Zazou Marketing

Yesterday I wrote about how Dunkin’ Donuts’ new ad campaign successfully differentiates the company from their competition. Today I am writing about a company’s ad campaign that fails to do just that. In fact, this ad campaign simply makes me wonder what they were thinking.

In this ad campaign, Microsoft accuses Google of causing global economic ruin as a narrator says: “While everyone was searching, there was bailing. . . . While everyone was lost in the links, there was collapsing.” The product? Microsoft’s new  search engine, Bing. All I can say to this is, “What?!”

I am not alone in this confusion. The LA Times ran a story about it today, titled “Microsoft’s Bing TV ad: Huh?”

This is my favorite part of the article:

I find many mysteries in this commercial. The first is how an ad firm with an estimated $100 million entrusted to it fails to notice the clumsy grammar (”there was bailing . . . there was collapsing” sounds as if the lines were translated from Zulu). While I’ve got my copy-editing hat on, I’d note that a long stretch of the ad’s narration — “Starting today we need the right information to make the right decisions, decisions that help us feel right, decisions that help us get to the right place at the right time, even if it’s right around the corner. . . . ” — is so vacuous it practically sucked my eyeballs out of their sockets.

Sucking eyeballs out of sockets is probably the last association that Microsoft wanted when they launched this marketing campaign. But I still do wonder what it is that they did want. Maybe the purspose of the campaign is just to turn heads? I suppose simply by getting attention some people will try the search engine. But I can’t help but think that if they gave people a good reason to switch from Google to Bing, many, many more people would give it a try — this is, after all, what any good marketing material should do.

Dunkin’ Donuts is rolling out an entertaining and fun new ad campaign. But that’s not what made it noteworthy enough for me to write about here. The reason that I’m mentioning it is because — as all marketing campaigns should — this campaign effectively differentiates the company from their competition.

Dunkin’ Donuts’ “Breakfast NOT Brokefest” advertising campaign introduces the company’s new 99-cent breakfast wrap, which is also in line with their current coffee pricing.

Dunkin' Donuts is rolling out a new "Breakfast NOT Brokefest" ad campaign.

The marketing campaign includes displays of legs that stick out of public fountains, which make it look like someone jumped into the fountain to gather coins. A sign next to the legs read: “Please do not remove change for 99-cent items at Dunkin’ Donuts.”

In a separate TV ad, a man tightens his belt, which prompts a colleague to point out that that won’t save him money.

The price-oriented advertising campaign sets the brand apart from the pricier McDonald’s and Starbucks (who are both trying to tackle the coffee and breakfast market right now).  Considering that people are feeling the need to scale back and let go of luxuries like a $4 latte, the Dunkin’ Donuts campaign may entice more than a few new customers.

By the way, if you want to read more about what Starbucks has been up to recently, read my past posts:

Starbucks vs. Stella: Two beverage companies warn against paying less

Copy Chatter: Starbucks Bucks the Short Copy Trend

Advertising campaigns inevitably responds to the times. And, as we are all very aware: The times are now tough. Which is why some brands have eschewed upbeat ads that dominated the boom times, opting instead for sober messages that harken back to the Great Depression.

Here are a few examples, as covered in a New York Times article that ran yesterday:

• A Farmers insurance ad campaign talks about how the company was started “a year before the crash.”

Farmers insurance ad campaign refers to the Great Depression

• Retailer Brooks Brothers is reprinting advertisements from the 1930s.
• Print ads for Soyjoy bars describe how “the Great Depression turned the land of opportunity into a land of despair.”

The effectiveness of these ads will inevitably run the gamut. But I do wonder about the wisdom (not to mention the relevance) of talking about the Great Depression in relation to a food bar. Though, to be fair, I should reserve my verdict until I actually see it.

Sometimes marketing campaigns just aren’t sexy. And that’s OK.

Take banks, for example. There is a whole slew of them who want the public to know that they are safe and solid–in a word, they’re boring. I have personal experience with this message, since I was hired recently by a credit union to two write letters for their annual report. The content of those letters? In part it was that the credit union is safe, solid and growing. And that they never took part in all of those risky lending practices that got the big banks in trouble.

But the marketing message definitely goes beyond one credit union. The New York Times ran an article about banks earlier this month, titled “We’re Dull, Small Banks Say, but Have Profits.” While the title pretty much sums it up, here’s an excerpt:

“community bankers have felt compelled in recent months to mount public relations campaigns to emphasize their fiscal health and in some cases to announce they rejected Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, funds. Some have held cookouts, others have held “reassurance” meetings in their lobbies, hoping to educate customers and prevent panics.”

The point of all of this? Sometimes what sets you apart from your competitors is not something bold and flashy. Sometimes it is your boring old business practices that give you an edge. The important part is that whatever it is that gives you an edge, go ahead and sell it!

I have absolutely no emotional reaction when I think of Chipotle. Instead, my thinking process probably goes something like this: “black bean burrito,” “fast food counter,” “husband got sick once.” So it was a complete shock to me to learn that the brand has such a strong following that when they changed their ad campaign recently, a group of Denver-based creatives started a “war” on Chipotle’s new ad campaign, called “Cheapotle.”

New ad campaign from Chipotle

An ad that is part of the "war" on Chipotle's new ad campaign.

Since I didn’t know about the new ad campaign until I found about this war, I did some reasearch about it. Apparently, Chipotle is focusing the campaign, called “My Chipotle,” on its variety of menu items and ingredients. Included in the campaign is a microsite, Mychipotle.com, where consumers can leave audio and video recordings talking about their burrito creations.

Now, listen to who this campaign is targeting, from an article in Brandweek:

“With this campaign, it is our intention to harness the power of our most loyal fans,” said Mark Crumpacker, Chipotle CMO, in a statement. “We want them to be a part of the process because we know they’re consistently expressing themselves through their menu choices. By encouraging them to tell us why they eat what they do, we think they’ll spread the word and encourage others to come in and give Chipotle a try as well.”

Hmmmm. Maybe some of their loyal fans will love this campaign and play along. But apparently they went very wrong with at least a few of those Denver-based loyal fans.

And I certainly can’t help but notice that the ad campaign was meant to spur community action–maybe just not the kind of community action that it actually has spurred.

A few choice words can make a powerful image. If you have any doubt, just check out the new ad campaign Mars just launched. In fact, in this case, the image and the words are just too much, in my opinion.

The ad campaign is for the first new candy bar Mars has launched in 20 years. Called the “Fling,” it is being marketed to women. The ad campaign is using plenty of double entrendres, including calling it a “chocolate finger.” I don’t know about you, but instead of making me say, “Yum, give me some chocolate,” that image in relation to a chocolate bar makes me say, “Yuck.” I doubt that that was what Mars wanted when they launched this ad campaign.

Take a look for yourself at one piece of the marketing materials for this ad campaign:

a promotional mailer for Mars' new candy bar, the "Fling"

I’m not the only one who thinks this campaign goes too far. NPR’s “All Things Considered” ran a story yesterday about the ad campaign. Here’s an excerpt from that story:

“The overall campaign feels weird,” Lisa Johnson says. “It feels creepy.” Johnson is the co-author of Don’t Think Pink: What Really Makes Women Buy — and How to Increase Your Share of This Crucial Market. She describes the marketing as a “full-frontal attack.”

“The language of it has so much sexual innuendo, you could pack it into a trashy novel.” Johnson says marketers are taking the connection women often make between chocolate and sensuality too literally. “There are other things you can do that can hit this note without banging on it.”

It remains to be seen how effective the ad campaign will be, of course. But I would definitely like to see toned-down copy for this ad campaign. And my guess is that such a toned-down version would be much more effective.

We’re all looking for new and effective venues to get the word out about our company, product or service, right? Well, how about splashing an ad on an abandoned storefront? There are more and more of these unrentable spaces, after all. And they give you a lot of space to catch your client’s eye and make a bold statement.

Check out these examples that ran in the New York Times today:

Many organizations create websites assuming that the product or service will sell itself… If you can just get people to your website, they’ll see how wonderful what you offer really is. And then they’ll go ahead and buy it, right?! Well, now that you’ve had your website for some time, you have probably realized that simply having a site doesn’t necessarily mean sales.

So, if you want your website to actually generate revenue, you may need to revamp a few important aspects of your site. In fact, there are six things you should update, says an April 28 article in The Washington Post. And since I’m writing about this article here, you won’t be surprised that one of the fixes that the article advises is to “write better product descriptions.” Here’s the article’s sage advice:

Spend some time reading your product descriptions to make sure they’re succinct and filler-free. The formula here can be difficult because, as Amy Schade says, you need to “convince [users] the product meets their needs,” but the verbiage “has to be short and descriptive.” There’s no salesperson available on a website, so shoppers “should be able to see a product and know what it does,” says Schade, a director at the Nielsen Norman Group in New York City and co-author of the second edition of the “E-Commerce User Experience” report. Writing new and better product descriptions, Schade says, “is time consuming but worth it.”

So there you have it. Good writing can equal sales. So, when you are creating product descriptions, remember to make them succint, descriptive, and filler-free, while also ensuring that they convince prospective buyers that the product meets their needs.

Zazou Marketing

A few days ago I wrote about Starbucks’ new advertising campaign. At least one of the new ads addresses the issue of price—warning that “paying less for your coffee comes with a price.” Since writing that I have noticed that a Stella Artois campaign makes a similar warning, “Perfection has its price.”

Starbucks' new ad campaign warns that cheaper coffee comes with a price.

A Stella Artois ad campaign that has been running for a few years claims that "perfection has its price."

As for the two approaches, I find the Starbucks ad to be much more effective. First of all, it is running in newspapers, and the headline is followed by a story of what separates them from their competition–with topics including their use of fair-trade beans. So, if the headline catches your eye, you can read on to find out why they claim that cheaper coffee has its price. And it actually makes me pause and consider paying $4 for a cup of coffee.

But the Stella ad is a billboard, so you only see the headline. The focus here, then, is on the “perfection” claim–a broad claim with nothing to substantiate it. It certainly doesn’t make me want to buy the beer. Rather, it only makes me wonder, “how much more expensive is the beer than its competitors?”

What do you think? Which campaign is more effective?

Zazou Marketing

More and more ad campaigns focus exclusively on getting your attention through visuals. While I am definitely an advocate of eye-catching design, I also absolutely believe that to get a good return on your investment, design and good copy go hand-in-hand.

Which is why I was so interested in hearing that Starbucks is running a new campaign: a series of full-page newspaper ads that are loaded with copy. A full-page ad? With loads of copy? This is definitely a different tactic. And it’s one that I am interested in seeing.

Both their website and the senior vice president of marketing’s blog offer a sneak-peak of the ads (I can’t display them here without a password). But from Advertising Age I learned that the ads will tell their story of what separates them from their competition, with topics including their use of fair-trade beans and giving health care to many part time employees. The ads will also address the issue of price—warning that “paying less for your coffee comes with a price.”

Come Sunday, I’ll definitely check out the first ad in the New York Times to see just how much copy there is and to see if it is compelling enough to keep me reading. Then, of course, the true test for this trend-bucking tactic will be to see if the ads have any effect on the company’s bottom line.