First it’s good to be back after my website went dark for about a week to address a change in hosts, and an extended bout of laziness that kept me away.

Microsoft, Google, Apple these are 3 of the largest tech companies in the world. They’re so similar and yet so very different.  These differences have really come out to the forefront lately with some of the choices in branding and marketing.

Apple

  I’ve been reviewing the new products Apple is releasing and how they talk about them to consumers. One thing is standing out, the use of the word “magical”, whether it’s the iPad or the new “magic trackpad” apple wants us to envision a world where their products bring to earth an almost imaginary experience. A new reality this is what Apple Brings.

Google

Their public facing brand has more to do with science fiction than technology. Their versions resemble confectionary delights rather than the operating systems they really are. Yes, Google has really embraced the fanciful in a way that inspires their customer base to jump in and get engaged.

Microsoft

Then there is Microsoft a juggernaut in the enterprise space but still very much an up and comer in the consumer space. They’ve got a few fanciful names like “bing, Azure, XBox, and Zune” but for the most part they are rooted in attaching to a brand that has been iconic in Redmond for over 20 years. Yes, everything is Windowized at the moment with: Windows Phone, Windows Mobile, Windows Azure, Windows Live Messenger, Windows Embedded, Windows Server, and a host of other products.

A once fanciful brand Windows has become a generic extended statement that tries to attach all these new markets to the desktop experience Microsoft dominates. Unfortunately, consumers aren’t getting excited by pushing the desktop experience into all these different categories. The message appears to come off as mundane and ordinary.

Fantasy in Marketing

There used to be a time when marketers were very cautious about making overly ambitious statements. Now making these bold fantastic, nowhere near reality statements have become the way to captivate an audience and cut through all the noise in the advertising space. Time will tell how long this trend lasts but it’s something that we’re seeing 3 major players handling a bit differently and it’s having meaningful results on performance.

The love letter:

Dear Viacom,

You’ve entertained me for years whether it be Nikelodeon, MTV, Comedy Central, VH1, or Paramount (didn’t even realize you owned that one). As a long time viewer, someone who respects and loves the product you put out I was saddened to hear that in your first go at Google you did not succeed in exerting your intellectual property rights.

You see, I’m an informed consumer and I respect the ownership laws granted by this country. Unfortunately, with lawmakers there is often short-sightedness in the drafting. How else could a law like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (designed to keep frivolous lawsuits from targeting internet hosts and ISPs) be utilized as a shield for a corporation that keeps illegal content on their service and servers through which they directly profit from? Sorry, I understand that it’s not Google’s fault that people upload the videos but creating the service means policing it. Google is profiting from Viacom’s content either through the additional traffic it generates (which facilitates a higher asking rate on advertising) or utilizing it in negotiations shakedowns of content holders. It’s a lot easier to bargain with someone whose content is already exposed when it comes to setting the tone of the partnership agreement.

Here’s to hoping in 5 years the Supreme Court sees things your Way Viacom.

Yours, Nick

The Hate Letter

Dear Viacom,

How is it you can be so good at creating amazing content and so terrible at serving it up to the world? I can access your content at YouTube just fine (yeah I know it shouldn’t be there). You might want to get on those take-down notices since their site doesn’t hang/ spend minutes buffering and I don’t even have to watch a commercial there.

Or better yet learn from NBC and actually post your content on Hulu ,rather than using Hulu point back to your overwhelmed site. See I don’t mind watching the commercials, I just mind the buffering time. I know Hulu is a little more appeasing than Google, who you still have that nasty back and forth legal fight with.

So in closing fix your website or I’ll just hit up YouTube.

Regards, Nick

Gotta say loving my new job, having an amazing time driving strategy for a large client. After the “vacation” its great to be thrown to the wolves and have to start executing immediately. Needless to say as always finding time for blogging is difficult when you’re consumed by other tasks in your life. I saw this today though and thought it would make a good post.

First off I’m not going to say giving to charity isn’t a good thing, but I have to look at this article and really take in what it says. I find charities to be a challenge, because of the structure and nature (including tax implications) there really isn’t an incentive to run a charity efficiently. The problem is not enough people asking how can we stretch this budget, what are our goals, how do we run this “business” in a manner that will maximize the return on investment.

I’ve in my past career life worked on these problems at a University, these are very real problems that do impact charities and educational institutions. Unfortunately, unlike businesses which are forced to address these issues many charities shift the focus onto driving more donations and endowment use.

In the end though I can’t find fault in giving, even if its an imperfect system its a necessary system; so some waste is permissible.

I’ve sounded off on this topic before. I’ll continue to be more in Viacom’s corner than Google’s so long as I can find a video any time day or night thats sitting on a Google Server that can be viewed illegally. Hiding behind the safe-harbor provision inserted into the DMCA that was designed to remove the possibility of ISPs being sued, or having to police their users rings hollow to me for Google.

There’s something to be said though for practicing what you preach, and while I’m sure Viacom’s site isn’t nearly as slathered down with content that was “borrowed” as YouTube was it makes for a compelling humorous video when you get to catch a company doing something hypocritical.

Apologies, video embedding is acting up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1PIICmNlH0

So I bought a new car last week, and after years of not having a functioning cigarette lighter to utilize an adaptor for a mobile phone I’m now ready to buy one. Now there’s some general rules I typically follow to make sure I don’t spend too much on this sort of thing, first of which is don’t ever buy from a branded carrier’s store (pro tip they make money from the accessories), and second the best possible place to buy is typically Radioshack®.

Buying Experience

Radioshack is cheaper one because they sell an incredible assortment of stuff including AA batteries that have high margins, and because they typically run an entire store with only two people during the busiest times of the day. So the advantage is I’m getting a cheap charger, but now the problem is there’s no one there to help me get the right charger.

It’s at this point I discover the genius of “PointMobl™” packaging on the chargers in a bright white iPod like section of the store. I pick up a couple of these weird over-sized plastic canister type containers and flip it over to read up specs on the back. Somehow I missed the “Flip it To Fit it!” messaging on the front, but still managed to do exactly what the designers wanted me to. This was some of the most intuitive packaging I have ever seen, as it left the end of the charger that fits into the phone in a small accessible hole in the back. Yes, I didn’t even need a sales associate as I could plug in the charger and know it fit, so simple so easy, its the low hanging fruit of product accessories which everyone else has ignored.

The Purchase Decision

I only had to pick up two packages until I found the product I knew would work with my phone. At that point I had 100% confidence that I had the appropriate product. Its at this point I was so happy with my ability to select the product, make the decision myself that I never even bothered to see if there was a competitive branded product available as well. I never even bothered to check the price (although its because I assumed correctly a $25-30 price window that I knew to be typical for this type of product. This was one of the more rewarding buying experiences I’ve had, and for something as simple and every day as a device charger.

PointMobl™?

Good thing you TM’d that name its a rock-star. OK, all joking aside I just bought a product with a company that has zero brand credibility; this is something of a miracle given my normal purchasing habits. Not only was this product packaging super effective in my purchase decision it actually built considerable brand equity for me. I’m not even kidding when I say I paid more attention to the packagings’ features than the Power Adapters.

So I’m thinking that these PointMobl folks really know this business, its at that point I then discover its not an accessory company but a branded mobile store that is at the very least partnered (and I’m guessing owned) by Radioshack. I must say I’m a bit confused to see the brand over-extending the branded storefronts but maybe this will make rolling out these stores a bit easier. Would love to be sitting in on their brand strategy sessions.

Conclusion

I like my introduction to PointMobil, I think its smart on Radioshack’s part to make use of a branded experience that better aligns with what customers normally associate with purchasing mobile products. I’m also blown away by the thoughtfulness they’ve injected into their offer, it really helps build credibility in an already crowded space.

There’s really a thin line between acknowledging a segmented group that you do business with dignity, and obliterating your trust within that segment.

365 Black

I ran across this McDonalds sponsored website on a satire site that was poking fun of fast food salads and people who think they’re somehow healthy at you. The site 365Black.com pushes a complete appreciation of the Black community, from its business owners/partners, to its customers, to the culture of the community.

I had noticed the targeting about 9 months ago when I was watching ads it really seemed like I never could spot a white person in commercials (I’ve seen a few since) anecdotal evidence isn’t really sufficient for me to be basing any blog posts on. Having seen this site though I can say it does appear that targeting this demographic is part of the agenda for McDonalds.

Impact on Primary segment

Unfortunately, McDonalds doesn’t really have the same wholesome health conscious image that maybe Subway (still not sure this is remotely healthy) has been able to portray. The fact they’ve been targeting a specific segment then comes under fire due to considerations about why they’re targeting this market.

Seeing articles like this show me that the marketplace has noticed and may not be that happy about it:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/375154/how_mcdonalds_targets_the_urban_market.html

http://www.qaadironline.com/apps/forums/topics/show/1882219-why-does-mc-donalds-target-black-people-

http://www.aachac.org/healthfactsheets/diabetes.html

Given the problems facing the community such as heart disease and diabetes and the fact that fastfood is considered to be a risk factor/causal agent by many, this segmentation and outreach program may be missing its intended mark and damaging McDonald’s credibility within the community.

Impact on Other Segments

Its always understandable when you leave a customer segment behind, a product just can’t be all things to all people. Unfortunately this can create friction with other segments who feel they’re being ignored. There’s no Asian 365 or White 365 etc. how does this make people feel who are a part of those demographics who also are valued customers for McDonalds? Does it send the message that maybe this establishment doesn’t cater to or respect their needs?

Conclusion

I’m always a bit alarmed by race in advertising. I think that the focus should be brought back to the individual and not so much emphasis should be made on what someone is. McDonald’s could have just kept the “Im lovin’ it” jingle, the celebrity endorsements like Michael Jordan, and left race out of it. The interesting thing is that approach worked for so many years, why change it now?

[youtube loCMWpJcp7g]

Typical M&A

We’ve all heard this story before big juggernaut company buys smaller yet substantial competitor. Proceeds to re-brand the hell out of all of their locations. This translates into a lot of very unhappy customers who immediately swear off the big Goliath that decimated their beloved champion of whatever trade.

Starbucks Acquisition of SBC

I love the simplicity and intelligence behind the branding decisions of how Starbucks has used SBC to date. The best part of it is many of the people who swear they will never enjoy a Starbucks beverage, have no clue what the SBC beverage in their hand is.

SBC as a brand shield

Starbucks had plenty of opportunities to branch out and partner up with various other chains. The dilemma: how can you partner with McDonalds without ruining the premium name associated with Starbucks? Solution: you buy SBC and proudly serve SBC at every McDonalds. Instead of turning a company into a direct competitor or eroding the key brand, they’ve now got a licensee and additional revenue stream.

Separate, Different, Still Cash-flow

A proper segmentation strategy doesn’t cannibalize your business it offers a new channel and source of customers that your traditional business doesn’t align with. Its obvious the strength in Starbucks is the brand, after all in some markets there can be 3-5 coffee stands on 1 street corner. It stands to reason that SBC’s presence will do little to impact this.

Incubation Market

Having a secondary business unit enables Starbucks to create, test, and market new ideas without harm to the main unit if they prove unpopular. This can also be a way of testing out perception or where/why the Starbucks brand is failing or floundering.

The Viral Video

The point of a good viral is the shock value. Taking a team of SBC coffee slamming employees doing a late night urban branding warfare campaign at the Starbucks headquarters is an instant classic. It has that gorilla marketing feel, and if you’re not in on the dirty joke (that SBC is owned by Starbucks) it has quite a lot of shock value. For those people who are “Anything But Starbucks” it could resonate with them. Fun Stuff.

Conclusion

Branding is a powerful tool, especially in a high margin, high service industry like the specialty coffee business. Starbucks the king of the mountain isn’t beyond reproach and recognized this by aiming to build a successful also-ran brand in SBC.

It seemed like everyone was high on the blog as a business model in the mid 2000′s; and why not with adwords from Google providing a rich source of income, low startup cost, and the rapid growth of online viewership it seemed the perfect business to jump into. That being said, blogging isn’t an easy activity nor a lucrative one unless you really come forward with something.

Keys to Success

First mover advantage – This is usually good for any business but especially necessary for the blog. Attracting a loyal crowd in an area where no one provided a like product (or one that was easily found) is huge.

A captivating idea – It’s not enough to build it up. It needs to be something that the masses want. I’ve gone forward with 2 ideas now MGMTNOW (branding/product marketing advice) and ZunedOut (Music blog focused on Zune). Unfortunately, both the areas I’ve selected don’t have a large enough following to really ramp earnings with.

Amazing Marketing – Marketing is a little different on the internet, its all about being linked to, getting the right search results, and utilizing Web 2.0. My experiences with Google really turned me off to Adwords for a blog. I think the costs especially given some of Google’s methodologies in their business model don’t align well with a product that is ad funded. This is not saying that a good organic result isn’t necessary. My experience was that the easiest way to push business was through Web 2.0 sites with rabid users.

Stumbling Blocks

Yada Yada Yada – You talk but everyone just hears you flapping your mouth. While readers demand content they only care about it if it’s meaningful. Writing a post just for the sake of getting something out there is a detriment.

M.I.A. – My biggest problem here. When you don’t want to fall into the “I say a lot but I don’t say anything trap” you can just as easily fall into the silent treatment and erode your base. I know after being laid off I was a lot more focused on other activities, and went 3 weeks between posts. General rule of thumb is if you don’t post once a week and you haven’t built a solid following they will likely leave.

Overly invasive monetization – The thing that gets you paid, is also the thing that your users appreciate the least about your site. Finding the right balance is key.

Conclusion

With the downturn in spending on advertising, its not as easy as it once may have been to watch those AdSense checks roll in. With the right focus on your offering, and a consistent approach of holding your viewers interests and being respectful of the presentation of the product offering there is still an opportunity for large return. Just remember for every website that claims they can give you the secret sauce your real secret to success is understanding a customer base and tackling their interests in a meaningful way.

It’s been a while since I saw something that really needed to be covered, and been immensely busy.

I came across this genius piece of technology and advertising this morning and just had to share.

So before you get to watch the video you have to watch an ad, nothing ground breaking there. What is a terrific idea is giving customers the choice of selecting which ad they do get served. I think this is terrific as a consumer who targets the ad they will be watching is likely going to be more receptive to the ad.

I’m sure this idea has been around for a while but seeing it on a mainstream site like MSNBC is great. It shows that media execs are starting to try and unlock a solid revenue stream online, something that will be necessary if we’re ever to transition media to the web.

Ever wonder how to get a project green-lit? Well fortunately for you I’ve had plenty of experiencing building these sorts of decks and am sharing it right here at MGMT Now. Please note we’re on a blog here so this PPT isn’t going to be the most graceful or amazing presentation of all time (I don’t have the time to do that for a freebie).

What you should come away with:

• How to structure a project document to get an investigation off the ground.
• Telling a compelling story
• Different aspects of a product/project that must be considered
• Easy, quick way to structure ideas to get what you want

See the PDF covering the presentation below:

Project Management 101