Thanks to Scott Monty, head of Social Media at Ford Motor Company, for this insightful infographic. For more awesome social media advice and info from an acclaimed master of the art and science, check out his musings at The Social Media Marketing Blog!
Created by Voltier Digital for ScottMonty.com
We're absolutely convinced at Atomic Ideas that bullshitting consumers won't help our clients sell more stuff. Not surprising since our overarching raison d'etre is to take the BS out of brand strategy.
The problem is, many advertisers still think that bullshit will help them move the needle. Case in point, Burger King and their advertising agency Crispin Porter + Bogusky, the latest victim of BK's marketing malaise.
Yes indeed, they're getting dumped by Burger King (oh, and Groupon just dumped them too after another self-indulgent fiasco). But from the agency world perspective, many of us wish we could be just like CP+B. But honestly, why? Here is an agency that arguably does more to publicize and advance its own agenda through its strategic and creative executions than it does for its clients. If everything you do is designed to gain attention for yourself as much as for your clients, maybe there's a problem. Of course, we are also aware of the fact that even CP+B may have caved to the clients demands. After all, 300 million is an awful lot of momey no matter how big an agency you are.
For seven years, CP+B garnered recognition, awards and peer accolades, and also much criticism for its Burger King work... from "Subservient Chicken" to sometimes bizarre and creepy "King" commercials to "Whopper Sacrifice". The problem is, that apart from an initial boost in sales, Crispin basically failed to help BK sell more stuff in the long run... much like their predecessors. Burger King is famously famous for switching agencies when nothing goes their way.
To quote Ad Age:
"Before Crispin Porter + Bogusky, Burger King went through creative agencies like shit through a goose."
In our humble opinion, BK is as much to blame as its agencies. Burger King is a company that simultaneously dropped its "flame broiled" and "have it your way" differentiation in favor of... well, what? A guy in a mask? Most guys with masks are either terrorists or bank robbers. And if you can't have it your way at BK, well you definitely can't have it your way anyplace else. So what's the difference?
There is no question that "Have It Your Way" must have presented some difficult operational issues for Burger King. On the other hand, if they would have spent as much money figuring out how to make it work for their operators and franchisees as they did on the inane, useless advertising they have put into the marketplace over the past decade and more, they may have actualy gained market share against McDonald's and other competititors.
From our perspective, the real reason BK has gone through so many agencies is partly their fault. The idea that advertising can solve all a company's problems is completely fallacious. It's an excuse to cover up poor management, poor vision and a general misunderstanding of what consumers want and desire from a brand. On the other hand, Crispin's desire to make a splash for their own brand certainly didn't help them solve BK's business problems.
Most of what Crispin put out for BK was entertaining, sometimes bizzare, buzz-building bullshit, and it didn't work. Obviously, their client bought into it (and probably even asked for it). But at the end of the day, numbers show it did not communicate marketable truths about the product that would move the needle for the brand and help them sell more stuff. Both Crispin Porter + Bogusky and BK got a lot of attention, but for what? Alex Bogusky quit, and now BK quit them. Quit Pro Quo.
So now BK is looking for a new agency... again. Unless BK actually owns up to the fact that they (and maybe their products, management and operational isues) are a big part of the problem, rather than the agencies they hire on a regular basis, they will once again be pissing in the wind.
Hey BK, Atomic Ideas may be small, but we say what we think and we won't bullshit you or your consumers. Besides, we're fairly sure we would be a hell of a lot cheaper than all those big boys that have so far failed you. Give us a call if you're looking to actually sell some real Whoppers!
CREDIT: Thanks to animateit.net for the Bovine Excrement meter!
As we all know, money talks. So this week GenisysCredit Union debuted two new radio spots which feature a likeable, relatable character named "Cash" who is in essence, your hard earned cash - ie. your money! Targeted to "GenY" and "GenX" men and women, these spots, written and produced by Atomic Ideas, casually inform listeners of the benefits of Genisys Credit Union versus banks or other credit unions.
These spots also roll out Genisys Credit Union's new web address: genisys.me utilizing the just released ".me" suffix. Why use the new ".me" instead of ".com"? Because Genisys is all about you -- or as the consumer internalizes it, all about me!
In just two and a half days on the air, Genisys has already seen a bump up in auto loan originations -- the subject of the first two spots. Future spots will highlight other areas in which Genisys has a unique selling proposition or "marketable truth."
Take a listen. Then maybe take your cash to Genisys Credit Union!
With the first Chevy Volt rolling off the assembly line today in Hamtramck, Michigan (gateway to Detroit) -- which incidentally, requires a government incentive of $7500 per car to have any possibility of selling -- I have to ask the question, "Where's the government incentive to buy advertising services?"
I know it sounds silly. Why would the government support a for-profit business, like advertising?
To which I ask, "Why would they support a for-profit business like automobile manufacturing? Or a for-profit business like banking?"
I know, the argument goes something like, "if the car companies (and/or banks) go under, so does our economy." Well, what happens when advertising goes under??? How will companies sell more stuff? This is an important point because if they don't sell enough stuff, they go under -- and so does the economy!!!!
Advertising has lost (by several estimates) over 160,000 jobs that will probably never come back. That's 160,000 people not paying taxes, or buying cars, or putting money in banks. And you know what happens when people don't buy cars or put money in banks? That's right, the government bails them out!!
Where was the government when Doner cut hundreds of jobs? When BBDO cut thousands of jobs? When Campbell-Ewald cut hundreds of jobs? When the networks, newspapers and radio stations cut thousands of jobs? I could keep going, but you get the jist. Advertising agency blended rates have not increased in more than 10 years (and in some markets have even retracted), while at the same time, clients are cutting budgets and squeezing agencies to provide ever more service for the same dollar amount.
I'm not complaining. I'm just saying, as Sally did in A Charlie Brown Christmas, "All I want is what I've got coming to me. All I want is my fair share!" I'm not asking for a government bailout, just a government incentive for advertising. Maybe a tax break for advertisers who could then use the money to pay their agencies more, or at least use it to advertise more!
The Volt and Leaf get government subsidies because, "they help reduce our dependance on foreign oil and (supposedly) cut greenhouse gasses." A government subsidy for advertising would reduce our dependance on word of mouth which would (supposedly) cut CO2 (a greenhouse gas).
At Atomic Ideas (a Michigan advertising agency and idea factory), we're doing everything we can to stoke the fires of capitalism by supporting advertising in all it's various forms -- from :30 TV spots to Magazine Ads to Billboards to Social Media campaigns. Or as we like to say it, "Atomic Ideas, Saving Advertising, One Tag Line At A Time!"
Recent Comments