FROG BLOG

I don’t get it. Why would a company want a spokesperson that doesn’t clearly add credibility to their brand. Have consumers become so brand educated that they can get past the lizards and cavemen (yes, I am picking on Geico today) to the knowledge that Geico is an insurance company that they would want to consider purchasing? (Yes that is a purpose of advertising to create awareness and move a prospect to the consideration phase.) And, even if a brand chooses an odd spokesperson (a clown, a cow, a over-baked actor) shouldn’t the ad still be about the brand/product benefits that differentiate it from competitors? Instead we get ads that are about the spokespeople and their trials and tribulations (or games or love interests) and, at best, only vaguely refer to why someone should consider a product/service/brand. Have consumers gotten to the point where the brand qualities don’t matter but the most entertaining ad wins their pocketbook?

Quite frankly, I want a dependable, responsive insurance company…I don’t care about the self-esteem (or lack thereof) of a caveman. And I’m betting there is market share to gain by getting back to the basics in messaging and advertising.

Share This

“It’s what you say, most of the time, not how you say it.” (Seth Godin - Seth’s Blog - 3/14/07)

In a recent post Seth Godin nailed what I think is the “missing link” for many marketers. The “what” should always carry the day. I think that is something a lot of deep pocket marketers have gotten away from because they feel they can. So, as I pointed out in an earlier post (Frog Blog - 3/10/07) “Too many times ads seem to be created for their shock values and for the entertainment of the account executives or the creative directors.”

But smaller, less well-funded marketers don’t always get it right either. They just tend to err on the other end of the spectrum. “Tell them everything in every piece.” Just as the “what” can get lost in the glitz and glammer it can also get lost in too many words.

Share This

Last night we had a discussion while watching the Big 10 Basketball Tourney. An ad for a car (and none of us could remember the brand) had many men — all ages and shapes — shedding their clothes on a busy street so they could touch/wash/rub up against a car full of young women.

Why? no one even ventured a guess

The message? it takes very little for men to make fools of themselves

Did it inform me? no

Did it entice me? no

Did it entice the men in the group? Way no

Did it entice the women in the group? H*&^ no

Did it improve my awareness of this car? no

Too many times ads seem to be created for their shock values and for the entertainment of the account executives or the creative directors.

What a waste of marketing budget.

Share This

I don’t get it.

Why are companies so anxious to associate themselves with “bad” things these days? Watching a couple hours of television and I am inundated with messages that suggest: ilicit sex, lying (lots and lots of lying), stealing, egotism (paired with its cousin narcissism) and just plain rudeness. The list could go on but it only gets more depressing.

Have we as a consumer pool become so jaded in life that the only way we can get excited is to “live on the wild side” through our products?

Granted, there have always been a handful of products that promised walking with the bad boys such as Harley Davidson. Today however, these messages are pervasive through many product catergories.

Somewhere along the line advertising, especially television, became all about the “ad” instead of the product. Is it edgy enough? Does it shout loud enough? Is the “ewww” factor high enough? (OK I made that one up but it sounds like it should be on the list!)

And people wonder why advertising is becoming less and less important in the overall branding strategy of many companies.

Share This