I saw this ad in a restaurant near my office.
Can someone tell me just what SMOKE FREE ROASTERS FEATURING THERMO-AERODYNAMIC TECHNOLOGY actually is?
Actually you can scrub the ‘smoke free roasters’ bit … just tell me about THERMO-AERODYNAMIC TECHNOLOGY.
I can imagine the owners of the restaurant were ‘influenced’ by those Skin Care / Shampoo ads that use complex scientific terms to try and ‘rationalise’ their product benefits to the end user.
Only thing is, while doing that may have value to those specific categories … in a cheap local restaurant, you have to question whether it has any value at all.
OK I’m being unfair given I have no idea just what this ‘technology’ is or does … but to be honest, any restaurant offering that sort of science terminology is more likely to put me off than to actively encourage me to give it a go.
It’s so easy to get lost in this sort of thing.
I understand why it works [especially for some categories] but it doesn’t mean that’s the only way to tackle the problem.
Saying that, with millions of dollars at risk, I appreciate why companies [and agencies] tend to follow a safe ‘mass trends’ rather than try to do something new – because if it fucks up, they can say they did ‘what everyone else was doing’ and it was just bad luck.
The problem with this attitude is that it ends up naturally favouring the brand with the biggest distribution channel and/or budget – and so for small organisations, they are either pushed out or stand no chance of making a sizable impression.
Why so many small companies feel they should act in the same way as the dominant player is beyond me.
I’m sure they think it adds credibility to their offer – and while in some ways it does – being a ‘me-too’ isn’t going to assure you of anything other than impending failure.
Many, many years ago we were approached by a company to try and break into the Spanish skincare market.
When we looked at the competition, PONDS was identified as one of the key brands that was an obstacle to our longterm success.
So rather than create communication that looked, sounded and acted like the category, we simply asked …
“HAS ANYONE SEEN THIS PONDS INSTITUTE THEY KEEP GOING ON ABOUT?”
… and then talked about how marketing is designed to blur the edges of ‘truth’ whereas we believe in a simple, natural, honest approach to all we do.
And while the nice folk at Unilever threatened to sue – the fact our campaign was based on undeniable truth meant they couldn’t actually take any action – resulting in their brand collapsing while ours went from strength to strength.
The company we were working for was The Body Shop and while things have changed dramatically for them in the past few years, I am very happy and proud to say I had a hand in closing the fictional doors of the PONDS ‘Institute’ forever, at least in Spain.
Hell, I should put that on my CV … unless I intend to go and work for JWT at some point in the future, ha!