A while back I wrote about how difficult it is to run global / regional brands.
The main thrust of my rant was that not only do you have to get a grip [and manage] cultural differences, but you also have to counter the various corporate attitudinal differences – which tends to mean that apart from a focus on ‘getting the money in’, there’s little consistency in approach.
To highlight my example, I discussed how SONY Malaysia were systematically destroying their corporate brands vision, strategy and goal by embarking on some terrible advertising for Vaio.
Now I know I shouldn’t care because I left that account when I/we ended our WPP experiment – but the thing is I do care, I care alot – and what kills me is that it seems SONY Malaysia’s terrible attitude towards brand building and treating people with respect and intelligence is spreading to Singapore.
Normally when I go to the Funan Mall – one of Singapore’s dedicated technology shopping centres – I get very excited because I know I’ll be seeing/buying more pointless shit that will keep me happy for oooooooh, 10 minutes, however on this occasion, I felt sick before I even entered the doors because hanging proudly at the entrance was this …
WHAT
THE
FUCK
So according to SONY [or should I say SONY VAIO … coincidence? I think not!] the colour pink makes you [1] more romantic and [2] more beautiful.
Well no offence, but Barbara Cartland was liberally coated in the stuff and she looked fucking terrible … though to be fair, she did write a load of soppy guff that sold in the millions.
And what the hell is luxurious pink?
Is that like ‘Tuscan Red’ … which is basically red with a poncy name? Designers have a lot to answer for I can tell you … 🙂
Now while I am sure there are some people out there who really, really, really want a pink computer [Emah for example!] I doubt even they would buy one JUST because of it’s fucking colour.
And if they did, would you really want stupid bastards walking around associating with your brand?
Well actually if you’re embarking on this sort of strategy, we know the answer to that – however selling your brand/product purely on the basis it comes in a particular shade of pink undermines any premium price you hope to achieve.
Look, I know that when iMac first offered different colour ‘flavours’, it was a novel approach because before that, computers had only been available in grey or black … however as I said previously, we live in multi-coloured ‘everything’ times, so this approach is particularly weak, especially when every other computer manufacture – including the super-cheap-and-nasty – offers the same option.
It is a very fine line between brand consistency and profit – however they are not mutually exclusive – and if SONY carries on letting it’s VAIO subsidiary fuck up their brand, then they only have themselves to blame if they go back to the wilderness they were so recently an inhabitant of.
I love SONY – not just because of what I/we did for them – but because I adore their products and when I see this kind-of activity, it makes me ill because it’s the actions of the desperate and/or totally misinformed.
I’m sure there’ll be someone who retort this approach has had a positive short term effect on sales, however to them I would counter by saying it’s the long-term ramifications you should be worried about – but then when organisations only focus on the end of the month, I’d only be wasting my breath wouldn’t I?
Brands keep going on about how hard it is to achieve consumer loyalty, but what do they expect when they subject them to lowest common denominator communication day after day after day?
Hmmmmn, I wonder how much of this approach is a byproduct of how the marketing manager/director is treated/respected by their boss?
As one client once said to me, “shit is handed down in direct proportion to what he is experiencing himself” – which means if the CEO isn’t getting laid, we all suffer 🙂