Sales Video Update

Final finished our sales video! Hard to believe I did this whole thing by myself in 3 weeks.

This is how crazy you sound

Why advertisers should think like comedians

By Naj Kidwai

Article Highlights:

* Customize your message similar to the way a comedian tailors a joke
* Video ads should not be delivered in a one-size-fits-all approach
* Personalized video increases ROI and engages consumers with your brand

Before walking on stage a stand-up comic scopes out the crowd. A comedian isn't going to start a skit to an all-female crowd with "So a guy walks into a …"

Comedians don't just walk on stage without preparation. They have several key points in mind, sit in as an audience member, mingle, check out the location and come into the room with adequate knowledge of hot topics in the news.

Online advertisers can learn a lot from comedians.

If you've ever been to a comedy show, you know that the audience plays a huge role in the delivery of a joke -- whether it influences the topic of the joke, the level of emotion with which it's told or how the audience influences the details of the joke itself. There's a feedback loop necessary for the successful execution of a joke. Take away the audience or the ambiance and it's guaranteed that the joke won't be as funny.

Outside of the comedy-club environment, the comedian loses his direct connection to the audience, minimizing the art of a good punch line. Every audience requires a different punch line to incite a laugh. Advertisers are similar in this respect when they're trying to reach their audience. Every consumer requires a slightly different message to entice a purchase.

The art of storytelling requires a push and pull between the storyteller and the audience. In the case of advertising, it's a push and pull between the delivery of a brand's message and its target consumers. In advertising, every message that will lead to a purchase resonates differently with each consumer. Personalization is a way for advertisers to use storytelling to their advantage, to build a connection with the consumer and increase ROI. Recent personalized video campaigns have resulted in more than double the click-through rates and 50 percent more sales conversions than traditional video campaigns.

In many respects, advertising online has branched out too far from the basic idea of storytelling in the hopes of reaching a mass audience with a one-size-fits-all approach. Consumers want more control over the advertisements that they engage with online -- ads that convey relevant, real-time stories about the products that interest them.

Personalization is a new trend in advertising both online and in television. Companies like Visible World and ZillionTV are using viewer advertising preferences based on geography, programming, inventory levels, time of day, weather, and category selections to offer brands a highly targeted and engaged audience. In the case of online video, personalized online video ad technology today like my company Real Time Content make it possible for brands to assess consumers' interests based on profile data and user interaction to not only tailor the type of ad, but take it a step forward by creating an advertisement in real time.

Storyboarding technology enables brands to create thousands of different ad variations by segmenting and tagging the video content in the initial campaign stages. The relevant video segments are assembled using the technology platform, which develops the video in real time based on the expressed interests of each individual viewer. Rather than having a handful of different storylines canned, storyboarding technology opens the door for thousands of different video combinations. The resulting ads are customized video experiences that give consumers more control over the content they are watching. The result? Consumers are more likely to be converted to a customer, which leads to an increased ROI.

The typical production process for the development of a personalized video campaign includes three basic steps:

1. Campaign development: During the campaign planning stage, video clips are segmented, tagged and categorized based on the goals of the ad campaign.
2. Ad creation: The video segments are assembled using a storyboard technology platform that creates thousands of different ad variations, which are personalized based on viewer interaction and user profile data. The platform enables contextually targeted ads based on a number of different profile variables, including geographic location, date and time, language, or viewer input about what they want to watch.
3. Real-time delivery: The technology instantly delivers a video ad that directly reflects the user's interests and behavior. Consumer reactions are measured for the advertiser and used to optimize future content.

Personalized video is akin to a brand's version of the comedian. Brands need to customize the delivery of their message similar to the way a comedian tailors a joke. A large part of the issue in linear video advertising is the lack of personal feedback that one gets from direct interaction with an individual based on the basic premise -- "What are you interested in?" Personalized video is about maximizing engagement with the individual.

Personalized video campaigns have resulted in greater effectiveness and better return on investment. The consumer is more engaged with content that caters directly to their interests, while spending more time with the advertiser's message and increasing the brand's awareness.

Nationwide, a leading U.K. financial services company with more than $480 billion in assets, recently executed a personalized video campaign to help increase the effectiveness of online advertising campaigns on its website as well as on third-party portal sites. The goal was to generate increased purchase intent through personalization of existing video assets. Consumers who interacted with the ad could experience more than 16,000 different video versions based on a broad number of content variants included in the campaign.

The personalized video campaign resulted in a 300 percent higher click-through rate for product offerings and a 100 percent increase in sales conversions compared with the standard video campaigns the company had executed. It also resulted in more than 8 million impressions and served more than 100,000 personalized video ads.

Advertising is no different than telling a good story. It's about a message and the delivery of that message in a way that touches your audience. Personalization in this capacity is a new way of looking at online advertising by bringing in the age-old basics of storytelling. By playing on the individual's interests, emotions, and online characteristics to fit the ad to the viewer, brands are able to target consumers more effectively.

Naj Kidwai is CEO of Real Time Content.

Original Article Here

YouTube to Roll Out Film-, TV-Friendly Portal

Intended Rival to Hulu Will Be Optimized for TV Viewing

by Michael Learmonth

NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- YouTube wants you to think it's a little bit less about dogs on skateboards and more about TV and movies. The Google video site announced a redesign today and a specialized portal that aims to make the service more hospitable for TV, film and TV-like in-video advertising that will be sold as part of Google TV.

The new video site will be owned and hosted by YouTube at YouTube.com/shows and will be sold as part of Google TV.

The channel within YouTube will be optimized for viewing on TV and is clearly intended as a competitor to Hulu, which has been accumulating users quickly and has a vast TV library from NBC Universal, News Corp., and soon, Walt Disney Co.

Professional-content emphasis
YouTube is also adding shows and subscription tabs to its home page to more quickly direct users past the hoi polloi of user-generated video to professional content.

With the redesign comes some new content from mostly existing partners. YouTube did get a new deal with Sony Pictures and Sony's video site Crackle, as well as Endemol, Anime Network, Scott Entertainment and some other niche producers. The company got expanded content from existing partners such as CBS, MGM and Lionsgate, but YouTube's library is dominated by musty library shows the networks aren't selling anywhere else, such as "Charlie's Angels," "90210" and "MacGyver." The only full-length show on YouTube currently on TV is CBS's "Harpers Island."

In all, a YouTube spokesman said content will increase from a few dozen movies to hundreds, and from a few hundred TV shows to thousands.

Key selling point
The video channel comes on the heels of YouTube's announcement with Universal Music Group to create a site for music videos, Vevo. But unlike Vevo, the site will be owned and hosted by YouTube at YouTube.com/shows.

Unlike Hulu, YouTube will accommodate partners' own video players, a key selling point for content partners that want to keep tighter control over their video. That YouTube has had such trouble landing TV and film is an indication of how much mistrust remains among the studios. None of its content deals are exclusive.

YouTube will start selling TV-like ad spots within the shows, which it has been testing since October, or allow their partners to bring their own ads into the service. In addition to video ads, YouTube will also sell its own array of display ads and overlays as well as the text ads it is well known for.

Focus on advertising
The intent is to create a lean-back video experience for users who want to watch a mix of user-generated video, film and TV. Shiva Rajaraman, YouTube senior product manager, said the prime time of the future is user-programmed and will consist of all manner of TV, movies, music videos and all types of user-generated video.

In Google's earnings call, CEO Eric Schmidt indicated that YouTube was making good progress with small and medium-size studios and that YouTube would also look beyond advertising for revenue. "We do expect over time to see micropayments and other forms as well, but our initial focus is on advertising," he said.

Original Article Here.

Billboard War Winner = BMW

Advertising Career Evolution

YouTube, Universal Partner to Build Hulu for Music

New Video Site Vevo to Use Customized Player
by Michael Learmonth

NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Google's YouTube and Universal Music Group, the world's largest record label, are going into business together in a deal they hope will forge a future for ad-supported music.

UMG's artists and channels have accumulated 6.2 trillion views on YouTube since its inception.

The two announced a licensing and advertising revenue sharing agreement on Thursday that covers the use of UMG music on YouTube around the world, as well as a joint venture to create a new video site, Vevo, a concept that bears more than a small resemblance to the NBC-News Corp. joint venture meant to create a business for ad-supported TV online, Hulu.

Vevo, which will be launched later this year, initially will have just UMG music, but CEO Doug Morris said he is in talks with Sony Music Entertainment, EMI and Warner Music Group about joining the venture. Warner pulled its content off YouTube in December after an impasse in talks to renew a licensing deal.

The new service changes the old model under which YouTube paid the labels a fraction of a penny when a song was played, either as an official video or a soundtrack for a user-generated video. The economics of the new deal are based on sharing ad revenue.

Like Hulu, Vevo will have its own, separate site and customized, branded player, which can be embedded on other sites, as well as carry pre-roll video ads. YouTube will provide the technology and infrastructure for Vevo, its first outside site. Google CEO Eric Schmidt said he'd like to see YouTube launch other sites, perhaps for other types of content.

UMG's artists and channels have accumulated 6.2 trillion views on YouTube since its inception, according to web-video-analytics company TubeMogul. Sony Music Entertainment has accrued 4.8 trillion views, and Warner Music Group has just over 1 trillion views. Typically music videos account for between 40% and 60% of the top 100 videos at any given time. The deal keeps UMG tracks on YouTube, a vital source of advertiser-friendly content.

Creating a Hulu for music isn't a new idea. Viacom is giving it a try with MTV Music. The next question for Vevo is whether the other labels now follow suit. CBS, ABC and Viacom stood on the sidelines two years ago when NBC and Fox created Hulu; now Viacom is licensing content to the service, and ABC is in talks to join up. The labels desperately need to develop new revenue streams besides the sale of physical CDs.

Original Article

Tropicana Line's Sales Plunge 20% Post-Rebranding

OJ Rivals Posted Double-Digit Increases as Pure Premium Plummeted

By Natalie Zmuda

NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Tropicana's rebranding debacle did more than create a customer-relations fiasco. It hit the brand in the wallet.

The new Tropicana Pure Premium packaging (right) had been on the market less than two months before the company scrapped the redesign.

After its package redesign, sales of the Tropicana Pure Premium line plummeted 20% between Jan. 1 and Feb. 22, costing the brand tens of millions of dollars. On Feb. 23, the company announced it would bow to consumer demand and scrap the new packaging, designed by Peter Arnell. It had been on the market less than two months.

A swift reversal
Now that the numbers are out, it's clear why PepsiCo's Tropicana moved as fast as it did. According to Information Resources Inc., unit sales dropped 20%, while dollar sales decreased 19%, or roughly $33 million, to $137 million between Jan. 1 and Feb. 22. Moreover, several of Tropicana's competitors appear to have benefited from the misstep, notably Minute Maid, Florida's Natural and Tree Ripe. Varieties within each of those brands posted double-digit unit sales increases during the period. Private-label products also saw an increase during the period, in keeping with broader trends in the food and beverage space.

The entire refrigerated-orange-juice category posted flat unit sales and a 5% decline in dollar sales during the period. As the leader in the category, it makes little sense that Tropicana Pure Premium would see such a drastic sales decline while the category remained relatively flat, industry experts said. Through Feb. 22, Tropicana Pure Premium accounted for about a third of sales in the refrigerated-orange-juice category.

Tropicana: no connection
A spokeswoman for Tropicana in an e-mail said, "No dots to connect here." The company did not respond to further requests for comment.

"It surprises me that their performance is so different from the rest of the category," said Gary Hemphill, managing director-chief operating officer at Beverage Marketing Corp. "It's a little tough to draw conclusions over such a short period of time. But I would say that's unusual."

Mr. Hemphill said typically when a beverage brand undergoes a rebranding it signals increased marketing expenditures and leads to improved performance, at least in the short term. "It gets people to look at the brand again and brings some kind of news and excitement around the brand," he added.

Tropicana had certainly sought to create excitement around the Pure Premium rebrand, announcing Jan. 8 a "historic integrated-marketing and advertising campaign ... designed to reinforce the brand and product attributes, rejuvenate the category and help consumers rediscover the health benefits they get from drinking America's iconic orange-juice brand."

'Black eye'
Beverage experts were hard pressed to think of another major brand that had pulled the plug on such a sweeping redesign as swiftly as Tropicana. "It's a black eye when you have to backtrack that quickly," said Bob Goldin, exec VP at Technomic. "There must be [another example] but nothing comes to mind. [Tropicana] is a big brand, and it was a big restage. This is something that I'm sure they were not happy about."

While it's impossible to say whether Tropicana has permanently lost share, as a result of the blunder, competitors are likely taking note. "We think the Minute Maid brand has opportunity for growth, and we're working hard to make that happen," said Ray Crockett, a Coca-Cola spokesman.

Original article here.

The Brilliance of Johnson Automotive Advertising

Compilation of their Badger Salesman campaign.

Are You a Victim of Narcissistic Marketing?

by Brian Clark

Narcissus

That’s when a marketing and copywriting strategy is based on how the marketer prefers to be marketed to, rather than exploring what works with the target audience. This happens all the time with entrepreneurs and small-business owners who create their own promotions, but it’s even worse when professional marketers offer narcissistic marketing advice.

The first warning sign is when people speak in absolutist terms without qualification. If there’s no “it depends on the market” or “this works for lawyers in the Midwest but not on everyone, everywhere,” be wary.

This is a good indication you’re staring into the deep, still water of marketing narcissism. And if you become transfixed with your own reflection when encountering that pool of bad advice because it matches your own personal preferences, you’re about to become a victim, too.

Some aspects of sales and marketing are universal, and those are based on human psychology. So it’s no surprise that the scariest forms of narcissistic marketing ignore the fundamentals of human nature based on an idealistic notion that “it shouldn’t be that way because I personally don’t like it.”

Yikes.
Narcissistic Marketing is Rampant

I’d rather not single anyone out on this, since I see narcissistic marketing advice just about every day throughout the marketing blogosphere. But there’s one particular article that I ran across yesterday that prompted me to write this post, so I will.

Julia Rubiner of Editorial Emergency penned a post entitled Dear Marketing Opportunist. The piece takes easy swipes at the low-hanging fruit that adorns the typical copywriting cheese plate by equating bad copy with used-car salesmen.

She first reprints out-of-context snippets of “atrocious” copy for us all to snicker at. It’s hard to find many who disagree with avoiding the gratuitous use of exclamation points, textual errors and clumsy language, so Julia plays it fairly safe.

But then, Julia shows her marketing narcissism when she goes after two response techniques that are pragmatic and deeply grounded in human psychology. Why would any marketer want to toss aside techniques that work, especially on behalf of paying clients?
Marketing Narcissism Mixed With Marketing Myopia

The first area where Julia’s creative writing degree gets in the way of her marketing efficacy is the use of numbers in headlines. We all know by now that numbers in titles and headlines work and will continue to.

To time-starved citizens, the smart use of numerals in headlines is simply an ultra-specific promise that let’s people know exactly what they’re getting, and more importantly, how much attention they’re expending. Julia thinks using numbers is bad for your brand, and of course the examples she gives are intentionally down market.

This is not only marketing narcissism, it’s marketing myopia. Marketers (and bloggers) think about headlines way more than average, and thanks to selective perception, get aggravated by what they deem to be an overuse of numerals despite their efficacy.

Get over yourself—you’re not normal, and you’re not the prospect.

I’m sure we can all come up with examples of major brands using numbers in headlines in context-appropriate advertisements and content. And that’s the key, right? Context-appropriate copy, rather than a blanket condemnation of a headline technique that often works better than others. And that’s based on empirical testing, not opinion or personal preference.

Sock Puppets and Scarcity

Remember back before the Dot-Bomb implosion when ecommerce entrepreneurs thought the fundamental rules of economics had somehow been altered by the Internet? That’s what I immediately thought of when I saw Julia’s next shot at a universal aspect of marketing and sales:

The assurance that if you act now, you’ll get something extra.

Wow. So Julia suggests that utilizing scarcity—a bedrock psychological motivator and the foundation of economics—is bad for your brand? I’m pretty sure this will come as a shock to, oh… just about every company on the planet.

Based on Julia’s own language, she’s implying that:

* “Good for a limited time only” promotions are brand killers. * Giving early adopters a price break is cheesy * Bundling products together as a short-term incentive is inauthentic * A Labor Day Weekend sale is a bad idea

I could go on, but this is so ridiculous I won’t. If Julia didn’t mean to be so broad, she should have qualified just a bit. Instead, the only qualification in the entire article is that there are plenty of multi-millionaires who use cheesy copy.

Classic marketing narcissism.
Get Over Yourself

In all fairness, I contacted and corresponded with Julia before I wrote this (and I would suggest every blogger do the same before publishing a “hit” piece). Here’s what she said:

Your point that for some audiences our advice is dead on, but for others, not so much is well taken; we are indeed trolling for a more exotic fish—if you’re a regular reader, you know we cater to entertainment and lifestyle clients….

Entertainment clients? Like the entertainment company that remade a Shakespearean play into a highly successful movie called 10 Things I Hate About You? And I’ll leave it up to you to examine the headlines of just about any “lifestyle” magazine at any newsstand.

Look, if you own a company and you want to market based on your personal preferences without regard for what works best with your prospects, that’s your prerogative. As long as you accept personal responsibility for lower revenues and profits when you miss the mark, no one can say a thing.

But if you’re consulting for clients or publishing marketing advice, I think you have a responsibility to set aside your personal prejudices and explore everything that works in a context-appropriate way. Or, just follow your own Marketing 2.0 advice and be truly authentic and transparent on your website:

“Welcome! I may not give you the most effective advice, but I sure do like it!”

Original article here.

Hat tip to Lisa for sending me this!

How Did This Get Approved?

Really Awkward Car Commercial Slogan - Watch more free videos

The World of Advertising - From Our Perspective

Great video my brother showed me that started this whole rant.


Here's another classic.


Here's my personal favorite.

How to Cut Media Spending Without Hurting Sales

By Joseph Abruzzo

With the front-page headline "Welcome to the Age of Austerity," Ad Age brought to the surface some concerns that have been on most marketers' minds: the state of the economy, housing prices, gas prices.

Knowing that revenues will be challenged, marketers are looking for ways to cut spending while minimizing the revenue and earnings declines. Rather than making across-the-board cuts, more sophisticated advertisers will be cutting strategically, focusing on the least productive uses of media.

Many obvious tactics can be employed to mitigate costs; for example, using cable in place of network or raising the proportion of 15-second spots.

But looking beyond cost mitigation, there are proven strategies to help to minimize the sales impact of media spending cuts. Of the five that follow, the first two are straightforward and easily implemented. The last three require a little more media math and advanced analytics, which have become increasingly common.

1. Target prospects who are most likely to give you their business

Plans that make use of demographically defined targets tend to deliver wide audiences including non-users of the advertised brand and individuals having limited or no involvement with the product category. The cost of converting these individuals to a higher category and bringing about greater brand involvement can far outstrip the resulting revenue.

More effective is behavioral targeting, which is based on purchase or usage behavior; for example, medium-to-heavy category users. The method would focus TV-program selection on shows with audiences having the highest composition of the behavioral target; in this case, the medium-to-heavy category users. In comparison to demographic targeting, this method can pinpoint opportunities for improving targeting efficiency by as much as 10%. And, of course, increases in targeting efficiency suggest ways to deliver the most important target prospects for less.

The same thinking can be applied to increasing consumption among current brand users. If Brand A accounts for about 3 out of 10 cups of yogurt consumed by the Brand A customer, then increasing Brand A's consumption by 1 cup, to 4 out of 10 cups, will produce a 33% increase in sales volume.

The improvement of "consumption-based" targeting over simple behavioral targeting is the focus on prospects representing the greatest opportunity for increase in sales volume.

2. Focus media delivery on geographical markets that matter most

Many marketers rely entirely on the "low cost" cost-per-thousand efficiencies of national media. In many cases, the CPM efficiencies are overstated.

When you take a closer look, "all-national" plans tend to under-deliver to high-priority markets -- regardless of your definition of "priority" -- and over-deliver to low-priority markets. (The media weight isn't where you want it, but you are getting a terrific deal!)

To rebalance media spending to benefit high-priority markets: First, take advantage of natural skews in national media delivery; identify national media vehicles that skew to desirable geographical areas. Second, fund increased delivery to high-priority markets through reductions in national media spending and, while doing so, examine ways to cut the overall budget. This is easier than it seems. Savings can range from 5% to as much as 15% depending on market-to-market skews in spending priority, local media costs and variation in national media delivery.

3. Avoid excessive exposure frequency

Maintaining weekly reach at minimum effective exposure frequency levels helps to avoid excessive frequency and over-spending in general.

The premise is simple and empirically supported. The return on your second exposure will provide a greater ROI than the third. The return on your third exposure will provide a greater ROI than the fourth. And so on.

Reach-based marketing mix models can provide reliable estimates of minimum effective frequency levels by medium. In the absence of a reach-based models, "effective reach" scorecards found in textbooks like "Advertising Communications and Promotion Management," by John R. Rossiter and Larry Percy, help to guide advertisers toward effective reach.

4. Spend when the return will be greatest

Despite learning of the benefits of "recency planning" in the late 1990s, many businesses continue to "flight" media schedules.

In the absence of seasonal variation in demand, with customers constantly moving in and out of markets, media math suggests that, for the majority of brands, continuity beats a flighted schedule.

A plan with two weeks of 50 gross ratings points per week can be expected to outperform one week at 100 GRPs by 5% or more. Knowing how to optimally schedule spending across time will suggest time periods for spending reductions.

5. Avoid over-spending in any one medium

There is no one optimal media mix. The optimal mix will vary by overall spending level. Identifying the best mix for a lower level of spend will provide the basis for minimizing the impact of spending cuts.

Take a "reverse" zero-based approach to cutting spending. Continuously evaluate the impact of the next reduction. Where will the impact of the next dollar reduction be minimized? Should the next cut come from TV or internet display ads or search?

This spending reduction strategy requires the availability of media mix models, simulation and optimization programs (which have become increasingly common across the majority of product categories).

These are five (slightly simplified) approaches to minimizing the effects of spending reductions. The saying that "media is a game of inches" applies to spending cuts. Cutting media spending "strategically" will suggest taking a few dollars from here, a few dollars from there. When considered across the complete range of spending cuts, the resulting sales impact will be small in comparison to the size of the spending reductions.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Joseph Abruzzo is exec VP-director of research at MPG http://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifNorth America. His experience spans work with acquisition-driven marketers like Paramount, Warner Bros., Esurance, Sears, Kmart, Pizza Hut, KFC and Ford Motor Co. Throughout his career, he has focused on the application of quantitative methods in the context of strategic marketing: research and analysis, response modeling, and marketing communication strategy development. In his position at MPG, Joe works with the teams to fully integrate media and marketing information to yield richer insights and smarter media plans for clients.

Original article here.

67% of Searches Driven by Offline Advertising

Behind Nike's Lawsuit Lies a Branding Story
Battle With EMS Is Latest Controversy Surrounding Google's Search-Term Bidding Policy

By Abbey Klaassen

There's a fight brewing over the lightweight, wicking apparel technology known as Dri-Fit -- but the battle is about search marketing and the right to bid on trademarked terms.

Dri-Fit is a trademark of Nike, and the athletic giant has sued New Hampshire-based outdoor-sporting-goods retailer Eastern Mountain Sports, which does not sell any Nike clothing, for bidding on the term "Dri-Fit" in Google's advertising system. So when a user clicks on an EMS ad after searching for Dri-Fit, she is driven back to the retailer's website, which displays other versions of wicking technology.

For Google, bidding on competitors' trademarks is allowed -- even if some marketers think it shouldn't be. But the Dri-Fit debate is only the latest in a series of similar complaints. As major marketers funnel more money into the $9 billion search-advertising category, many are increasingly sour about Google's policy. Google recently settled a trademark-infringement suit brought on by American Airlines, which was upset that competitors advertised against its trademarked terms. The settlement didn't clarify the rules, but it did allow Google to keep selling ads against marketers' trademarks.

Brand awareness
At the heart of it, the debate over trademarks is part of a bigger branding battle marketers wage online, where billions of dollars are spent on advertising and other forms of marketing to create brand awareness. When a consumer goes online to search on a specific brand, marketers don't want competitors to be able to park in the paid-search listings.

Tom Adams, CEO of Rosetta Stone, likens it to competitors sitting at your doorstep: "Think if you had a shop and competitors were standing outside your store, and the moment someone walks up they say 'Please come with me.'"

Marketers absolutely can co-opt the goodwill generated offline by targeting other brands' search terms, said Rob Murray, president of iProspect, citing Mazda's advertising on Pontiac's search term when the latter ran TV ads urging people to "Google" it.

According to iProspect, the money marketers spend offline to build a brand does indeed affect search performance. A 2007 study found 67% of the online searchers are driven to search by offline channels and that, of those, 39% ultimately make a purchase. (Of course, this year's study showed 45% of marketers still don't integrate offline and online.)

Balancing interests
While Google's policy allows bids to be placed on someone else's trademarked keywords, it does not allow a marketer to use a trademarked term in the ad copy. Google asserts that allowing competitors to bid on branded keywords gives consumers more choice in their search results. "We are trying to balance the interests of trademark owners, advertisers and our users," said a spokeswoman in an e-mail. Yahoo and Microsoft search have stricter regulations and generally don't allow advertisers to bid on competitors' trademarked terms.

"If I'm Geico and driving people to Google's search engine to perform searches and Google's saying we want to give consumer choice, well, in algorithmic [search] everyone expects that [in unpaid or natural search results]," Mr. Murray said. "But when it comes to paid search, the fact Google will benefit from all clicks, it's a slippery slope." In Google's defense, he said, there's lots of aggressive bid management going on and Google can only police it so much.

Mr. Adams is part of a coalition of marketers, the Alliance Against Bait & Click, that includes InterContinental Hotels Group, Starwood Resorts, Northwest Airlines and 1800 Contacts. The group is attempting to stop what they call "scads" -- scam ads that confuse consumers. And while the group's target goes beyond trademark bidding, it does count such tactics as confusing to consumers.

Did you really 'Google' that?
"Somehow in context of search-engine advertising, search engines have gotten idea that if you ask for one thing it's OK to give something else or something in addition," said Harvard professor Benjamin Edelman, a member of the alliance. He likens it to hitting the channel for Fox on a remote control and getting NBC instead.

Of course, who decides what is or isn't acceptable is the big question. Adding another layer of cloudiness is that many trademarked terms have arguably entered the common lexicon. For example, a consumer might say they need a Kleenex, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't take a tissue from Puffs. Or a person may say they Googled something, even when they looked it up on Yahoo.

Original article here.

Cut Your Advertising = Go Bankrupt

Ad Cutbacks Backfired for Bankruptcy Victims
Mervyn's, Bennigan's, Sharper Image All Dialed Back on Ads to No Avail

By Natalie Zmuda and Emily Bryson York

In the really tough times, it's almost instinctual for a company to dial back on marketing, but there's a growing body of evidence -- and bankruptcy filings -- to suggest that cutting ad dollars can be the ultimate false economy. Bennigan's, which cut marketing spending by 75% last year, has filed for bankruptcy. Bennigan's, which cut marketing spending by 75% last year, has filed for bankruptcy.
Photo Credit: Scott Olson


Last week, department-store chain Mervyn's and S&A Restaurant Corp., which owns Bennigan's, Steak & Ale and Tavern restaurants, became the latest to file for bankruptcy. Both Mervyn's and Bennigan's dramatically cut marketing spending in the past 12 months.

According to TNS Media Intelligence, Mervyn's measured media spending plunged about 25% to $76 million in 2007. On a smaller scale, Bennigan's cut spending 75% in 2007, to $347,000. Another recent bankruptcy victim, Sharper Image, slashed its budget 82% in the two years before it filed for bankruptcy in February. Baker's Square restaurants cut spending 19% in 2007 and filed for bankruptcy in May.

Of course, it's not strictly a cause-and-effect relationship. "Obviously there are a lot of factors at play," said Kevin Keller, professor of marketing at Dartmouth. "But the pattern is there. It's not like they were investing a lot in advertising and failed."

Fiscal restraint
Particularly for public companies, marketing cuts can demonstrate fiscal restraint. But Darren Tristano, exec VP of Technomic, said that while marketing seems like an easy place to pare, "ultimately, because a lot of traffic you're driving is through marketing and promotion, you're really cutting off your nose to spite your face."

Larry Light, former global CMO of McDonald's, recalled marketing cuts at the beginning of his tenure, in 2002. "It bought time, but the problems didn't get better, they got worse," he said. McDonald's boosted marketing spending as part of its "plan to win" beginning in 2003, and sales at stores open at least a year soon soared.

Cutting marketing at a critical time makes a turnaround more difficult, Mr. Light said, and in some cases impossible. "It is true that some companies try to cost-reduce their way out of problems, and all that does is delay the inevitable problem," he said. "You can't cost-manage your way into the future."

Still, it's clear that many companies will continue to do just that, with more budget cuts and bankruptcies expected among retail and restaurant chains in the coming months. "It's likely that we'll see more companies getting into trouble," said Avi Dan, a marketing consultant. "As long as there is a credit crunch and consumer-sector weakness, the first priority of many marketers is to protect their balance sheet, even if that means trimming budgets."

Vacant tables
Mr. Tristano also said to expect more bankruptcies before year-end. Restaurants have been filing at an alarming rate, five or six in each of the last three years. With four chains having already filed in 2008, Mr. Tristano expects at least three more by year's end, the highest number since Technomic started tracking restaurant bankruptcies in 1980. He pointed to the existence of more chains, many of which are now public companies.

Casual-dining chains seem most vulnerable, Mr. Tristano said. In that sector, Applebee's, Chili's and Ruby Tuesday have some of the worst same-store sales. But only Ruby Tuesday boosted spending last year, 12% to $49 million. Applebee's spending was down 3%, to $168 million, and Chili's was down 30%, to $88 million. Some fast-food chains are also making cuts. Wendy's, which has also struggled with same-store sales, cut spending 16% in 2007 to $300 million.

On the retail side, several companies have been showing signs of struggling under the burden of a tough economy and slowing consumer spending. Of those, Borders Group, Pier 1 and RadioShack are all cutting marketing budgets. Measured-media spending at Borders was down 48% to $3.5 million last year. RadioShack sliced budgets by 45% to $116 million over the last two years, and spending at Pier 1 was down 67% to $27 million last year. A spokeswoman for Borders said that the company's loyalty program is now the focus of marketing efforts. No other retail companies returned requests for comment.

"As long as the economic conditions stay tough, you're going to see companies that cut back and some that will potentially pay the price," said Mr. Keller. "It comes down to a very fundamental philosophical issue of advertising as an expense or an investment. If you view it as an expense, then you cut it. ... It's a big problem, because people [make cuts] without truly recognizing some of the revenue benefits."

Original article here.

Stop the press - Skinny women sell more products

Researchers Find Thin Models Make Viewers Like Brands More, but Themselves Less

By Jack Neff

Thin is still in for advertising, new research suggests, unless you're trying to sell cookies or self-esteem. Women who had just seen thin models were nearly four times more likelyto turn down a snack pack of Oreo cookies offered as thanks for their participation in the study than women who hadn't. Women who had just seen thin models were nearly four times more likelyto turn down a snack pack of Oreo cookies offered as thanks for their participation in the study than women who hadn't.


A study by business professors at Villanova University and the College of New Jersey, inspired by Dove's "Campaign for Real Beauty," shows that ads featuring thin models made women feel worse about themselves but better about the brands featured.

Seeing thin models also made college-age women far more likely to turn down a snack pack of Oreo cookies offered as thanks for their participation in the study, or to opt for a reduced-fat version. Women who had just seen thin models were nearly four times more likely to say no to Oreos than women who hadn't, and 42% more likely to opt for reduced-fat cookies if they did indulge.

Women in a sample of 194 college students aged 18-24 expressed more negative feelings about their sexual attractiveness, weight and physical condition after seeing thin models than before. So-called high self-monitoring women, or those more concerned about what others think of their appearance, were the most negatively affected by seeing the thin models in the study.

More likely to buy
The professors are still preparing a written report on results from a second phase of the research, which found that despite the negative effect on their body image, women preferred ads showing thin models and said they were more likely to buy products featured in those ads than in ones showing "regular-size models," said Jeremy Kees, a business professor at Villanova.

Karen Becker-Olsen, a business professor at the College of New Jersey, also has been conducting the research. She couldn't be reached for comment by deadline.

"The really interesting result we're seeing across multiple studies is that these thin models make women feel bad, but they like it," Mr. Kees said. "They have higher evaluation of the brands. With the more regular-size models, they don't feel bad. Their body image doesn't change. But in terms of evaluations of the brands, those are actually lower."

Mr. Kees acknowledged the findings create something of a quandary for marketers, who might have a positive effect on young women's self-esteem by showing more typical women in ads, but suffer in the marketplace as a result.

"I'd tend to be cautious about using models in advertising that wouldn't maximize the attitudes and evaluations of the advertising and the brands," he said. "Certainly [Dove is] getting a lot of publicity, and it's a great, innovative campaign. But in terms of the bottom line of how that might be impacting ... purchase behavior, I'm not sure."

Appetite suppressant
Mr. Kees said the professors landed on the Oreo tactic, in which study participants didn't know their post-ad-exposure cookie-eating would be monitored, as a way of studying real behavioral impact in addition to the usual survey responses regarding ads.
The Dove Self-Esteem Fund, backed by its Campaign for Real Beauty, has exceeded its original goal of reaching 1 million young girls by this year and expanded its target to 5 million by 2010.
The Dove Self-Esteem Fund, backed by its Campaign for Real Beauty, has exceeded its original goal of reaching 1 million young girls by this year and expanded its target to 5 million by 2010.


The data shows a definite, if short-term, link between thin models in ads and eating behavior, but Mr. Kees said he wasn't comfortable making the leap that seeing thin models could cause eating disorders.

Dove and its agency, Ogilvy & Mather, Toronto, weren't reluctant to connect those dots in their "Onslaught" viral video released last year, splicing scenes of yo-yo dieting and bulimia into a montage of beauty advertising.

"That's a far stretch to infer an eating disorder from a one-time choice," Mr. Kees said, but added, "That's certainly a scenario that would be rich for future research."

The new study in part concurs with and in part diverges from some prior research on the impact of thin models. Research reported in 2005 and 2006 from psychology professors at University of Sussex and University of West England in the U.K. concluded that ads featuring ultra-thin models do make women feel worse about their looks, but aren't any better at selling products than ads featuring more typically proportioned women.

The Lower Chamber of France's Parliament earlier this year passed a law that would ban the use of ultra-thin models in ads, and authorities in Spain last year banned ultra-thin models from runways. Unilever also vowed to not use size-zero models in any of its advertising.

Unilever stays the course
In a statement, a spokesman for Unilever said the company believes its approach works. "Unilever is confident in the effectiveness of its advertising," he said. "We believe women have the right to feel comfortable with their bodies and not suffer from lack of self-esteem brought on by images of excessive slimness."

Dove's campaign, he said, has "penetrated society and started a dialog about real beauty," adding that "we are thrilled by the overwhelming positive responses we have received from women (and men) as a result of the campaign."

The Dove Self-Esteem Fund, backed by the campaign, has exceeded its original goal of reaching 1 million young girls by this year and expanded its target to 5 million by 2010. Campaignforrealbeauty.com, he said, already has reached 4.5 million people.

Despite those efforts, he said, "There is no question that women and young girls are being bombarded with unrealistic messages and images of beauty that impact their self-esteem." But, he said, "We are excited to see now (and have seen in the past couple of years) a growing trend towards more realistic and healthy looking women in advertising and in the media."

Original Article Here

Using an environment to your advantage.

Here's a great example of fitting your message into the environment instead of trying to modify the environment to fit your message. If you can make people stop what they're doing and focus on the ad you've done your job as an advertiser.