Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Auckland, Community, Context, Culture, Food, Love, Loyalty, Pride, Professionalism, Small Business
This is the last week of blog posts for 2025.
I know … I know … it’s the Christmas gift you’ve all wanted.
And it gets better, because not only is this post relatively short, it’s also relatively harmless.
But like a scammer trying to lull someone into giving them their credit card number, I should warn you … the rest of the posts this week are long.
Like seriously long.
And while I am in no doubt you won’t read them, they’re actually quite good. Or at least one of them is … hahaha.
So with that warning now formally announced, I’ll leave you with a post about Amy and her ‘Fig’ delivery company … and what we can all learn from it.
I appreciate the last couple of posts have been a bit serious, so I thought I would tone it down a bit. Even though, underpinning it all … is a serious point.
If you look hard enough.
So recently, on a walk, I saw this …

Now, I get figs are delicious.
I get restaurants often need and use them.
But an ‘on-demand’ delivery service for them?
It may initially sound bonkers but I love it exists.
So many people only value ideas ‘with scale’ that they ignore the power of servicing niche.
Sure, it may not make them trillions but they know specifically who they are, what they do and who they are for which is more than many companies who spend tens of millions desperately trying to ‘be something for everybody’ and finding out they’re nothing for no one.
I suppose the point of this post is that while there are many definitions of success – scale is, contrary to what many say, only one of them. Which is why if you have an idea for a business … don’t evaluate it simply by ‘how big can it be’, but think in terms of how important it can be to someone and how happy it will make you.
There’s a lot of celebration for big talking, big names … but frankly, Amy at Figs Direct is more inspirational to me than most of them.
Filed under: 2025, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Confidence, Craft, Luxury, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Relevance, Reputation
Birkin.
The Holy Grail of handbags.
Created in 1984 when the CEO of Hermes, Jean-Louis Dumas met the actress Jane Birkin.
They’re sold exclusively through Hermes stores and you have to jump through all manner of hoops to be able to buy one.
You also need to have a fuckload of cash because they can cost in the hundreds of thousands.
That’s MULTIPLES of hundreds of thousands.
And that’s in US dollars.
Whether those prices are justified is immaterial … the reality is, they are viewed almost like precious gems.
Which is why this ad for a beauty company – MCoBeauty – made me laugh out loud.

Look at it.
LOOK AT IT!!!
It’s more Burger King than Birkin … made even better that it is appearing on bus shelters.
On one hand, I quite like how they have just destroyed the pomposity of the Birkin brand with one simple image … but on the other, they’ve not just destroyed the aspirational value of the ‘prize’ they’re giving away by making it look like a ‘pound shop knock off’, they’ve also just fucked themselves over by reinforcing that however much brands like MCoBeauty may try and claim they’re all about ‘accessible/everyday luxury’, they’re basically admitting nothing compares to getting your hands on real luxury.
But that last point is immaterial when you make an ad that makes a Birkin Bag look less appealing than a supermarket paper bag.
If it was ironic it might work, but it’s not … it’s pure ‘starburst’ sales promotion awfulness
Who designed this thing?
The colours are hideous.
The copy is disastrous.
The art direction is scandalous.
If you want to leverage giving a Birkin Bag away to drive sales … maybe you should make it feel like something you would actually like to own, rather than avoid. And god forbid Hermes see it because they will come after you like a ton-of-bricks. Even if you own it. And even if it is second hand. Hermes understand the value of reputation … it’s why they can sell bits of stitched leather for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
What is so annoying is this could have been really good.
Not just executionally, but for building the reputation and value of the MCoBeauty.
But no, instead – as is the case with far too much these days – they haven’t given a shit and just banged any old bollocks out, because we live in times where marketing is focused more on what you want to say rather than understanding the importance of how you say it.
Or said another way. There’s too much focus on systems rather than appreciating the value and impact of craft.
Which may explain why Hermes – for all the challenges the luxury category are experiencing – are still doing better than MCoBeauty and the entire ad industry put together.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Cars, Comment, New Zealand
I’ve always found personalized number plates fascinating which is why a while back I wrote about the ones that were near where I live.
Anyway, I recently saw 2 that got me thinking …
The first was this:

There’s something epic having a number plate that turns the ‘horsepower’ conversation into ‘moopower’.
I would love to know what made them choose this.
Are they a dairy farmer?
Are they really into milk?
Are they someone the RSPCA need to be keeping a close eye on?
Not sure, but it stood out to me far more than 95% of creative designed by outsourced research systems that promote ‘brand assets’ but forget to tell people it’s only an asset if creativity makes it mean something.
The other was this …

On one hand, the introduction of the word ‘bad’ immediately has an effect on the car.
Despite being virginal white, suddenly that EV family car has a bit-of-the-badass about it.
Or it would, it the number plate wasn’t ‘BAD EV’ … which suggests the driver is aware of the negative association of the brand given their CEO, Elon, is a right-wing, Fascist prick … and either doesn’t care, or is trying to own the narrative so they can’t let someone else have a go at them.
Unfortunately for them, I don’t think either of those scenarios will work for them given Teresa – in our strat gang at Colenso – has a Tesla and despite every one of us loving her and knowing she feels a bit of the ick for driving an Elonmobile, still didn’t stop us getting her this.

Number plates. They say more about who you are than your DNA.
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: 2025, A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Agency Culture, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Business, Comment, Confidence, Conformity, Consultants, Craft, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Effectiveness, Egovertising, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Martin Weigel, Mediocrity, Paula, Planners, Planners Making A Complete Tit Of Themselves And Bless, Planning, Process, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect
In strategy, one of the biggest insults is someone saying the strategy was post-rationalised to fit the work. The accusation implies you are a parasite of creativity … bigging yourself up on the sweat and tears of the creative team.
I get it. We all like to think we are a vital part of the process … the ignition of possibility … but the reality is, we all post-rationalise at some point, in some way.
I don’t mean we do fuck-all work and simply ‘badge’ our involvement post creative development – well, there’s some who do that, but they’re not hard to spot. No, what I mean is we all fine-tune our strategy as the creativity starts to reveal where it can go.
And that is good.
Because if you are so purist you think what you write is the rule of law, then you either better be fucking incredible or prepared for disappointment.
Sadly, I know there are some who think that way.
People who don’t get strategy without output is intellectual masturbation.
People who don’t get strategy that doesn’t create change is cowardly bullshit.
People who don’t get if strategy doesn’t make the first creative leap, it’s commercially small.
The reality is there’s a big fucking difference between having a vision for the work and dictating the work … and far too often, I see a lot of strategists talk about the former but act in a way that is much more about the latter.
It’s why I’ve enjoyed working so closely with artists – be it fashion, music, photography or authors – because while many approach their work with a clear vision for what they do … and an incredible focus on ensuring every little detail that goes into it is true to what they are trying to express … they also stay open to possibilities, opportunities and happy accidents throughout the entire journey.
Put simply, if they find something that feels/looks/sounds better than they imagined or intended, they go with it.
They chase the excitement and the interesting – which Paula, Martin and I discussed in detail [in particular regarding how Succession creator, Jesse Armstrong, approaches his ‘writers room’] a couple of years ago at Cannes with our talk ‘Strategy Is Constipated, Imagination Is The Laxative’.
And that is what strategy should be doing as well. And often it does … and yet, I continue to hear people throw ‘post-rationalised’ barbs like they’re confetti. Given how much work is seemingly churned out without any strategy whatsofuckingever – masked by using a celeb, a gimmick or some made-up ‘consumer need’ – I can’t help but feel we should be focusing our judgment on those who are literally undermining the value of our discipline rather than someone who wrote a strategy, saw work that revealed a bigger possibility and then evolved/adapted their thinking because it helped everyone get to a bigger and better place.
I say this because I recently watched an interview with Bowie who perfectly articulated how the ‘creative process’ that is spouted and sold by so many is often a pile of shit.
As usual, he’s right.
Of course I appreciate there are some industries, processes and jobs where there is no room for deviation.
But in terms of business – and especially the business of creativity – that’s a terrible idea.
It’s why I find it hilarious how many companies and individuals try to claim they have perfected the ‘creative process’ when not only are most basically flogging self-serving insurance policies rather than business liberation but ALL OF THEM – and I mean ALL – are peddling processes that revel in ‘removing process inefficiencies’ without realizing they’re the very bits that allow great work to be born.
And that is the problem with where we’re at right now.
People who have never made any work, creating processes they say lead to great work.
But when you’ve never done it – or never done it at a level that has made a difference – you don’t realise the things that make no sense to you, are often the very things that make special things happen time and time again.
So what do they do?
They get rid of them …
So there’s no time to do nothing but just think about stuff.
There’s no time to shoot-the-shit with colleagues, clients and people in general.
There’s no time to explore, research and experiment with your thoughts and ideas.
There’s no time to collaborate with people who have exceptional taste, craft and vision.
And all this is before we even get to basic shit like being given a good brief, a good amount of time, a good enough budget and good enough people who not only can make the work … but evaluate it and take responsibility of getting their organization to embrace it.
So all these pundit processes sell the illusion of a seamless, processes where the people involved are immaterial to the work that is produced … often using the shit in the market as the ‘ultimate validation’ of their approach, while conveniently ignoring the fact most of that shit was created because of their processes, not despite them.
Look, I get what we do is expensive … I also get what we do has a lot riding on it, so the desire to have more certainty in decisions is understandable. But you can’t expect certainty while demanding possibility … while at the same time, reducing budgets, people and time … and anyone who says you can is not just bullshitting you, but stealing from you.
I’m not saying there isn’t stupid shit in adland, but we also have to acknowledge there’s stupid shit in corporateland.So given we’re all supposedly wanting the same thing – while appreciating what each party brings to the table that the other is not capable of doing – maybe we’d all be doing better off if we talked honestly and openly rather than egotistically and judgmentally.
I know I’m dreaming, but hey … it’s close to Christmas, so when better to make a wish?