Possibilities

Great new ad from Nike.

What Would an Average Customer Think?

From AdAge:

My reaction to the first line: "Sweet, they're rolling back the price hike." Then: "Wait, they're not rolling it back." Then: "Wait, what? Two companies? I'm so confused."

That was almost exactly my initial reaction to Netlix's announcement, too.

Qwik...what????

From AppleInsider:

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings sent a letter to subscribers on Monday, admitting he "messed up" and announcing that it would spin off its DVD and Blu-ray-based mailing business as a new service dubbed "Qwikster." 

The company's changes come in response to a subscriber backlash that was spurred by higher prices for rentals of physical DVDs. Hastings said the pricing for combined streaming, via Netflix, and mailed rentals, from Qwikster, will remain the same as it is currently.

Too little, too late.  And a stupid name, to boot. Way to go, Netflix.

Out with the New at Old Navy

From AdAge:

Old Navy is on the hunt for a new chief marketer.



Amy Curtis-McIntyre, senior VP-marketing, quietly left the retailer earlier this summer after just more than a year in the job, a spokeswoman confirmed. "Given the challenges in driving traffic, Amy and Tom [Wyatt, Old Navy's president] agreed it was time to make a change in the marketing leadership," the spokeswoman said.

Old Navy, which spent $221 million on measured media last year, according to Kantar, introduced a new campaign, "Old Navy Records: Original hits. Original styles," in February. The campaign, introduced by Ms. Curtis-McIntyre, replaced the "Supermodelquins." Old Navy worked with music house Honor Roll on the campaign as well as industry heavyweight Joseph Kahn, who has won several MTV Video Awards and a Grammy. The commercials feature original tracks from various bands.

Wow. Who saw this coming? Oh, yeah. That's right...

I once didn't get hired to a marketing director job when I was asked what changes I would make and I told them, "none." The program was working, so much so that the person whom I would've replaced was hired away based on that success. They couldn't believe that I said I wouldn't make any changes. Every other candidate had come in with a list of changes they would make. I, on the other hand, said I would spend a few months researching the success of the current plan and familiarizing myself with it before making any tweaks. They were stunned and hired someone else based partly on that (and based partly on the fact that I said I didn't want to delegate everything and would still be involved in the creative.)

And you know what? Their next two marketing campaigns have sucked. When new creatives come in, their first instinct is often to dismantle or piss on everything the previous person did before. But many times that's completely unwarranted, especially "if it ain't broke."

I do, however, fully expect the next Old Navy marketing chief to burn Ms. Curtis-McIntyre's legacy to the ground and start over on the ashes. And rightly so.

My New Favorite Theater: Alamo Drafthouse

http://youtu.be/1L3eeC2lJZs if you're seeing this on Facebook

Waaaaay not safe for work, but worth every second.

The Difference is that No One Is Going To Die From Bad Creative

From AdAge:

Take a look around the room at your next gathering of professionals. Each of the following is classified as a "professional" based on experience, education, certifications and credentials.

Lawyer: college + law school + a little thing called "The Bar"
Architect: college + apprenticeship + test for licensing
Doctor: college + med school + internship + residency + lots of tests

Now, let's take a look at the training, testing and certification of an account executive, graphic designer or other agency professional. (I will pause for a moment so you can imagine the sounds of crickets breaking the silence.) Yep. All you need to call yourself an art director or copywriter is a computer, phone and a copy of "place any do-it-yourself marketing book here."
Even Realtors and interior designers require testing and certifications to practice their trade, and it just seems wrong that our industry does not require the same amount of quality control. In the end, I guess the question we need to answer should be, "Is what we do important?" How can we expect clients to respect us if we don't even take our industry seriously enough to insist on testing and licensing?

What about continuing education? Yoga teachers and speech pathologists are but a few of the professionals that are required to attend continuing-education classes to maintain their licenses. Yet advertising and marketing professionals have no such requirement. I don't think the human body has changed nearly as much as our industry in the past 10 years.

Old Navy Retires Supermodelquins

From AdAge:

Old Navy's plastic people are going into retirement with the launch of a new campaign, "Old Navy Records: Original hits. Original styles," today. The campaign is slated to run throughout 2011 and will include half a dozen original tracks, as well as a tie-in with mobile app Shazam.

The Supermodelquins, introduced by CP&B two years ago, was a successful campaign that put Old Navy "back on the map," said Ms. Curtis-McIntyre, senior VP-marketing. "It was a big dive back into mass marketing for Old Navy and it did a lot of positive things for us. "

I love it when companies kill campaigns that are clearly popular and are working.

And my son is going to be pissed. I can't tell you how many hours we've spent playing with the mannequins at the front of the store while Mommy shops.

Every Super Bowl Spot in 2 Minutes

Open Letter to Santa's Wonderland

Dear Santa's Wonderland in College Station,

You've finally done it. You thought you were clever. You thought you were slick. You thought that you could continue bending us over year after year and that we wouldn't notice. You were wrong, jack. You've pissed me off again, and this time I'm taking to my blog (and to Facebook) to spread the word about your greedy crap.

It wasn't bad enough that you've been raising prices year after year so that it now costs almost $100 for my family to come out for a visit. It wasn't enough that you added a charge just to get in to "Santa's town" despite the fact that once inside the only thing that one can do for free is to sit by the fire in the middle. Then another charge for Santa. And another to see the lights. And another for the kids to ride the donkeys. Then there's food. And shopping. And kettle corn. And cocoa. Nickle and dime, nickle and dime, it's death by a thousand paper cuts with you isn't it?

And I've written you e-mails in the past that have gone unanswered (nay, ignored) regarding my displeasure with your exorbitant pricing. But yet Santa's Wonderland has remained part of my family's tradition in spite of your greedy crap. Every year, I've swallowed my pride and have agreed to bring my family out just because you have the best Santa anywhere. But this year, I've had enough - and here's why:

I got your e-mails that proclaimed "save money and time by buying your tickets online!" According to your website, I would be saving $2.00 per ticket. There are four of us in my family, so I thought "why not? Saving $8.00 is something, at least." So I proceeded to your (crappy) website to pre-order my tickets. That's where I saw this offer:


So I go to order, and I find this:


I'm just about to click "continue" when I happen to notice this at the top of the page:


Ebenezer Scrooge would be proud, indeed, you slimy S.o.B.s. That $2.00 per ticket savings is all but erased by a $1.50 per ticket "service fee." That's deceptive advertising at its finest.

I just want you to know that I'm going to bring my family out tonight because we already promised the kids we would and because I (unlike you) am not into pulling the rug out from under people at the last minute. But this will be the last year I bring my family - or recommend you to other families - unless you get your act together.

What you need to do is to not charge people just to come in and look around. Drop that stupid entry fee, or at the very least give people something for it, such as a free bag of kettle corn or a cup of hot chocolate. I know, I know... as you state on your FAQ page

"there are considerable costs associated with creating the "Ultimate" Texas Christmas experience. Christmas lights, holiday displays, electrical supplies and personnel are just a few to mention."

I understand that you have overhead, but you don't see the mall charging admission at Christmas time just to cover the cost of decorating, do you? They have a Santa, too, you know.

So there it is. I wish you the best of luck - I really do. In a few years when your attendance starts to dwindle because people can't afford to pay through the nose to see some Christmas lights and an Elvis impersonator, send me an e-mail and ask me to come back. And don't try to pull a fast one like you did this year, either. People love Christmas. People love to have a good time and see pretty lights and take their kids to see Santa. But people don't like to be raped at Christmas, even in the name of "overhead." And people really, really don't like deceptive offers that come with hidden fees.

Bed Intruder Song Guy Meets Sex Offender App

Remember when I told you that the Bed Intruder Song was destined to be a classic?

Check this out - in a stunning display of genius marketing, a new sex-offender tracking app for the iPhone features Antoine Dodson, the star of the "Bed Intruder Song" as its pitchman.

Pure genius.

Subtlety

Genius post from Seth Godin:

Subtle is a cousin of beautiful.

Subtle design and messaging challenge the user to make her own connections instead of spelling out every detail. Connections we make are more powerful than connections made for us. If Amazon and Zappos had been called "reallybigbookstore.com" and "tonsofshoes.com" it might have made some early investors happy, but they would have built little of value.

Subtle details demonstrate power. Instead of being in an urgent hurry to yell about every feature or benefit, you demonstrate confidence by taking your time and allowing people to explore. They don't put huge banners on the Hermes store, announcing how good the silk is and how many famous people shop there...

And subtle messaging communicates insider status. I don't have to say, "Hey I was in Skull and
Bones too! You should hire me!" Instead, a subtle (secret) handshake does all the talking that's needed.

It's tempting to turn the dial all the way to 11, the make everything just a bit louder. The opposite is precisely what you might need.

I'm aware of the oxymoronic nature of spelling out details about subtlety. At least I didn't explicitly point out the Spinal Tap reference.

You and Your Johnson

Thanks to Ron for sharing.

FaceTime

The FaceTime introduction ad is one of the best ads I've ever seen.

Good advertising evokes emotion, impulse and reaction. This one does all that in a very beautiful, classy way.

Amazing Ad from Nike

I'm not a soccer guy, but then, this isn't really a soccer ad. It's simply amazing.

Swagger Wagon

Great video from Toyota. I haven't been a huge fan of the Sienna family spots, but I thought this was very clever, funny and very well done.



Thanks to Kristi for sending me this motherfatherin' video.

New Sharp TV Commercial is Not Only Creepy, But it Also Might Disrupt the Space/time Continuum, Resulting in an Alternate 2010

It begs the question: how can you show a better TV experience on an old (albeit HD) television?



From AdAge:

The new commercial, featuring actor George Takei of "Star Trek" fame, not only makes little attempt to demonstrate the product difference, it comes within a whisker of self-consciously pointing up the absurdity of attempting to demonstrate the product difference.

After all, showing superior color on a TV commercial is a visual tautology; the picture quality is confined to the picture quality of the set being watched. This leaves it only for the ad to imply (i.e., fake) superiority by splashing all sorts of bright, vivid primary and secondary colors on the screen, as luminously as possible.

The net net of all this is that a pretty good idea -- seeing it to believe it -- is largely squandered by all the goofy misdirection. This would include the casting. Takei may or may not retain some futuristic Mr. Sulu resonance, but if so, it is not exploited here. He's just a strange guy with a deep voice, dyed hair and a vaguely creepy sense of humor.

Times must be tough for George Takei.

Miller to Use Pre-Prohibition Recipe

From MSN:

Batch 19 is a new beer being test-marketed by MillerCoors, and it has an interesting gimmick: It's based on a recipe that dates back to before Prohibition.

Batch 19 is being marketed as a "true, authentic, original beer," and it has a great backstory: A master brewer at MillerCoors unearthed the recipe in Coors' archives, and discovered that it was used to make beers before 1919. Hence, the name Batch 19.

Sounds kinda cool, actually. But then there's this:

MillerCoors is trying all kinds of stunts to improve its sales, including using a new bottle with grooves inside the neck that supposedly make for a better aroma and flavor...

I wish they would quit with the crappy-tasting beers, soft drinks, foods, chips, candies and other things that are just gimmicks. Just make a good product and become a legend.

Maybe It's Time For a Moratorium on People-in-Their-Underwear Ads

From AdAge:

After running back-to-back ads in the Super Bowl utilizing the same creative theme -- people walking about without any trousers -- CBS has agreed to give one of the marketers involved additional ad time to make up for the gaffe, according to a person familiar with the situation.

I noticed the similar ads when they ran during the Super Bowl and wondered if any make-goods would be offered. Interesting that CBS chose to offer them only to Dockers.

But the underlying issue is this: the creative just wasn't original, and it was juvenile. Sure, underwear is funny (using giant-sized underwear was one of my all-time favorite gags when I was mascotting), but when everybody starts dipping into the same joke well, it's time to move along or risk what Dockers is experiencing - no one will remember your message, especially if someone else has a better crafted message (even if they're not competitors or even in the same category, as is the case here.) And in this case, the CareerBuilder underwear spot wasn't even new. It was Dockers with the wholly unoriginal idea. CareerBuilder should be the one getting the make-good. Actually, the Super Bowl audience should be the one getting a make-good for having to put up with either spot.

And CBS should know better, too. They know exactly what order the spots will run in the Super Bowl and all the spots are screened ahead of time. You would think somebody would have clued in to the similarity of the spots. I guarantee that if there had been two lighting farts commercials back to back, there would have been hell to pay.

So Why Not Google?

Thanks to everyone for the pushback on my post yesterday regarding my favorite Super Bowl spots. There were some great honorable mentions including the Doritos "House Rules" and "Samurai" spots. The Samurai, while not a great spot over all, get the mention for great editing.

And in a stunning turn of events, one of you (and you know who you are, Steve) even nominated the Betty White Snickers ad. Just because it was Betty White. Now had Betty White been the one doing the tackling, it would have been a lot more unexpected and funny. And so Betty.

But why not Google? The press has been going ga ga over the Google "Parisian Love" spot. But I was less than impressed. Don't get me wrong - it was a nice enough ad. It didn't have any hairy dudes in their underwear or farting horses, which was good. It was at least classy ("stay classy, Mountain View..."). But my problem is that it was an ad for Google search. And that's it.

Google is synonymous with internet search, and has been for years. Microsoft made a lot of noise this year about its Bing service, but despite their best efforts it hasn't really taken off. And I don't expect it will, either. Can you imagine someone saying "just bing 'B+W filters?'" No. But "just google 'Sheryl crow toilet paper'" sounds natural. But I digress. The fact is that Google didn't need to spend two million dollars on a Super Bowl ad. Everyone already uses their service for what they were advertising. And those that don't *cough* Harris *cough* don't because they like the thrill and the danger of having to perform the same searches over and over without getting the most relevant results.

Had Google used the spot to include some of its other services, such as gmail or Google maps or YouTube or BlogSpot or Google Calendar, or Chrome, the ad would've been much more effective. What Google seems to be building is a one-stop shop for your digital life. Much the way that Apple envisioned the Mac a few years back as your digital hub, Google seems to envision itself as the place to get and store information on the web, and now a way to have it delivered, as well. They're making it so that if you want to - if you're a Googlebot, that is - you don't have to go anywhere else on the web for, well, anything. But search? Come on. This ad would've been amazing in 1998. But in 2010, I'm not impressed with a full minute of watching someone use Google to search the internet, even though it did tell a nice story.

So nice ad, Google. But not good enough to make the Destructo Top 5©®(patent pending). And I'm still wary of you. But that's a topic for another time.

My Favorite Super Bowl Commercials

So everyone can quit flooding my in-box asking me...