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


Anyone Can Feel Popular If You Lower The Criteria To People Who Breathe.
May 17, 2012, 6:12 am
Filed under: Comment

You’re in a café having a plate of chips.

Suddenly a woman on another table asks if she could borrow the vinegar on your table because hers has run out.

“Sure …” you say, and pass it to her.

“Thank you …” she replies, “… I love vinegar on my chips”.

“Yep …” you answer, “… so do I”.

According to some agencies, that simple and casual interaction means you’re a ‘fan’ of the chip eating lady and the company that made the vinegar, has just acquired 2 valuable ‘brand ambassadors’ who have balance sheet value.

What am I going on about?

Facebook likes … that’s what.

The way some people go on about them, you’d think they are a declaration of love, but given the clay head from Lionel Richie’s 1984 hit, ‘Hello’ has over 11,000 Facebook Fans, the whole premise of people only clicking on things that mean a lot to them is absolute and utter bollocks.

And yet people still use them as a ‘gauge’ brand popularity.

I know why, because it’s easy to get and doesn’t have a downside – but I wonder what would happen if Facebook added a ‘don’t like’ button – what would happen then?

What would, say Unilever, think if their brand had 10,000 likes and 26,000 don’t likes?

Rather than use that as a way to get a better understanding of why/how [some] people don’t like the brand, I think it would probably just result in the immediate closure of many corporate Facebook pages … not to mention a massive downturn in Facebook revenue.

Facebook likes can be turned into something valuable – but not in their current guise – but few brands [or agencies] will take on that challenge when it’s so much easier to let the thumbs up, add up – even though in real terms, the average person puts as much consideration into a clicking on a Facebook ‘like’ as they do farting in their sleep.

Brands will never reach their full potential while they continue to filter the ‘facts’ to suit their own ego, agenda and pockets.



Some Communication Does More Harm Than Good …
May 16, 2012, 6:03 am
Filed under: Comment

So recently I was on a flight and at the start of every program – literally every program – there was this ad for HSBC:

OK, I get it … they want to ensure international business travelers view HSBC as the authority for local & international financial knowledge, advice & help.

That makes sense for a lot of reasons, including the fact it reinforces their ‘World’s local bank’ positioning [still one of the best lines ever written]

However I have an issue with it.

No, it’s not the content of the ad – which let’s be honest, is no great shakes – it’s the message they’re conveying.

After enduring a 60 second montage of industrial imagery – & stilted conversation – HSBC present us with this:

“At HSBC we believe a bank should know when a market has emerged”.

No fucking shit.

I expect fucking Amazon.com to know when a market has emerged, let alone an international fucking bank that was founded well over 100 years ago in Hong Kong and Shanghai.

But even more than that, the ad is talking about India.

INDIA!!!

I appreciate some people don’t like to leave their house but even the most myopic, racist fuckwit knows India is hardly some insignificant backwater and that is has been a major economic player in many global industries for years and years and years.

Sri Lanka, maybe. But India?

That’s cause for military action right there.

But back to the ad …

I don’t know whether the passenger in the car is meant to be a businessman or an HSBC representative, but the fact they’re surprised India has ’emerged’, means they’re hardly the sharpest knife in the drawer are they – and they’re certainly not the sort of person you’d want to invest either your money or your trust in.

But the real shame should be saved for the bank and agency who wrote and approved this rubbish.

They might be sitting there smugly thinking they’re brand pioneers, but all they’ve really done – on top of spending copious amounts of cash on the most pointless, state-the-fucking-obvious marketing message ever known to man – is ensure that instead of being regarded as ‘The World’s Local Bank’, they’re actually ‘The World’s Most Blinkered Bank’.

Not exactly the best message to send out to well traveled, economically aware, international business people.

Even less so when you’re a financial organisation whose HQ is pretty much next to the country they’re claiming has only now, ’emerged’.

This attitude of ‘continual news’ might have worked back in the 50’s, but in 2012, this approach – especially for a bank – highlights how incredibly bad they are at investing their shareholders and customers money.

But then we already knew that didn’t we.



Is The Education System Broken?
May 15, 2012, 6:15 am
Filed under: Comment

Life isn’t fair.

I wish it was, but it isn’t and – sadly – I doubt it ever will be.

Some issues are more obvious than others and some are more serious than others – however one that bugs the crap out of me is education for profit.

Basically I’m vehemently opposed to it.

VEHEMENTLY.

I appreciate running schools and universities is expensive … I certainly believe teachers should be getting paid a great salary … but that doesn’t excuse the outrageous costs that some schools and universities charge for the privilege of their education.

I recently read a report on acquisitions made by schools and universities in Australia, America and the UK and it was frightening reading.

We’re not talking school books and computers … oh no … we’re talking land and property that was in the tens of millions.

TENS OF MILLIONS.

What the fuck?!

Where the hell does a school or university get money like that?

To me, that is outrageous, whether you’re Harvard or, even more shockingly – a school from the northern suburbs of Sydney.

A few years ago, Harvard come out and said, ‘They didn’t want to be a production line for the next generation of super-rich bankers’.

Because I was doing some work with them via Google, I immediately wrote to someone very senior at the organisation to say how positive that was to hear.

I also added that if they really wanted to ensure they achieved their goal, one way they could do it was to double their schooling costs because, let’s face it, people would still pay and for everyone who did, they could allow someone who had no intention to go into the traditional Harvard employment channels, in for free.

I got an email back that simply said, “You’ve got us”.

Of course my plan was inherently flawed – I know that – but making public statements about wanting to ‘do good for society’ or giving out a few scholarships doesn’t fool anyone because as everyone knows, talk is cheap and if they really wanted to make a difference, they would not be acquiring bank balances that make the Greek and Spanish Governments jealous.

Education is a basic human right …

Everyone should have it …

Everyone should benefit from it …

… but all this high-priced education is doing is creating a class system, not of the ‘educated’ versus ‘everyone else’ but of those ‘who have a lifetime of debt’ and those ‘who won’t’ which is even worse in a lot of respects.

What’s worse is that because schools, universities and governments have lowered the overall ‘pass criteria’ to ensure they achieve high pass rates and the illusion of ‘accessibility’ … it’s created a mass of people that [1] think they can go to university[2] think they need to go to university and [3] have a degree but still can’t get a job because there’s so many out there in the same position.

No wonder – as Sir Ken Robinson said – that we are in the grip of educational inflation, where having a degree isn’t enough, it has to be an MBA and soon, an MBA won’t mean as much so it will have to be a PHD etc etc.

We need educated people.

We need smart, clever folk who can help make things better for them and the World.

But apart from the fact not everyone has to go to university to achieve that, we seem to creating a society that is inheriting debt rather than having the skills and opportunities to create more opportunity and profit for everyone.

Don’t get me wrong, I think they’re some amazing schools, universities and teachers out there … I think education is vitally important and inherently beautiful thing … but I worry the people who are benefiting the most from the current system are the ones running it rather than the ones experiencing it and that’s bad news for everyone, especially the future generations.

OK, rant over. Just needed to get that off my chest.



Bad Taste Is In The Eye Of The Receiver …
May 14, 2012, 6:11 am
Filed under: Comment

OK, so the tone, timing and manner of the letter has a lot to be desired, but in terms of seeing and seizing an opportunity, the person behind this letter can’t be faulted.

The reason I say this is because I feel too many in adland wait for opportunities to fall on their lap rather than go out and chase it down.

Of course there’s a fine line between being proactive and being hard-sell … but the point I’m trying to make is that the early mover often gets the opportunity and while that shouldn’t mean you sacrifice quality for speed, it also shouldn’t mean you sit back with the attitude that you only do stuff when you’re approached to do stuff.

Enthusiasm – especially in Asia – is often a major competitive advantage.

Don’t snub it, embrace it … but remember to be more respectful than the guy above.



The First Rule Of Problem Solving Is Knowing The Problem You Need To Solve …
May 11, 2012, 6:12 am
Filed under: Comment

One of the things I always find interesting to observe is how people approach problems.

In my experience, they tend to fall into 2 distinct areas:

1. Jump right in with ideas.
2. Think [& discuss] the brief … then get on with coming up with ideas.

The basic problem with both of these approaches is that you assume the brief is correct.

I’m not suggesting someone has given you wrong information on purpose, however I have seem way too many briefs that talk about executional wants rather than commercial needs.

One is like going to the DR, telling him what is wrong with you and then ordering him what to prescribe whereas the other is like going to a specialist, explaining your situation and then having them diagnose your problem and offer advice on how to make you well.

There’s a whole bunch of reasons for these 2 possible outcomes, however one that is entirely our fault is our reluctance to investigate the brief.

I don’t mean asking a few questions about the audience or highlighting a few issues about timing or budget … I mean genuinely understanding what the brand/product/business actually needs to achieve and then evaluating that with what has been given to you.

Now I appreciate that sometimes, clients don’t know.

Some seem to have the attitude their only objective is getting marketing collateral into the hands of their sales teams within a set time period, whereas others have this belief ‘advertising’ is totally separate to ‘marketing’.

Of course not everyone is like this – and for those who are, some have the attitude that they’re not worth dealing with – however I don’t really share that point of view, at least not initially, because I believe there is a way to help everyone see the light and that is asking questions.

But here’s the thing, it’s not about asking any question, it’s asking the right question.

So how do you do that?

Well for me, it’s about understanding that there is rarely an all encompassing ‘magic bullet’ question – that one bit of curiosity that suddenly makes everything clear – it’s about asking questions that allow you to prod and poke, explore and cross reference until you slowly identify and close in on the real issue that needs to be addressed, not the superficial or the generic.

Ultimately, it’s being a Rodi – knowing your clients business intimately rather than just relying on what the brief says.

And of course, when I say ‘knowing their business, I don’t mean in terms of advertising, I mean in terms of their actual business.

Distribution. Development times. Competitive environment. Sales information. Internal issues and opportunities.

KNOWING. THEIR. BUSINESS.

Too many planners seem to think their job is purely about the advertising.

Sure, they might ‘talk’ about the business issues of their client, but they simplify it to either:

1. It’s a communication problem.
2. It’s a differentiation problem.
3. It’s a relevance problem.

That’s it, according to them, all the issues of commerce fall into 3 simple areas.

Bollocks.

And even if it was true, it doesn’t explain why they believe all of them can be solved with another piece of advertising.

Or an app.

Or a powerpoint document full of meaningless or un-executable ideas.

[If you want to know what I think it the way to approach things, you should watch this from 8″ 9 secs to 8″ 25 secs. The rest of it is utter fucking waffle as usual]

Paul Simons – a legend of advertising and planning – has written a great post on the state of planning these days.

This isn’t – like some would like to claim – some ‘out-of-date’ man trying desperately to remain relevant in an ever-changing World, it’s a highly successful and experienced planner wondering where the fuck the rigor has gone from our industry.

At a time where so many planners swan about the place thinking they’re ‘Rockstars‘, the reality is many of them have confused cool with clever.

Anyone can say they are focused on the business – or quote something from PSFK – but that’s very different to being able to prove you’ve done something.

And I’m not talking about having won some EFFIE awards.

Sure that’s good, but sadly, that has become as much about your submission writing skills as it has to do with creating effective work.

I should point out that this has nothing to do with age, but attitude and application.

Forget the hair-gel and fancy loafers and focus on the approach and the rigor.

I’ve said many times why I think Northern is so good but put simply – like other people I look up to, like Paul Simons and Mark Sareff to name a few – he understands that a problem is simply something that hasn’t had the right questions asked of it yet and before any jumping to solutions can happen, he has to find out what the hell he is really being asked to solve.