tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post2376802804847603651..comments2023-12-23T21:59:20.634-08:00Comments on The Ad Contrarian: Take The Refrigerator TestBOB HOFFMANhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05158827977385952634noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-81196782382004458642015-05-22T11:00:46.201-07:002015-05-22T11:00:46.201-07:00Here's some - https://econsultancy.com/blog/62...Here's some - https://econsultancy.com/blog/62903-consumers-believe-traditional-media-trumps-digital-for-ad-effectiveness-study<br /><br />http://www.wired.com/2013/07/email-crushing-twitter-facebook/<br /><br /><br /><br />Not exactly the place you'd expect to see these figures. And fort he record they all say -'we expected the results to be the opposite - it's a marketing trick. Wow - we were as surprised as you...blah.<br /><br /><br />There is load of other large reports on the hyperbole of digital marketing be it by McKinsey's or even Adobe.Jimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-83590026326435618472015-05-21T20:45:03.987-07:002015-05-21T20:45:03.987-07:00I'll put yachts aside, I don't work on thi...I'll put yachts aside, I don't work on this and don't have the data. But you're taking one of the most hyper niche market in the world there, and your supposedly diligent reading of how brands grow probably taught you a few things about these (I hope). <br /><br /><br />As for watches and luxury items, I'm really curious to know why you think physical availability doesn't play a big role. My largest client is LVMH group in China, and I regularly see the importance of physical availability, even for these luxury brands. They don't have to be (and should not be) ubiquitous in the sense of being available everywhere around town (perceived exclusivity is very important), but it's still of paramount importance for these brands to be available in as many areas where consumers would expect to see them. If a brand is not there, the competitor is more likely to sell. And, when you look at the data, you see that distribution and availability is still one of the key drivers of growth, it's just relative to their market dynamics. Even the top of the top expensive ones work very carefully on their availability, and look for smart ways to expand on it to reach their extremely niche clientele without setting up brick and mortar retail. <br /><br /><br />As for your case, I'd like to remind you that it is not "digital as a support" (a truism that applies to most media nowadays), but digital being "meaningless" - which it certainly is not. <br /><br /><br />I'm not sure what's resting, but it certainly is not a strong case.LeShannnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-46863884363548974012015-05-21T11:41:11.654-07:002015-05-21T11:41:11.654-07:00"Surely your reading of How Brands Grow surpa..."Surely your reading of How Brands Grow surpasses my understanding of these categories."<br /><br />I know. sad, isn't it?Guestnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-64498235086041145622015-05-21T11:35:03.150-07:002015-05-21T11:35:03.150-07:00"I'm yet to encounter a category that is ..."I'm yet to encounter a category that is not deeply about physical availability."<br /><br />watches. yachts. luxury items. not based on availability but on something else. care to take a guess? go on, I need a good laugh.<br /><br /><br />"Digital can help build brands, otherwise these wouldn't exist. The <br />biggest ones? Sure they're more traditional, and for very normal <br />reasons: they need the extra reach, the benefits of combining <br />touchpoints (1+1=3 in media), and the fact that traditional advertising <br />still works brilliantly well." <br /><br />I rest my case. digital is merely a support.Guestnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-6044101635729395012015-05-21T11:12:18.224-07:002015-05-21T11:12:18.224-07:00Funny, I'd say if you did a digital brand camp...Funny, I'd say if you did a digital brand campaign that didn't help build the brand,it's because it was a shit campaign, not because digital brand building doesn't work.<br /><br /><br />Yes, I totally acknowledge that's just a single, imperfect study. But it's also done by someone with no vested interest either way. In fact, he says they assumed the results would be the opposite at the beginning. Data is data, and until I see other studies contradicting this, I'll go with what I have.The Truthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-86051583663250729952015-05-21T11:04:59.708-07:002015-05-21T11:04:59.708-07:00That Stanford piece is an interesting article but ...That Stanford piece is an interesting article but I don't buy it. Hartmann says "That’s why for some really great ads — like ones we see during the Super Bowl game — we often can’t remember what brand it was” - I'd say that if you saw an ad and you can't remember what brand it was for, it's because it was a shit TV ad, not because TV ads don't work. His definition of what makes a "great ad" doesn't tally with mine. Also in the article: "The presurvey found that people who are consistently exposed to the internet have lower recognition of brands than those systematically exposed to television." But they said in the article adjusted out of the results the fact that TV was already doing a good job of brand recognition. I think the problem starts when people with a vested interest take articles like that as read, without interrogating them properly.Sell! Sell!http://sellsellblog.blogspot.co.uk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-30083857412223627282015-05-21T00:22:46.398-07:002015-05-21T00:22:46.398-07:00Great Article...A blog main source of revenue is i...Great Article...A blog main source of revenue is in most cases by <a href="http://www.myhoardings.com/" rel="nofollow"> Advertising</a>Geet choudharyhttp://www.myhoardings.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-35003905087289300962015-05-20T18:44:21.834-07:002015-05-20T18:44:21.834-07:00You've said it many times Bob: the Internet is...You've said it many times Bob: the Internet is great at fulfilling demand but lousy at creating it. Demonstrably true and at this point an ingrained behavior. And targeting does not equal opportunity to create demand.VinnyWarrennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-16655119540812427442015-05-20T17:20:25.682-07:002015-05-20T17:20:25.682-07:00Parameters so narrow they're meaningless don&#...Parameters so narrow they're meaningless don't lend for a discussion. Especially a discussion so broad as "you can't build brands with digital."<br /><br /><br />I notice you willfully ignored the link I posted to actual research that shows brand building is more effective in digital than traditional.<br /><br /><br />If we limit our discussion to all brands started in the past 20 years, I can point to many, many brands built on digital. How about Google - a brand built entirely online until they ventured into TV just a few years ago? Netflix was a brand that built a passionate following online. Warby Parker has already been mentioned. Yelp. OpenTable. Uber. Twitter. Facebook. Gilt.com. I could go on and on.<br /><br /><br />All those brands COULD have built their brand offline, but chose (very successfully) to build them either completely online or nearly all online.The Truthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-10810471272543673872015-05-20T17:03:40.994-07:002015-05-20T17:03:40.994-07:00So you can never have a discussion with parameters...So you can never have a discussion with parameters? Parameters are useful in that they stop people veering off topic, and draining the life out of the topic by pointing out every single minor exception.<br /><br />What you're showing is that parameters are no match for someone who's willfully ignoring them.<br /><br />if we limited our comparisons to companies started in the last 20 years only, the results would still come out in favor of traditionally built brands as you'd still limited to touting GoPro, a bunch of online stores and a handful of others..Yeah butnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-75251312025202620242015-05-20T15:59:17.447-07:002015-05-20T15:59:17.447-07:00The ratio is so large, because digital marketing h...The ratio is so large, because digital marketing has only been around for 20 years, while the majority of "big, non-web companies" have been around much longer. <br /><br /><br />I find it sad that you can't see how Bob gamed the system by artificially narrowing his criteria. If his premise - that brands can't be built by digital - was sound, it would apply for the majority of companies regardless. But if course it doesn't. So he sets up a straw man just to sound smart by knocking it down.The Truthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-15504837425558040482015-05-20T15:56:08.196-07:002015-05-20T15:56:08.196-07:00Digital is not a channel. And you need to re-read ...Digital is not a channel. And you need to re-read the post. Or list more than YOUR narrow selection of brands that have built themselves primarily through digital. The ratio of digital to traditionally built brands is so large it really renders your argument moot.Yeah butnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-62102759379767860252015-05-20T15:24:37.017-07:002015-05-20T15:24:37.017-07:00Your argument is you can't build a brand with ...Your argument is you can't build a brand with digital advertising.<br /><br /><br />Your "proof" is there are no big non-digital brands that have done so.<br /><br /><br />That's like arguing solar electricity is a failure because people who live where it rains a lot still use the power company.The Truthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-86183134816386241122015-05-20T15:12:05.694-07:002015-05-20T15:12:05.694-07:00Hey Morin, This is not your personal soap box. I&#...Hey Morin, This is not your personal soap box. I'm tired of you clogging up my mailbox with stupid comments that don't even indicate you understand the premise of my post. One more comment on this and you're out.bob hoffmanhttp://adcontrarian.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-5455212707673380832015-05-20T15:09:27.537-07:002015-05-20T15:09:27.537-07:00The only thing that's even remotely proving yo...The only thing that's even remotely proving your point is the artificially narrow parameters in which Bob set up this straw man of an argument. <br /><br /><br />My point is, ZERO brands are built entirely through a single channel. There are so many different interactions with a brand from a consumer standpoint, you can't attribute anything to a single channel - be it TV, digital or something else.<br /><br /><br />But as pointed out, you absolutely can build a brand PRIMARILY through digital. Will a primarily digital focus work for every brand (cheese for instance)? Of course not. But it will work for way more than this article claims.The Truthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-68483812593703163722015-05-20T15:01:07.302-07:002015-05-20T15:01:07.302-07:00You have your Go Pro example, which works on youtu...You have your Go Pro example, which works on youtube because of the product it is. Creating content for 1100 videos is easy and more often than not exciting viewing, showing off the product better than you could with 1 TV spot.<br /><br />They thing is, youtube makes sense for THAT brand specifically. How many cheese brands would that strategy work for?<br /><br />Nobody has said there aren't examples of successful digital campaign executions but screaming on and on about GoPro and a handful of other specific examples doesn't really prove your point so much as it proves ours.<br /><br />If you could rattle off 100 major brands all built primarily through digital you'd have an argument, but for every 5 or 10 you've mentined there are 100s built more traditionally.Yeah butnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-88026944589210329812015-05-20T14:28:26.865-07:002015-05-20T14:28:26.865-07:00For every wine.com example you have, that same onl...For every wine.com example you have, that same online store sells 1000's of products and brands that we're not built online.<br /><br />So yep, wine.com may have built it's brand predominantly online (though I'd imagine they send out many many coupons/DM pieces too to drive people to their site, some of which would be digital of course), the products you're actually buying far outnumber the web-native brands/store fronts that was initially clearly mentioned as a caveat we're most definitely not.Yeah butnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-59917775380170778852015-05-20T14:07:28.654-07:002015-05-20T14:07:28.654-07:00I'm not talking about the online/offline brand...I'm not talking about the online/offline branding of the wine I bought. I'm talking about the brand I brought it from.<br /><br /><br />I bought from Wine.com because I like their brand. I love the email recommendations they send and the digital brand-building they do. They're a friendly brand who communicates well and has positioned themselves as a brand that's very knowledgeable about everything they sell.<br /><br /><br />I could very easily go down to BevMo and buy from that brand. But to me, their brand is cheap, with semi-sleazy promotional gimmicks. As a brand, they don't come across as knowledgable about wine. They come across as trying to hawk me whatever they have in stock. That's not a brand I want to deal with - no matter how many TV and radio spots they run. (And they run a lot.)The Truthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-56246491446240550952015-05-20T14:02:52.179-07:002015-05-20T14:02:52.179-07:00True - throwing your TV spot on YouTube and thinki...True - throwing your TV spot on YouTube and thinking that's the sum of your digital branding is a bad idea. But that doesn't mean you can't use digital as your primary method of branding.<br /><br /><br />Of GoPro's 1100 videos, you could very easily edit hundreds of them down to a :30 or :60 and they'd make excellent TV brand spots. But just because they're on a digital channel now doesn't make them any less effective as branding.<br /><br /><br />In fact, one could easily make the argument that 3 million free views on YouTube - where you get quantifiable information on who watched, how much they watched, etc - is a lot more valuable than spending a ton of money to run a TV ad where you get 3 million "views" with no provable data to show for it.The Truthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-40802961647450962952015-05-20T13:53:17.481-07:002015-05-20T13:53:17.481-07:00I doubt a youtube video, shot purely for youtube w...I doubt a youtube video, shot purely for youtube would ever be placed during the superbowl. If it did happen, the spot would definitely have been created with a superbowl (or an TV) broadcasting in mind.<br /><br />Whereas it's easy to upload anything to youtube as it is seldom a big brands primary medium.<br /><br />In summary, taking a print ad, TV ad etc and merely broadcasting it via a digital channel is a poor use of the medium, and calling it 'digital' to make a point is at the very least disingenuous.Yeah butnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-3465633969067050232015-05-20T13:49:05.192-07:002015-05-20T13:49:05.192-07:00You may have bought them on Amazon, but was the wi...You may have bought them on Amazon, but was the wine you chose built digitally? And the popcorn? Unless you're completey oblivious to everything but digital banners and user reviews you didn't choose the brands you bought THROUGH Amazon based on digital advertising or brand building. If you claim you did, you're either in an exceptional minority or you're not recalling where you first encountered brand X.<br /><br /><br /><br />Buying popcorn via Amazon doesn't prove digital built a brad any more than buying one at you local supermarket proves that Tesco built a brand. <br /><br /><br /><br />Delivery channels, in this case Amazon, is not the same as an advertising medium. The vast majority of things bought online, people we're made aware of offline. Nobody is buying Seiko watches after hearing about them for the first time through online reviews.Yeah butnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-79907613991066974272015-05-20T12:53:03.781-07:002015-05-20T12:53:03.781-07:00Mack Weldon undies are a good example. I'm not...Mack Weldon undies are a good example. I'm not sure what you mean by "non-web-native" but I assume you mean physical goods. Anyway, I saw the ads on Facebook, went to the site, liked their pitch, tried a pair and now am brand-loyal. Will they become Hanes? I think it's possible. Maybe, at this point in history, they can't become a household name without mass media. But Twitter, Facebook and Youtube are on their way to becoming mass media anyway. In my usage, "the computer" is basically another tv network.Andy Bobrownoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-30115828934345293012015-05-19T21:27:33.008-07:002015-05-19T21:27:33.008-07:00I'm yet to encounter a category that is not de...I'm yet to encounter a category that is not deeply about physical availability. So what's your point?<br /><br />Mine is simply that I increasingly see a lot of fashion and cosmetics brands relying almost exclusively on digital marketing - and often on digital distribution. In China we see some brands doing extremely well only using these channels. Alibaba launched their own cosmetics brands using only Tmall distribution and online ad platform. <br /><br />Meanwhile, I see plenty of big, established brands in these categories relying increasingly on digital channels to maintain mental and physical availability. <br /><br />So digital can help build brands, otherwise these wouldn't exist. The biggest ones? Sure they're more traditional, and for very normal reasons: they need the extra reach, the benefits of combining touchpoints (1+1=3 in media), and the fact that traditional advertising still works brilliantly well.<br /><br />But then, what do I know? I only work for some of the largest leading brands in these categories. Surely your reading of How Brands Grow surpasses my understanding of these categories.<br /><br />The big lie in our industry is not that digital can work, it's that traditional doesn't anymore.LeShannnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-61734864684472191312015-05-19T21:15:43.628-07:002015-05-19T21:15:43.628-07:00Because they need the reach and digital media isn&...Because they need the reach and digital media isn't enough for big brands.LeShannnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5249997465016074955.post-82198665833887065592015-05-19T17:13:57.633-07:002015-05-19T17:13:57.633-07:00So if GoPro takes a previously digital-only video ...So if GoPro takes a previously digital-only video and runs it on the Super Bowl, is it not TV advertising?The Truthnoreply@blogger.com