Accidental Branding

Digital media genius Cory Treffiletti (not just a smart guy but, more importantly, a regular TAC reader) wrote a recent post about a new book he reviewed entitled "Accidental Branding".

While I haven't read the book (it has not been published yet), it appears to be about something I have discussed here before -- that branding, to a large extent, is a by-product.

Here's an excerpt from a piece on The Ad Contrarian website called "Everything You Need To Know About Branding On One Little Page."

You want to have a strong brand? Quit “branding”. A strong brand is a byproduct. It comes from doing other things right. Make sure your product is excellent. Make sure you're taking good care of your customers. Make sure your ads differentiate you. That's what builds brands...

The thousands of companies in America who think they’re going to be successful if they just get their “brand” right are nuts. You’ve got to get a whole lot of other things right first.

If you do, the brand will take care of itself. If you don't, all the "branding" in the world won't help.

Branding's Final Absurdity

There's very little fun left in the ad business, but one of the big chuckles we still get (secretly) is watching our clients go through idiotic "branding" exercises.

These con games last for months, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and generally have less impact on business than cleaning the drapes. Nonetheless, there are very clever companies out there making zillions of dollars convincing businesses that all they need to do is "fix their brand" and all will be well.

I can only compare the pain of participating in one of these exercises to putting on ski boots and watching Cats.

Now branding has reached the height of absurdity. Great Britain has embarked on a re-branding program. This is not a joke. Part of the process, introduced by Prime Minister Gordon Brown's government, is to find out "what does it mean to be British?" Well, Gordo, it used to mean you had an empire to run. Now it apparently means you have nothing better to do than sit on your fat ass and engage in the same type of moronic navel-gazing usually reserved for overfed CMO's.

To poke fun at this idea, the cynics at The Times of London sponsored a slogan writing contest for their readers for a new British "brand." My favorite entry: "At Least We're Not French."

A representative of the British government said that after writing a "statement of values", the government would... hold “an extensive and intensive” period of consultation with regular citizens on what being British means to them. Then it will convene a “citizens’ summit” of 500 to 1,000 people who will "deliberate on the matter."

Get out the ski boots.

Murder Most Productive

In Death by Branding TAC asserted that Southwest Airlines was on the way to ruining their brand with "branding."

What makes their campaign so awful is that they're trying to convince business travelers that flying Southwest will make us more productive. Right. That's the big airline issue for me. Not price. Not schedule. Not comfort. Not reliability.

"Bob, what airline you wanna take?"
"I don't know. Which one makes me more productive?"

It's such a moronic strategy, it can only have come from an account planner.

As a service to the marketing department at SWA, thought I'd give them one traveler's list of the top 10 things I consider when choosing an airline:

1. Hope I don't die.
2. Hope I get an upgrade.
3. Hope the toilet ain't too stinky.
4. Hope I don't sit next to a talker.
5. Hope it leaves on time.
6. Hope I don't sit next to a laptop maniac.
7. Hope I don't sit next to a smelly fatty.
8. Hope I don't sit next to a smelly fatty laptop maniac talker.
9. Hope I don't die.
10. Hope I don't die.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE AD CONTRARIAN

Death By Branding

Southwest Airlines better be careful. They have been a great example of how the best way to build a brand is with product advertising. They are now on the road to proving how the best way to kill a brand is with "branding."

Here we have an airline that offers the worst flying experience in the nation. But they haven't wasted their money trying to make us love them. Instead, they have wisely spent their money getting us to fly them.

They have given us specific, concrete reasons to fly with them: lower fares, more flights, more convenient destinations. As a result, they have actually built a meaningful brand—a brand that stands for something concrete and discernible—while United and American, et al, with all their "brand" advertising, stand for nothing.

But lately Southwest's advertising has the smell of "branding" all over it. They are trying to change our attitudes about them. Good luck. Here's a tip for the head marketing honcho: No one gives a shit which airline they fly. They fly the one with the best price at the best time. End of story.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE AD CONTRARIAN

Brand Tinkering

As we mentioned in a recent post, tinkering with the brand is way more fun than solving real business problems.

Solving problems requires unpleasantness. Floors have to be swept and walls have to be painted. People have to be fired. Systems have to be changed. Products have to be redesigned.

Brand tinkering, on the other hand, is generally quite agreeable. All it requires is money and a bunch of congenial meetings. Hire some branding consultants. Appoint a task force. Interview "stakeholders". Conduct focus groups. Have an off-site or two at a nice hotel.

Then start reporting the "learnings". Fire up the PowerPoint projector. Share the results. But remember, everyone's point of view is valid!

Best of all, if there's any real work to be done, it'll be done by the consultants who'll give you a nice fat report to quibble over for months.

Unfortunately, after the money is spent and the naval-gazing brand babblers have gone home, someone still has to sweep the floor and paint the walls.

(For more on this see Everything You Need To Know About Branding On One Little Page)

SUBSCRIBE TO THE AD CONTRARIAN

Web Films vs Bagels

I had a chance to stay at a Ritz-Carlton last week. The convergence of two recent posts -- Ritz Bits and The "Brand Problem" Problem -- came together in a perfect storm.

I stayed for 2 nights and had no turn-down service either night. I had horrible French toast for breakfast, made with stale bread. I sent it back and asked for a bagel. I got a stale one.

Meanwhile, Ritz is spending lots of time and money to enhance their brand by using a Hollywood director to create long-form on-line videos for their website. Here's some free advice. You want to enhance your brand? Cancel the films and serve some fresh bagels.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE AD CONTRARIAN

The "Brand Problem" Problem

There was a time in America when every problem was a "communications" problem.

If you couldn't get along with your husband, you weren't communicating. If your kid was incorrigible, you probably weren't on the same wavelength. If your boss didn't like you, you just didn't communicate well with him. There were no problems of substance, just problems of communication.

Well, the truth is, sometimes your husband is just a pain in the ass, and your kid is a nasty little brat, and your boss thinks you're a worthless shit. And all the communication in the world won't help.

Today we have the business version of this. Instead of communication, the problem in marketing today is always "the brand." So if your products are crappy, or your stores are dirty, or your service is lousy, or your business strategy is stupid, you -- my friend -- have a brand problem! Call in the branding consultants. Pay them a few hundred thou and let them study your brand for a few months.

They'll give you a big fat report filled with charts and graphs and the latest up-to-the-minute buzzwords and cliches. And if anyone asks what you're doing about the problems you can make a nice little PowerPoint presentation.

Tinkering with the brand is so much more pleasant than solving the problems.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE AD CONTRARIAN

Big News from Brandweek

Stop the presses! Here's some huge news. Consumers favor brands that offer them good quality at a low price! Oh my god!

"The 26,000 men and women polled... showed a strong inclination to brands that either saved them money or were perceived as having good value" is how Brandweek reported it.

A company called Brand Keys did the survey. Apparently, they had to poll 26,000 people to figure this out. Ya think we could have saved these people some money?

But wait. There's more. Just the name of the survey tells you it was run by nitwits: The "2007 Brand Keys Customer Loyalty Engagement Leaders List" is what it's called.

Congratulations to Brand Keys on squeezing every horrible cliche and buzzword in the marketing lexicon into one survey title. A masterful achievement. And just for the record, what language is that?

Oh, and one more thing -- a warning to anyone who uses the word "engagement." I'm going to come after you. I mean it.

Note to Brand Keys and Brandweek: In case you haven't read "Everything You Need To Know About Branding on One Little Page" on The Ad Contrarian web site (and shame on you if you haven't!) here is an excerpt:

'You want to have a strong brand? Quit “branding”. A strong brand is a byproduct. It comes from doing a lot of other things right. For example:

1. Make sure you’re selling excellent products.

2. Make sure you're taking good care of your customers.

3. Make sure your ads demonstrate how you are different and better than your competitors.'

Didn't need 26,000 people to figure that out.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE AD CONTRARIAN