September 2008 - Posts - Devil's Advocate - Blogs

SELL SATNAQ

I was sitting in McDonald's on Pentonville Road yesterday, minding my own business, when a whopping great banner flew past the window, towed by a helicopter. Reaching for my specs, I was able to make out the logo: SATNAQ. This not being a product I'd heard of (comes with living in the back of beyond, I assumed), I began to speculate on what it actually was. Not surprisingly, my first guess was something to do with satnav - I mean it almost says 'satnav', although surely they wouldn't let a giant typo flap aimlessly around London's grey skies? Ok... with the credit crunch being most commentators' diet of choice right now, my thoughts moved on to finance... the 'NAQ' bit sounding as if it's got some vague connection with those weird US markets. Perhaps it's even a combination of the two? A service that navigates the investor through the turbulent storms threatening to flatten one's strawlike home and leave the piggy bank shivering at the mercy of Mr Wolf. Naw... not that either. So what is SATNAQ? ................................................................................................................................. You probably spotted that I'm being bit a little bit ingenuous here: but the fact is, while the one half of London that bothers to raise its eyes skywards sees an ad for QANTAS, the other half gets regaled with SATNAQ. Quite why the budget didn't stretch to a double-sided, non-see-thru banner I can't imagine. Surely it would be cheaper than having the helicopter fly backwards as well as forwards (if you see what I mean), and certainly kinder on the environment. In the meantime, I'm wondering if some enterprising cockney hasn't come up with a product called SATNAQ, in order to take advantage of the free advertising currently on offer. It would be an interesting test to demonstrate whether advertising really works.

Posted Sep 25 2008, 10:23 AM by Ian Moore with no comments

Discombobulation happens

... and brands could learn from it. I think it was Barry McGuigan that coined the word whilst commentating upon a 'discombobulated' Frank Bruno (not a pretty sight), but now I feel it applies to one of the most successful brands of the last few years, New Labour. Its leader may or may not be discombobulated - certainly he isn't if press reports are anything to go by (since you can safely assume the opposite) - but the brand most definitely is. I find it strange that the people at the top of organisations either never paid attention in marketing class at business school, or never pay attention now to the professional marketers they employ. Otherwise you think they would know about discombobulation, and act accordingly. ............................................................................................................................................................... The marketing equivalent, of course, and the thing I'm obtusely alluding to, is the product life cycle. Good old BCG. Like the Ansoff matrix, (not-) Rosser Reeves' USP, Trout & Ries' Positioning, and even - ahem - NEWAIDA, the PLC is as near a law of marketing as it gets. One advantage of being an industry old-stager (very late Baby Boom, I hasten to add), is that you actually have time to see these theories behave in lawlike fashion. Sure as eggs are eggs, products and brands really do come and go. And, to a large extent, they have a life of their own in this regard. The main influence isn't the marketer, but how factors change in the competitive environment. The cleverest thing a marketer can do is to recognise the true stage in the cycle, and the dumbest thing is to try to work against it. ............................................................................................................................................................... At risk of sounding like Alf Garnett, it's been bleeding obvious for a very long time that New Labour have had it - for the time being. Rather than trying to patch holes in the sinking ship - holes that appear at a daily faster rate - they should go down gracefully. Don't waste any effort or resources on the inevitable. (Obviously spend as much as possible and enact as many difficult-to-remove socialist bills in the time remaining.) Abandon ship and paddle to the nearest safe-looking island. Re-group. Build a hut. Suss out the competition. Lay a few traps. Let them fall into them. Bray loudly. Let the jackals of the press get their teeth into fresh flesh. Find a new brand spokesman (possibly even a new brand). Nurture the star. Its time will come. ............................................................................................................................................................... Lots of products and brands I can think of don't do this either, which is even more perplexing.

Posted Sep 18 2008, 04:31 PM by Ian Moore with no comments

What next - turkeys to vote for Christmas?

So - a survey of 10,000 Asda shoppers in SCOTLAND (I emphasize the word Scotland) has revealed a huge majority in favour of booze promotions. Knock me down with a feather. Land of whisky, Tennent's Extra and spiritual home of Buckie, surely there was only ever one eligible choice on the ballot paper? Cor blimey, they'll be voting for full independence next! (And I say this as a fully paid-up resident and 'Yes-Yes' voter.) .............................................................................................................................................. Of course, it's a moot point whether a ban on alcohol promotions will terminate excess consumption, because the commercial reality is that available supplier discounts and 'prohibited' extra-fill will simply be fed into the ongoing price (with a little bit going to pukka branded promotional activity, and maybe a hefty chunk into the retailer's margin. Ker-ching.). In any event, High Street booze is now so cheap that it would take the mother of all price hikes to lift it past its on-trade levels, and I don't notice any shortage of inebriated barflies pouring nightly out onto the streets. .............................................................................................................................................. Luckily for the community, decisions on alcohol promotion and availability are made by politicians and not Asda shoppers, so there's a chance that something might be done to reverse the nation's decline into chronic cirrhosis and street-corner strife, as has been achieved in regard to the latter by the recent under-21 pilot alcohol bans in test districts (although apparently not to be rolled out, despite their immense success). .............................................................................................................................................. However, I detect crocodile tears from Asda when it comes to defending the poor, hard-up shopper, alluding to the credit crunch and tough economic times. Surely everyone knows the best way to save money on alcohol? Don't buy it.

Posted Sep 11 2008, 01:35 PM by Ian Moore with no comments

Let's Ban Customers

The major mults remind me of certain of my kids. You say: "Right, when your friend comes round, you won't play soccer in the playroom with your size 5 leather replica World Cup football, will you?" The answer comes with instant conviction: "No, Dad." "Why not?" "Because it'll break things, Dad." "Good. Off you go." Pal arrives. Give it 10 minutes. Crash! There goes the plasma. ............................................................................................................................................................ Why do kids play football in the house when they know they shouldn't? Because they can. (And it's good fun... I do it myself when there's no one in.) Why do the supermarkets promote 'unhealthy' foods when they know they shouldn't? Because they can. (And it's good for profits, sales, traffic etc.) The latest National Consumer Council report lambasting the mults for over-promoting HSSF foods (high in sugar, salt and fat) is naive in the extreme if the NCC thinks it can appeal to the better nature of the buying fraternity and expect them to treat their customers like their families. Sure - you can bet there are people in every buying office of note who won't let their kids near a blue fizzy drink or a bumper bag of crisps or a multipack of chocs - but will they sell them to their customers? Not half! This is business. Why would anyone think a company would do other than pay lip service to a pressure group bent on damaging its dividends? If the supermarkets were meant to be responsible for the health of the nation, they wouldn't stock alcohol (and by the look of the shrunken half-starved neds you see arrested on reality tv, there aren't many obese kids causing trouble on the block). ............................................................................................................................................................ The only effective way I have found of avoiding the playroom being smashed up is to ban the kids from entry. (Nicking their ball's no use - they'll soon improvise with a rolled-up sock, cushion or even - at a push - a smaller sibling.) No... if they want the supermarkets to stop selling junk food to us dim consumers, they need to ban us from their stores.

Posted Sep 04 2008, 05:04 PM by Ian Moore with 1 comment(s)

Blogs

Devil's Advocate