By now you’ve probably seen the horrible videos that Microsoft is using to promote its grassroots Windows 7 Launch Party effort.
There’s so much wrong with the video, that it’s not even worth getting into.
While the marketing is embarrassing, the program seems like it’s gaining traction. I went to the Launch Party site and saw that they have over 10K parties planned in the US alone. I read through some of the user comments and people seem genuinely excited about this ... or maybe it’s Windows 7 that they’re excited about.
Free software and a little geek cred can go a long way.
You’re walking down a city street, stomach grumbling, looking for some place to eat. You come upon two restaurants next to each other - one is mostly full, one is mostly empty. Which one seems the safer bet?
Our instincts are to think that the one with more people must have the better food, service, or both. Or maybe it’s just a better place to be seen at. If you chose to eat at the crowded establishment, you’re very presence there is marketing to the next passerby an inferred value proposition. This business is in fact extracting a service from you.
The same holds true if you walk around with a Starbucks cup, wear an Ed Hardy t-shirt, or are seen walking into a Barnes & Noble. Your interaction with these brands endorses and markets them.
So why aren’t brands paying us for this valuable service? Or put more practically, why aren’t their products and services appropriately “discounted” to factor in the time that we put in to market them?
This is the premise of #sixweeks, a recently publicized experiment conducted over six weeks in London by digital strategist Paul McCrudden. McCrudden recorded the time he spent interacting with brands. And after six weeks he began invoicing these businesses for the time he spent with these brands at a fee based on his salary, prorated and greatly discounted.
McCrudden’s mission as he puts it is to “challenge the basic assumption that consumers are subservient to brands.”
I get that McCrudden is being a bit dramatic here to make a point. But the truth is that his basic assumption is all wrong. Subservience isn’t part of the equation, but relationships are. And like any relationship both sides give and both take.
We want to be seen shopping at that store or wearing that handbag or drinking that cup of coffee or using that Mac laptop. Our brands define us - who we are, who we want to be. There’s significant value being delivered to the consumer beyond the actual product or service - it’s status, identity, comfort, security ... the list goes on.
And if brands don’t continue to deliver, to listen, to improve, to care - we take our business elsewhere.
McCrudden’s premise only makes a bit of sense if we are giving business to brands that we care nothing about - it assumes the worst on both sides.
Knowing that the wrong response to McCrudden’s efforts would be a PR nightmare, businesses have started to pony up cash, vouchers, or both. I mean, who wants to go on record looking like they don’t value their customers. Even though that isn’t really the point here.
My favorite response is from the eatery Pret a Manger. Founder Julian Metcalfe paid McCrudden’s fee, but also added in the cost of the food, the time he thinks it took for McCrudden to do the paperwork, and “a nominal sum to cover interest”.
In a response dripping with courtesy, Metcalfe writes…
“You are of course, absolutely right. The time spent in my cafes will greatly help the profitability of our company. I have asked our accounts department to issue a cheque today as I see no reason why you should be kept waiting. I’m sorry to have to pay you by cheque as I am aware of the effort and time it will take you to pay this into the bank.”
This Ad Age video talks about how advertisers are now setting their sights on using video game engines to create real-time interactive spots.
Zoic Studios recently created one of said spots for the release of Kill Zone 2 that was broadcasted on the Sony Playstation Network. Playstation viewers were able to manipulate camera angles, view uncomposited layers, and hear commentary - all rendered in real-time.
Technologically speaking, this is huge. How effective is the execution though? Visually, it doesn’t quite do it for me. And I’d imagine that for an audience that spends a lot of time “living” in these virtual worlds, their reaction was probably the same.
That said, this is an early breakthrough. I definitely think there’s potential in the medium. Especially when you think of this stuff coupled with Microsoft’s Project Natal technology. And that includes non-game consumer products. For instance, imagine being able to “get inside” a car and zoom into the dashboard on your HD TV.
It was interesting to hear Zoic co-founder Loni Peristere talk about the creation process. He believes, and I agree, that soon the platforms for creating these experiences will be more in the hands of storytellers than technologists. The technology will be far enough along that creatives can pull from vast digital libraries.
There’s also sure to be ground-level democratized innovation on this platform as the tools become commonplace.
More and more I’m hearing folks in the advertising industry finally starting to talk some sense.
Mark Earls former head of Ogilvy’s planning offices in London speaks here about the perils of a multi-channel execution of a single “big idea”. Today, many agencies and brands continue to focus on consistency rather than effectiveness. This is certainly evident in my recent blog post on MasterCard.
There is a quibble I have with something he said - though it might be semantics. He aligned the term “big idea” with “big insight”. Big insights are very different than big ideas. Many ideas, strategies, and executions can flow from a single insight. And while one insight might rise to the top, the second, third, fourth and fifth aren’t far behind. The key with insights is to get the ones that no one else has. Patrick Edson from MillerCoors talked about this a few months ago.
Earls quickly touches here on the decreasing relevance of the 30-second spot and how products and services are the future of advertising.
So what’s slowing the industry down?
Minds are boggled with how to structure awards shows around things that actually provide consumer value vs brand impressions.
I just got off the phone with Chase in response to an offer to upgrade one of my credit cards. The key driver for me was the rewards program.
This free plan even sounded better than the one I was paying for on my “prestigious” World MasterCard. I asked the representative to help me compare the other card benefits. She informed me that this new card was better.
“That couldn’t be”, I protested. MasterCard sent me several mailings touting the premium services on the World card, while this new Chase card was really just about the rewards.
I decided to do a little research. Which brought be to the World card microsite.
Firstly, the site is useless. It communicates card benefits as sound bite-rollovers on a 3D interface. A simple text-based list of my high-touch services is no where to be found.
Meanwhile, fluttering birds keep beckoning me after each 3D transition to “register and customize your world”. Customize what world? This crappy 3D one? There’s no information about the value of registering. Simply put, this site doesn’t give me enough information whether I’m a prospect or a customer.
The site reeks of an agency that is more accustomed to attempting to deliver on marketing “wow”, than on delivering consumer value.
Lastly, the visual execution is just wrong. The materials I received in the mail had a sense of exclusivity to them. This microsite feels more like a bad version of Mario 64. It’s just off-brand.
Furthermore the design caliber of this microsite (and the Priceless.com site framework) is amateurish at best. It’s not even worth a design critique.
It’s just hard to believe that the destination for one of the most iconic ad campaigns in recent times.
I just got off the phone with Chase in response to an offer to upgrade one of my credit cards. The key driver for me was the rewards program.