debacle was that we created an a campaign for them that achieved the highest global recall rates in Kimberly Clarke history but then, because it was rather risque [“Protects You From People Full Of Crap” – but it was aimed at Dad’s rather than Mum’s] they paid us NOT to run it.

OK so we didn’t lose out financially – but given they knew what we were like, we were rather surprised and disappointed that a campaign everyone absolutely loved, didn’t see the light of day because of corporate uncomfortableness.

It was genius … shot like an old Wild West film in the Saloon. There were cowboys all over the place before a baby with a giant nappy tried to get in through the swing doors.

Oh, I’m not doing it justice – but it was great – as was the new packaging, which we made look like a tool box!

rob m, that pantone joke was possibly the worst in the history of ‘industry jokes’.. but damn if i didn’t have a giggle!

this post has been fantastic reading and thankfully reminded me that authenticity is the key.

during the day i’m one of those awful in-house communications people that you guys despise and i’ve been trying to ‘encourage’ my organisation to be present for a younger audience, make itself a little more accessible to those who might see us as a daggy, boring kind of organisation and get a whole bunch of new people to associate with us. with much resistance from all directions.

and, thanks to this blog, i realised that the fact of the matter is, that ain’t gonna happen and somehow, it’s time for us to embrace our inner dork and speak to our true audience.

now, i’m off to channel my inner middle-aged-mother-of-3-with-a-fine-arts-degree-and-an-absent-husband and see what i find :)…

[perhaps i can come up with a safe Huggies campaign while i’m at it..ha!]