I came across an interesting item today- a  column by Priska Neely  from the NPR website. It  addresses the issue of product placement, but includes the “down side” you don’t often see.

It is no longer a surprise to anyone that companies pay big bucks to get visual exposure for their brands in popular movies and television shows. One of the most often-cited examples is American Idol;  it started with simple Coke cups on the table in front of each judge, but has progressed to the point where the show sometimes appears to be taking place inside one big, glitzy Coke machine.

It’s certainly an interesting topic. Quick quiz – can you remember the type of candy Kramer was eating when he dropped a piece from the observation balcony over an operating room and it wound up inside the patient? (First correct response wins a package of that candy from me!)  What brand of vehicle did Jack Bauer drive during all those seasons of “24” ?  (First correct response on THAT one will have to settle for a hearty “attaboy.”)

The reasoning is obvious; what brand wouldn’t want to be the “hero”  or at least bask in the glow of a cool scenario. But what about those scenes in which the pictured products are less than heroic? As the article points out, producers are largely free to use any branded products they wish without getting any special permission from the company.  Do you want YOUR brand to be the alcohol of choice for a drinking airline pilot?  How about a closeup of your chainsaw brand in the next slasher movie?

I find the whole topic fascinating; I have been in advertising long enough Read the rest of this entry »

I came across an interesting post at mashable.com discussing the electronic coupon voucher program Groupon.  Apparently, the tough economy and stiff Groupon pricing requirements are putting a squeeze on some small businesses, who feel they have to try it, but wind up getting buried, losing money, and regretting the decision.

In one example, a London bakery owner was really, well, frosted when she was forced to hire extra help to bake 102,000 cupcakes to satisfy the Groupon demand, and wiped out her year’s profit in the process. Some surveys cited in the story claim that 70% of small businesses “hate” Groupons!

One has to make all kinds of wild assumptions to draw conclusions on this, of course, but I have seen claims (even by business owners themselves) that had they invested the same money in advertising instead, they could have drawn enough new customers at full or nearly full price to deliver more incremental profit, and have a better chance of converting new customers into loyal, long-term ones.

I find this a fascinating discussion. It seems intuitive that Groupon users (and I’m not talking down here – I have used them and will continue to do so) are looking for deals. And unless you really present some incredible experience during their visit, they are likely to go somewhere else to use another deal rather than come back to your establishment and pay full price next time.   On the other hand, as some point out, it is your job as a business owner to provide them an experience special enough to change that equation.

I agree with both positions. (I KNEW I should have gone into politics.) I do know that, as a consumer, I feel a bit awkward when using Groupons, although I know it was the merchant’s decision to offer them. As an advertising professional, I feel as though the discussion is a bit “apples and oranges.”  A well-strategized ad campaign (based on a real point of difference that matters to the consumer, of course) is the best way to attract the kinds of customers you are most likely to keep. A Groupon-type promotion is likely to generate larger numbers of customers in the first place, but most of them will continue to ignore your business as they did before once they’ve gotten their “deal.”

It’s just a very intriguing discussion. What do you think?  Is the answer a Groupon “Light” service that offers a bit less of a deal so business don’t risk bankruptcy when they try it? Would a different type of promotion – or advertising – attract the customers who are willing and able to spend the money your product or service is worth in the first place, for a better chance at long-term success or survival?

Let me know what YOU think about the whole thing – I’d really like to know!  And for the next 14 days, I will allow you to post two comments for the price of one!

For years, those of of us who work in (or teach) marketing communications have been relying upon a few aging case histories of public relations disasters. Our moldy old textbooks have presented the Tylenol “tainted capsule” deaths in Chicago as an example of a company handling things quite well. The Exxon Valdez oil spill, however, has wallowed around in the “what not to do” end of that spectrum.

Recently – and unfortunately – we’ve come up with some marvelous new candidates we can use to update those textbooks. Do the names “Toyota” or “BP” ring any bells?

I don’t for a moment claim that either of those situations is done; obviously they are not. But I’ve seen plenty of Toyota’s “we’re working hard to fix things” commercials. And that Tony Blair-ish CEO from BP  is on TV more often than Two-and-a-Half Men, and seems every bit as sincere as Charlie Sheen’s character in that sitcom.

But as I watch those damage-control  efforts, it strikes me that whatever they say, it’s a little too late. The public’s opinion about these companies was largely formed long before either of these situations hit the news. And that’s why Toyota is already enjoying sales boosts again, while BP continues to dominate the headlines.

I did not do this research, but wish I had. Let’s say a year ago, you asked 100 people what they thought about each company. I’m quite convinced that the general opinion of Toyota would have been something like this (excluding those still guided by general anti-Japanese, buy-American sentiments):

“They sure make dependable cars, if not very exciting ones. I wish American car makers could really get the quality down like that, but they just can’t seem to do it. I guess if I wanted a car that would last longer, have good resale value, and not spend much time in the shop, I’d go with Toyota.”

For BP, my guess is the composite answer would be something like this: Read the rest of this entry »