Search results matching tag 'Financial Advertising'

Your bank really, truly, madly, wants to make you happy!

822535 — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:00:00 GMT

My last couple of posts have been about US health care and drug advertising, a huge cash cow for American agencies, and one that seems to be completely out of control as far as any kind of meaningful regulatory action is concerned.

The other sector of the American economy that has obviously been taking a lot of flak over the last year has been the banking and financial industry. With the massive bailout many of the banks have recently received, whilst continuing to pay top executives billions of dollars in bonuses, you would think they would at least have some kind of coherent communications strategy that did a couple of things. Admit they screwed up, big time. Thank the taxpayers for their money. And above all, promise never to *** things up again.

So, you have to laugh when you look at the new Bank of America campaign that’s just been launched to the tune of $40 million. In the words of a bank spokes-hack… We are using a series of spots with “simple, clear and direct” messaging to repair our relationship with consumers. They could start off by lowering their outrageous interest rates and banking fees. But no, these epics are all about how easy it is to buy *** you don’t need with your debit card, and how you can win useless rewards by spending more.

According to another spokes-hack, this one for the American Bankers Association… BofA’s move is indicative of a turning point in the recession. “There is still a lot of turbulence going on, and I don’t think it’s over yet. But they’re cuing in on some kind of consumer confidence and optimism that says, ‘Let’s get back to where things where.” Exactly what bloody consumer confidence and optimism would that be then?

It’s just another example of the disconnect continually demonstrated by both clients and their agencies (In this case BBDO) to their audience. All these bozos want is to simply get back to things “the way they were.”

Gentlemen… Things will never again be the way they were. Particularly for the ad biz.

Is George Parker too big to fail?

822535 — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:26:00 GMT

Why am I not jumping up and down with joy when I read that Multi-zillionaire, Eric Schmidt, Google’s Chief Executive douchenozzle reported a 27% increase in profit in the third quarter, signaling what he referred to as the beginning of a recovery in the search-advertising market. He was also emphatic when stating that the worst of the economic downturn is over.

This on the same day that America’s biggest bank reports huge losses (no doubt requiring more of my tax dollars, cos it’s too bloody big to fail… Mmmm, as they happen to hold the mortgage on my house, I wonder if they’d help me out in the same way… Fat chance!) Also, GE reported quarterly financials that beat analysts expectations, even though profits fell 42% and revenue was down 20%… Which makes you wonder about these so called analysts.

Anyway, the point of this rant, isn’t necessarily political (Well, just a bit.) It’s that we have arrived at a situation where major corporations are underpinned their profitability by massive cost cutting and restructuring… Or in plain English, laying thousands of workers off. Ergo… No work… No money… No buying stuff… No advertising.

I don’t care how many times multi-billionaire CEO’s of advertising and marketing mega-companies tell us we have turned the corner with the light at the end of the tunnel showing us the green shoots… It’s bulls*h*i*t.

In the meantime, as my mortgage is too big to fail, please send donations to the George Parker Benevolent Fund. Ta very much!

There’s now't so barmy as politics!

822535 — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 15:53:00 GMT

I was a bit gob smacked to read that Tony Blair is likely to be the next head of the European Union… A job that The Times says, no one wants him for. Which means he’ll probably get it. Over here in America, they love him. That’s why Bush gave him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, rather than JK Rowling, ‘cos Tony doesn’t go in for witchcraft. Mmm, I wouldn’t be too sure about that.

Anyway, the funniest bit was this… Meanwhile, Blair is said by some to have had some reservations about the presidency post, chief among them that he would earn less money than he does now giving speeches and other private work, and that the job would involve a lot of bureaucratic grind. But he would still earn about £250,000 a year with generous EU tax allowances, have a staff of at least 20 and a splendid Brussels residence.

Excuse me, but isn’t he rather busy at the moment bringing peace to the middle East from his permanent suite in the King David Hotel? And what about his two million pound a year job as an adviser to J.P.Morgan?

As described in The Telegraph at the time… Sources close to the bank said Mr. Blair would not need to have an office on Wall Street as he would be called upon "as needed" - and would give much of his advice over the telephone. He might occasionally attend a board meeting or go on visits to parts of the world where the bank had major interests.

Wow, sounds like being on the board of one of the agency holding companies!

How to lose money and influence no one!

822535 — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 03:49:18 GMT

There's a Guy over here on TV by the name of Jim Cramer... He's supposed to be a financial wiz... At least that's what NBC calls him when they promote his ranting, screaming, going red in the face show on CNBC called "Mad Money." He's also the writer of several books about how to get rich in the stock market... Obviously by following his advice.

Personally, I've always wondered about, if these people were so good at making money, why don't they just quietly make a few gazillion dollars by keeping all that red hot information to themselves and not spreading it around... Well here's why... An article in the current edition of Barron's shows that over the last two years, in a booming market, Cramer's recommended stocks rose 12 percent, compared with a 22 percent rise in the Dow Jones industrial average and a 16 percent rise in the Standard & Poor's 500 index.

You'd think if the guy was such a financial genius, he could do better than that, wouldn't you?

Making money on Wall Street by taking the mick out of Wall Street!

822535 — Wed, 23 May 2007 08:15:04 GMT

Who says you can’t make money blogging… Actually most people… I’m living proof. But there's always hope, and today’s new-media success story makes you think…

Well, you never know. Last year, Howard Lindzon came up with an idea for a daily video blog that would take a lighthearted look at Wall Street news.

In classic entrepreneurial fashion, Lindzon, attracted $600,000 in start-up funding from friends and family, then gave birth to Wallstrip, hosted by Lindsey Campbell.

Today, CBS Interactive announced it had bought Wallstrip for $5 million, with Quincy Smith, the unit's president saying, "The Wallstrip team is made up of savvy and resourceful Web content creators whose talents we will utilize as we build our next-generation roster of programming verticals.

Also, their distribution strategy of syndicating their content to many video properties rather than force people to visit Wallstrip is in line with the CBS Interactive philosophy."

OK, whatever that means, it was obviously worth $5 million to CBS rather than produce this kind of content themselves. Particularly when you consider that the major networks are like the major BDA’s… Unable to fully understand the new markets and audiences out there, and really slow to do anything about it when they eventually do. Check out today’s episode of Wallstrip and the less than warm greeting they get at CBS headquarters.

Is advertising affected by the stock market... Does the Pope wear little red shoes?

822535 — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 04:46:51 GMT

I have to admit that in spite of living in the US for more years than most of the readers of this blog have been on the surface of the planet, Wall Street continues to be a deep, dark chasm of unfathomable mystery to me. Yes, I have worked on all kinds of financial ad accounts from Chase Manhattan, to Bank of America, to Merrill Lynch, to Charles Schwab. But I still don’t understand the financial market… And I have a sneaking suspicion that most of the people working in it don’t either.

For instance, at the close of markets yesterday, Hewlett-Packard announced that both revenues and profits were up significantly for the first time in the last three years. Which was when they showed CEO “Queen Carly” (Carly Fiorina) the door, helped along with a $45 million golden parachute, even though she had driven the value of this once proud company through the floor. But no surprises there. In common with many other American CEO’s who have almost destroyed once proud companies during their tenure after being showered with more money than you or I will ever see in our lifetimes, they leave and write a book about how they “Wuz Robbed!” Shades of Boo.Com!!!

Anyway, back to H-P. What was the reaction of Wall Street after the announcement of this sterling turnaround in the company’s fortunes? To a man, they hammered the stock driving it down by more than 6%. At the same time, its main rival, Dell computer, which has been going through all kinds of troubles and losing market share and profitability all over the place, is up nicely, thank you!

So, what’s my point here? H-P does great advertising, courtesy of Goodby, Silverstein and Partners. Dells advertising sucks… I can’t even remember who does it now; it’s bounced around so much. I only remember when I worked on it at Chiat back in the eighties, we did some pretty neat stuff, and in fact some of it’s on my web site. But, ever since then it’s been going downhill… He said modestly!

Which indicates to me that advertising can have a definite affect on a company’s sales and profitability, whereas it might not do anything for its share price.

But then again, the only thing less quantifiable than the stock market is advertising. Otherwise, we’d all be out of a job.