What Susan Boyle and Britain's Got Talent should get marketers thinking about more!

I am embarrassed to say that despite being a total online geek (some may say online whore as I use it so much and so many tools), in my professional life I have not led a more innovative and aggressive use of new media and tools. Focusing more on the traditional marketing tools of TV, print, in-store. Is this what you also revert to?

I really started challenging myself on this. This challenge started when I was merrily criticising the UK ITV TV channel and the producers/ owners of the "Britain's Got Talent" show who found that one of the acts (Susan Boyle) exploded into a global sensation due to clips posted by fans (ignoring any copyright) on YouTube. The clip (which was finally put up officially) has been watched some staggering 62 million times (and that is just 1 clip as other copies have several million as well) and growing. The station and owners making no money from it initially as they had not fully thought past the traditional model of selling space in the show on air, and some revenues from viewer phone-in voting. (Even I make money from my hotel room and other clips on YouTube). This was all as Susan Boyle, due to the YouTube fame, appearing on Oprah and Larry King live making a local UK TV show a worldwide feature. This is after an audition mind you - she has not won the show (as of writing) and may not. But her fame is assured. As is ITV for not being more aware of the new models available to them to reach consumers.

While I was criticising them for not embracing new media, embracing the power of people who engage with new media and social networks to discover things, I realised I was the same creature.

Why are people like me who even when using new media and tools so much as consumers, forgetting it all when we walk through the door of the office? I have blogs, use twitter, use Google news as my main source of news, on Facebook at least once a day, do all my holiday and travel using tripadvisor and online, buy a large amount of things online, use iPod and listen to podcasts every day... And so on. But have not championed them for the brand.

Why?

Is it because it is easier to use the tools that are more familiar with the management upwards and those leading the countries? Habit and familiarity?

Or is it because agencies have stayed as agencies, and still talk in a language of TV and Print (oh and here is how you could run that online) and so are not challenging enough? The online function seem to all be in different divisions in agencies, and not central to the process.

I really think I, and everyone needs to really revolt! We have to be more focused on the total journey from awareness to consideration to commitment and purchase by our target and where in that chain we need to influence.

Keeping acting more like a consumer when you walk through the door of the office!

Take a look at the video of Susan Boyle that made her the internet and international sensation: click here to watch on YouTube: 

Being noticed in rush hour. The importance of standing out in thelaunch crush

People
Originally uploaded by The Kids and Kahlie

Some years ago while working on some training on advertising, I used to talk about how there is roughly 365 new skincare/ personal care products and extensions launched every year. This meant that on average your new product or extension would only be new for a day.

As within 24 hours there would be something new. I realise now that this was a silly fact, as latest data shows that (despite the tough times) that some 850 new personal care products were launched a year. That means you are only new for less than half a day if you are lucky.....

And if you launch in the mass market channels in most countries, the launches are crammed into 2 launch cycles in most cases.

So when agencies talk about clutter, they really mean it. Not only is there clutter in the amount of messages but also the amount of news and new things for people to explore. No wonder the beauty care business can be so volatile...

But it does mean that whatever you do, you really do need to stand out and be noticed.

Think about rush hour and the volumes of people getting on and off the Metro, the tube, the trains. The volume of news is like rush hour every day. You need to be able to be noticed and stand out in that sea of grey and similarity. Just like in rush hour, everyone tends to be very similarly dressed and deck out in whatever the latest colour and fashion is. This is what we all do when launching and marketing in our categories, we tend to feel most comfortable sticking with the trends, what the competition are doing. What has worked in the past..

To really stand out, you need to be different. Different enough to be noticed. But not different enough to not be appealing. A tough balance. But it has to be done. Especially when the other scary statistic is that up to 90% of new launches fail or fall well below expectations.

You need to be noticed in rush hour, as it is rush hour every day, twice a day when it comes to beauty care!

Toy Monster: The Big, Bad World of Mattel by Jerry Oppenheimer

The author of this book clearly is not very fond of the toy company Mattel, nor the larger than life personalities that have run it over the course of its history so far.

Though looking at a list of the other books that he has written, which I only did after finishing the book, it is clear that his stock in trade when it comes to writing is focusing on the drama of the people associated to dramatic events and scandal linked to celebrity and business. He has written books on Martha Stuart, Rock Hudson and the Hiltons (and has a book about Bernie Maddoff coming out in late 2009).

His story of the history of Mattel is a bit one sided, but it made for entertaining and interesting reading despite this. As long as you take that into account. It would be a less provocative and grabbing narrative if it was more balanced.

The book is structured to take you through a series of major stages in the history of Mattel, each of which he associates and focuses on the personalities involved at that time. Closely linking that individuals personality and faults to the peaks and troughs of the volatile fortunes of the company. This focus on the people makes it more of a soap opera than a real business analysis of the brand and company. So although you learn about the company, you do not really get a deep understanding of the company and brands themselves.

He spends time in the book on the battles (personal and business life) with the “father of Barbie” and then with the couple who started Mattel. Then he moves onto the dealings that ended up driving out the woman who created Mattel and the criminal charges that involved. It covers the loud and over confident CEO who was finally driven out by her poor acquisitions, through to the CEO who oversaw the company during the toy recalls related to lead paint from toys made in China and magnets being ingested by children.

Overall I found the book enjoyable although it was closer to a “holiday book” read in style and content. But good entertainment. It made me curious to see how he has skewered other people in his books. I may just buy one to find out.

The other thing that I thought was interesting from a "brand"/ "marketing" side was that the author (Jerry Oppenheimer) has been a good marketer as he has created this brand as you expect when you see or get one of his books that he will tell a soap opera style story about a personality from the world of business. Very clear!

To buy the book on Amazon:

How the confused and the meerkat made me think about rewarding brand loyalty!

There seems to be such a big focus on getting new business that many forget that is is probably cheaper, easier and more sensible to focus on getting existing customers to keep buying and buying more. I once read that it is very usual for 20% of customers to account for 80% of profits.

This issue really struck me over the last few days with the experience of car insurance, and now has made me challenge the the point of being loyal to a brand and a business. As things have been getting tougher economically, it is seems amazing how businesses (especially financial) are focused on getting new business - but they seem to care little about existing ones.

Like many I am sure, I have always assumed that my current provider of insurance for my car (Direct Line) who I have been with for many years valued the business and were giving a fair deal. I just got a renewal and it seemed a lot. So inspired by the almost avalanche of price comparison sites advertising on TV, I decided to try them out. I tried out confused.com and comparethemarket.com

I was gob smacked to see just how badly my existing provider was "looking after me" (a loyal customer). The prices ranged from half my current (for the same benefits) to around 15% less. On calling my supplier they then offered me £120 less from the renewal they had sent. This was an even bigger insult as meant that they really taking advantage of being loyal, as one call and they were saying their "best" was not. 

This has now got me thinking and am going to go through all my bills and do comparison online.

Despite saving money and seeing the power of price comaprison sites, it does raise a bigger question  for everyone in marketing: what are you doing to make sure your current and loyal consumers feel valued and are getting the best deal to reward that loyalty? As once trust is lost never to return..

Below are the ads that got me to try out the price comparison sites in the first place:

(1) The strange but memorable ad that helped me remember the site name: Compare The Meerkat.

(2) And the Confused.com ad the really annoying but clear ad that spoke about the product upgrade and news to drive traffic