Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Ambition, Apple, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Delusion, Empathy, Finance, Generosity, Money, Privilege, Reputation, Technology
On Tuesday I wrote about how we have our priorities messed up …
If you haven’t read it, you can see it here.
The underlying point being we seem to accept the shitty behaviour of the super rich, but are hyper-critical of the humble – even though we know the former are making choices to become even richer whereas the latter are simply trying to survive.
In the post, I highlighted a valuable lesson I learned when I was starting out in my career from my then client – and now mentor – the wonderful Lee Hill.
He told me:
“There’s nothing wrong making lots of money, it’s how you do it and what you do with it that counts”.
It would be easy to think that in this Trumpian, authoritarian World, the ability to be ‘decent and rich’ is a pipe dream.
But I remember many years ago, George interviewed a bunch of wealthy people for a project we were doing at Cynic and came back saying he had discovered a group he called ‘the reluctantly rich’.
Basically, these were people who had made a lot of money but never felt they deserved it.
Maybe they inherited it, maybe they were in the right place at the right time … maybe they were just lucky … but they didn’t connect to it so did all they could to be generous to others with it.
Some to that was because it helped offset their guilt a little bit.
Some was their way to let others experience what they were going through.
But most of it was simply because they wanted to help others who hadn’t been blessed with the good fortune they’d received.
Often this was done quietly and privately because the goal was never about recieving gratitude, they just wanted to do some good with it, helped by the fact they never felt connected to the cash, so giving it away was easy … even though they were perfectly aware of what it offered and could do.
Admittedly there weren’t masses of people who felt this way, but there were more than a few.
Still are.
I say this because recently I saw a video of Steve Wozniak – Woz – the co-founder of Apple.
At a time where Musk, Bezos, Zuck and countless other ultra-wealthy tech and finance bros revel in their elitist, vulgar, arrogant lifestyles, he is a reminder of when the tech industry consisted of a few people trying stuff they hoped could help millions grow, express and explore their lives … which is a world away from where we are today, where the tech industry seems to be a few people designing products that enable them to control, contain and restrain millions for their own, fucked-up benefit.
So thank you Mr Woz, you’ve just proved you don’t have to be a prick to be rich.
It just feels that way.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Auckland, Brand, Brand Suicide, Clients, Clothes, Communication Strategy, Content, Context, Craft, Crap Campaigns In History, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Design, Details, Effectiveness, Egovertising, Emotion, Empathy, Entertainment, Fans, Fashion, Film, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Marketing Science, Media, Mediocrity, Metallica, Netflix, New Zealand, Premium, Privilege, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Respect, Standards, Steve Jobs
For 50 years, I never dressed particularly fashionably.
I had a ‘style’, but it was never one people looked at and thought, “I want to dress like that”.
Questionable t-shirts, ripped jeans and a pair of birkies tend to have that reaction.
Part of this is because growing up, I was never exposed to anything ‘fancy’. Despite my Mum being Italian and going to Italy a lot … my version of designer clothing was stuff from Burton’s and C&A and nothing more.
But over the years, I got more and more exposed to the high-end fashion houses.
Projects with Prada and Chanel introduced me to people, stories and experiences that taught me there was far more to who they were than big prices and even bigger pretentiousness. But even that was not enough to convince me this was something for me.
Hell, I still remember the utter shock I felt when I heard a mate tell me they’d spent 70 quid on a t-shirt.
Sure, this was a 1000 years ago, but back then I didn’t know how that was even possible.
T-shirts were 3 for a few quid from Asda so what on earth could justify 70 pounds for a single tee???
And that was how things carried on for decades until 2 events happened in my life:
I got healthy and I started working for the most successful and influential luxury and street-fashion investor on the planet.
And with those 2 things, everything changed …
I got to go behind the scenes of the highest level of the industry.
I got to talk to the creative directors of the houses and labels who define global fashion.
I got to meet the people who create, curate and craft the experiences that define how fashion makes us feel.
But most of all, (1) I could now actually fit in their clothes and (2) my client sent me shitloads of them for free.
Of course, I appreciate how lucky I am for that – and I massively appreciate that they were doing it to ‘keep encouraging me on my health journey’. But – and I say this with utter love and respect for them – I can’t help the real reason is because they didn’t want me turning up to their big meetings and fancy events dressed like a trainwreck. What maybe triggered this was the time I found myself sitting next to Phoebe Philo, ex-creative director of Celine and founder of her own label, who – on seeing my t-shirt, featuring a cat logo – said:
“I love this, who is it by?”
To which I replied:
“My son made it, and that’s our cat”.
To be fair, she was brilliant but I can’t help but imagine she was also thinking, “who the fuck is this nutter I’m next to?”
Bit like the time I was in the lift with members of the Prada family.
They were – literally – the best dressed people I had ever seen in my entire life.
Me? I was wearing ripped jeans, some Nike’s and a hoodie probably from Asda.
Again, they were kind, warm and welcoming – and never once did I feel judged, in fact the opposite – but it was not long after that I started receiving a lot of fancy clothes – hahaha.
But the point of this post is not that I am more fashionably dressed person than I’ve ever been in my life.
Nor is it that I am one of the luckiest bastards on the planet.
No, it’s that the last few years have completely changed my perspective of the industry.
Where once I may have just seen it as pricey and poncy, I now have a deep appreciation, understanding and respect it..
The creativity, the craft, the inspiration, the statements, the history, the details, the obsession.
Put simply, the belief that EVERY detail matters, no matter how big or small.
Steve Jobs once talked about the importance of ‘painting behind the fence’ – the belief that even if no one ever sees or recognizes the care and consideration you have put into your work, you know and that matters – and in many ways, he could have been describing the luxury fashion industry.
You only has to watch the Netflix Documentary ‘7 Days’ – specifically the episode about Chanel’s couture catwalk show – and you’ll see how much thought goes into how every single detail is presented.
Not simply because image is important to them, but because they want to honour the work they have created.
Make sure it is represented, seen and felt exactly as intended and created.
It is a similar approach Metallica have to their music.
It’s why they bought the best vinyl printing plants in the World.
It’s why they invested in the best live concert sound-system in the World.
It’s why they own the rights to all the music they create and have ever created.
It’s not ego. It’s not hyping. It’s about ensuring they honour the work they’ve made so everyone experiences it exactly as intended, versus letting someone else determine that.
So where the fuck is this all going?
Well, it’s because recently I saw this.
Yep, it’s a billboard for the movie Devil Wears Prada 2.
BUT WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON WITH THAT IMAGE???
How is a movie centered around the world of luxury fashion and media using such a badly designed, stretched and distorted billboard like that?!
Looking online, I can tell you that’s not the official image – at least as far as I can tell – plus I should point out the image has accentuated the lines of the digital billboard, which weren’t visible to the human eye.
But that aside, the image used looks like someone at the local distributor, media agency or billboard company decided, for reasons I don’t understand, to create – or adapt – their own version of the official artwork; the result of which is a visual that makes Devil Wears Prada 2 seems more Poundland than Prada.
Which highlights two very important reminders:
1. Everything communicates who you are and what you value.
2. For the best result, make sure all who work for you – or with you –know who you are and what you value.
I’m not saying price or speed doesn’t matter, of course it does … but what price does sloppiness, misunderstanding or a need-for-speed end up costing?
And to those who say that doesn’t matter, because no one cares … I say this in return.
Not only do you not understand marketing …
Not only do you not care about your company …
You sure as shit don’t understand your customers.
Which gives us one final thing to remember …
For all the systems, processes and marketing practice methodologies you can use … if you forget who its for and what its for, then you’re truly wasting your money.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Cars, Colleagues, Craft, Culture, Customer Service, Emotion, Experience, Fake Attitude, Japan, Luxury, Marketing, Mercedes, Money, Packaging, Resonance, Respect
Over the years I’ve written a lot about brands who spend time and money ensuring their customers feel they’ve purchased something of significantly greater value than the functional cost of the item they’ve purchased.
The original ‘brand experience’ as it were.
There’s Tiffany with their iconic ‘little blue box’.
There’s Apple with their packaging and attention to detail.
Hell, there’s even Absolut with their special edition bottles – though I accept that’s more a satisfying novelty than something that builds real additional value for the brand.
But what I find interesting is for all the talk of ‘brand experience’, most brands – except those truly in the luxury space – suck at it. And that’s not counting the masses of brands who don’t even bother with it – often believing their customers should consider themselves fortunate for owning whatever it is they’ve just handed over their cash to buy.
But that aside … the problem with a lot of ‘brand experience’ is it’s starting point is the cost to do it, not the emotion they ignite because of it – so we end up with countless Temu versions of whatever it is they want to do or what they think people want to get.
Now I am not saying that these approaches don’t work or aren’t liked, but we end up in parity status very quickly – which has the result of completely nullifying whatever ‘value’ you hoped you would get from it in the first place.
The reality is experience is less about what you do and how you do it …
Not just for distinctiveness.
Not just for memorability.
But because it conveys what you value and the standards you keep.
This should be obvious as hell – but the problem is, when companies evaluate it against the cost – or time – many view it as an expense rather than an investment in their brand and customer relationship, so before you know it, they strip things back to its most basic form.
It’s why I love how Japanese brands tend to approach brand experience.
As a society, care and attention seem to be built into the DNA.
You just have to see how they package anything to realise they – if anything – over engineer brand experience.
It’s a culture that places high importance on standards, respect and consistency – which is why I like this video of someone picking up their new Lexus car.
On one level, it’s not that different to a lot of car manufacturers around the world who place a bow or blanket over a car when it’s about to be picked up, however when they do it – you know the amount of effort involved in executing is minimal, whereas this – whether part of a fixed process or not – requires commitment and time.
Is this overkill?
Yep.
Is this more culturally influenced than category?
Undoubtedly.
And is the whole thing a bit awkward?
For many, it absolutely would be.
However, the point of the Lexus example is less about what they do and more a case of showing a brand who are committed to expressing who they are and who they’re for – because where brand experience is concerned, too many companies approach this key part of the ‘sales process’ with passive energy whereas Japan is almost aggressive in ensuring its point of view in expressed in an active and engaged manner.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Communication Strategy, Complicity, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Design, Differentiation, Innovation, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Packaging, Perspective, Positioning, Pride, Purpose, Reputation, Respect, Steve Jobs, Technology, Values
I’ve written a lot about the bullshit of brand purpose.
Or should I say the hijacking of purpose by marketing departments and agencies.
Far too often, we see companies where their ‘purpose’ has no day-to-day impact on the operations or decisions they make beyond pushing their marketing messages and promotions. For these orgs, purpose is positioned simply as ‘something we hope might change’ rather than actively doing stuff that actively pushes it.
As they say in the UK, “the truth of the pudding is in the eating”, and a lot of corporate brand purpose tastes like bullshit.
That doesn’t mean the concept of purpose is entirely wrong.
Oh no.
However the reality is true brand purpose is born rather than manufactured – especially by a marketing department – so for every Patagonia, there’s a Unilever … which is why I find the easiest way to see who is talking truth versus shite is simply by exploring how much inconvenience they’ll accept and embrace.
Recently I saw an interesting example of a brand who not just embraced inconvenience, but demanded it.
An example which I imagine caused all manner of friction and tension throughout the company.
And yet, when you think about who the company were and – more importantly – who they wanted to become, you see it as absolute commitment to their beliefs and ambitions.
Take a look at this …
Now I appreciate some would read that and only see the problems … the costs … the disruptions … the impact on productivity … the C-Suite ‘bullying’. But they’re probably the same people who think purpose is about ‘wrapping paper’ rather than beliefs and actions … which is why I kinda-love this.
I love how much they were pushing it and how they pushed it.
It was important to them.
Not for virtue signaling, not for corporate complicity – though I accept there’s a bit of that – but mainly because a company can’t talk about technology, creativity and the future while asking your very own colleagues to embrace the cheap, the convenient and the conformist.
Just to be clear, this is VERY different to companies who mandate processes.
That’s about control and adherence.
A desire to keep things as they are rather than what they could be.
And to me, that’s the difference between those who ‘talk’ purpose and those whose actions are a byproduct of it.
Every day in every way.
Because as the old trope goes, it’s only a principal if it costs you something and the reality is – like strategy – too many talk a good game but will flip the moment they think they could make/save a bit more cash.
Apple may have a lot of problems, but fundamentally, they mean what they say and show it in their actions – both in the spotlight, but also in the shadows … where very few people will ever see – as exemplified by Jobs famous ‘paint behind the fence‘ quote.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Corporate Evil, Crap Campaigns In History, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Technology
Years ago – 2006 to be precise – Apple did an iconic set of ads about Mac vs PC.
Here’s some of them. Because they were so unbelievably good at what they were designed to do – that is make Microsoft look a well-intentioned, but ultimately out of touch, out of date, faceless corporate monolith – they made loads of them.
In many ways, these ads cemented Apple’s persona into societies mind, presenting technology as something we could use for life, not just work … which sounds mad to say now, but was a big deal back then.
Anyway, recently when I was in the US, I saw this …
Yep, that’s the Mac vs PC guys except they aren’t promoting Apple, they’re advertising – drumroll please – Ozempic!
FUCKING OZEMPIC!
And while I can imagine there is some research that states people who can remember the Mac vs PC ads are now at an age where they have the money to help with their weight control, the reality is this all just felt tragic as fuck.
Not just because it’s the most borrowed of borrowed equity.
Not just because it feels they think this makes them ‘just like Apple’.
Not just because they’re using characters from TWENTY FUCKING YEARS AGO.
But because when you look at the ads, you don’t just think of Apple more than Ozempic … but when your brain finally gets around to working out these people are being used to promote a weight control drug, all you think is ‘Ozempic may help you lose weight but it sure as fuck doesn’t stop you looking old or desperate for cash’.