Magnolia... What???

Yesterday I was sent reeling. I was introduced to something that I just can't seem to wrap my mind around: Magnolia Pearl.*

I was shooting video for my buddy, Clover Carroll, out at Marburger Farm at Round Top yesterday for a web show he's putting together when we stumbled across a booth that was just buzzing with activity - Magnolia Pearl. There were women in what I would describe as various states of undress and disheveldness pouring through racks and shelves of what I thought were feed sacks.  It turns out the feed sacks were clothes.  And they were seriously lapping them up with gusto.
 
The interior design blogger we were filming, Holly Mathis, was well familiar with the brand, as was Rachel, Clover's wife (and co-host of the show).  They both loved Magnolia Pearl.

To me, Clover and our sound guy, it looked like... well, just old tattered crap.  As we were sitting around at lunch talking about it, Clover summed it up pretty well.  He said it looked like they should've broken out in a chorus of "It's a Hard Knock Life" at any moment.   My thoughts were a little more raw and less poetic, as usual.  I thought the clothes looked like what old west hookers would wear when they were hanging around the whorehouse during the day.

I've been thinking about it some more.  If I had to describe Magnolia Pearl I would say it's "Sharecropper Shabby Chic."  I happen to like the Shabby Chic look (I got to meet Rachel Ashwell while we were there, too... and couldn't help but wonder if she hangs around in Magnolia Pearl - I doubt it, but who knows?)

When I got home and mentioned Magnolia Pearl to Kristi, she, too, said she loooooved their stuff.

Say what??!!?

How could I not know that the woman that I love - the mother of my children - has a secret desire to dress like she's straight out of the Industrial Revolution? It's bad enough that we're poor enough to BE sharecroppers, but does she really want to look like one, too?

I was truly shocked.  How is it that all these ladies not only were totally in tune with this brand, but also looooooved them some Magnolia Pearl, and none of us guys had ever even heard of such a thing?

Shocked.  Just shocked.  I'm not shocked that something like Magnolia Pearl exists - I'm floored that ladies absolutely love it.

I get the irony of it all - it looks old and tattered and cheap, but it's actually new and expensive ($250 for a pair of bloomers).  I guess I can't see people actually wearing this stuff out anywhere - to the mall or to church or to the movies.  The ladies I saw walking around Round Top looked, well, ridiculous to my eye.  Maybe it's just a "working around the house (or around the farm?) kinda thing.  I guess that's one thing.  Maybe that's Magnolia Pearl's niche - "what to wear around the house to be comfortable when your furs are out being cleaned..." People would think I was nuts if I bought a pair of $250 ripped up and worn out sweat pants.

I make fun because I still just can't understand it. But then, I'm a jeans and t-shirt kinda guy.  I've never claimed to understand women's high fashion.

*Note: if anyone from Magnolia Pearl ever actually reads this, three notes about your website:
1. it's buggy in Chrome and Safari and scrolls very, very quickly by itself so that you can't actually see the images.  Could've been a Flash player error, but that's actually worse because your low-bandwidth site gives a 400 bad request error. In fact, almost every page other than the front page on your store gave me a 404 error.  You might want to look in to getting that fixed.
3. Try as I might (in three different browsers) I couldn't seem to add white bloomers or a white dress to a shopping cart.  Rose bloomers?  No problems there. But I had loooots of problems with your shopping cart. Seems like a kind of important thing to have working properly, no?  
3. Please, for the love of all this holy, make it easier to turn off the music on your site.  Sites that begin playing music by themselves are the worst things.  Ever.  Sites that play music and have no easy way to turn it off are even worse and are on par with those websites you go to where there are fifteen animated ads all flashing at you at the same time.

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.

Circling the RIM, er... Drain

From the LA Times:

Research in Motion announced five new BlackBerry smartphones, the first to run its new BlackBerry 7 mobile OS, on Wednesday in a bid to recapture market share and inject some new excitement into the company's products.

The devices will arrive at an important time for the Canadian company, one of the first to popularize email integration on a phone.

FIVE new phones????!!?? I'm sure THAT won't cause any confusion in the marketplace.

Memo to RIM: simplify. Have you learned nothing on the last three years???

I give RIM two years before they declare bankruptcy.

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.

HP Teams Up with... Communists?

From AdAge:

Hewlett-Packard is finding unusual comrades -- members of China's Communist Youth League -- to help expand its business in rural China.

"Rural China represents a huge market, about 700 million people and already today, about 100 million of them are online. They have access to the internet and engage. The rest are non-internet users, but they are still a huge opportunity," said Robin Seow, Beijing-based marketing director for HP's Personal Systems Group in China.

Regardless of the profits... Seriously, HP? You actually thought it would be a good idea to team up with the Communist Youth League? Were the Black Panthers, the KKK and the Hitler Youth busy?

Blockheaded Blockbuster

From Yahoo News:

Blockbuster was the national leader in the video rental business for nearly two decades. Now it is contemplating Chapter 11 to eliminate debt. The company lost $65 million last quarter. Its revenue continues to fall rapidly as firms such as Redbox and NetFlix (Nasdaq: NFLX - News) siphon off its revenue. Blockbuster has more than 6,000 stores, so it is hard to imagine that the company could disappear. But, there is some precedent, even if it is on a smaller scale. Blockbuster rival Movie Gallery said in February that it would close all of its 2,400 U.S. stores. Blockbuster's model of renting movies through physical locations has been destroyed by cable and satellite video on demand, DVDs via mail and dispensing machines. Blockbuster may still be around as a company that has movie kiosks and a small mail and Internet-delivered content business. But its brick and-mortar business is dead.

Wrong. Cable and satellite didn't kill Blockbuster. And for that matter, neither did Netflix or Redbox. Blockbuster killed Blockbuster. Blockbuster grew to prominence with cable as a competitor, and satellite offers little real choice. "727 channels, and nothing's on... " Since way before Netflix or Redbox, Blockbuster's overpriced rental structure and its abusive (and confusing) late policies are what killed Blockbuster. Had they simply lowered their prices across the board - not with a half-hearted "some things are a dollar and some things aren't" model they tried a couple of years ago - and simply did away with late fees, they would still be the industry leader. Redbox's success is a direct result of people actively boycotting Blockbuster's prices.

I don't buy the notion that people are done with brick-and-mortars, either. After all, people still have to physically get in the car and drive to the nearest Redbox. But people are willing to do it because the price is right. With Blockbuster's overwhelming selection advantage, imagine what kind of business they would be doing if they would simply adopt Redbox's pricing model.

Competing on price isn't easy. But if you're going to compete on something other than price, you'd better have something that people will pay extra for. An in-stock guarantee, for instance. Or a by-mail order system. Or a digital delivery system. Or rent one-get one free. Or something.

But no. Blockbuster said "we're Blockbuster. This is the way we do things. This is the way we price our movies. Take it or leave it."

And people have been leaving it in droves. RIP, Blockbuster. I won't miss feeling beaten up every time I walked out of one of your stores.

Reward Loyalty

From O2 (The mobile carrier that sells the iPhone in England):

iPhone stock will be extremely limited in the UK at launch and not everybody who wants one will be able to get one straight away. We want to make sure that our existing customers get priority so until at least the end of July, only existing O2 customers will be able to get an iPhone 4 from us.

There's a company that gets it. Reward the people who have gotten you there and focus on new customers second. That's quite a contrast to AT&T who, as I've said before, seems to have the motto "we've already got their money and they're locked into contracts. Let's bend them over at every opportunity so we can and focus only on new customers."

Treat your existing customers right and you'll have customers for life.

Kudos to you, O2.

New Sony Gadgets Take Aim at Apple

From the Wall Street Journal:

Threatened by Apple Inc.'s growing stable of portable devices, Sony Corp. is developing a new lineup of handheld products, including a smart phone capable of downloading and playing videogames, according to people familiar with the matter.

The Japanese electronics giant also is developing a portable device that shares characteristics of netbooks, electronic-book readers and handheld-game machines. The device is designed to compete against multifunction products such as Apple's coming iPad tablet, these people said.

Both the new smart phone and the multifunction device are expected to work with Sony's new online media platform, due to launch later this month.

How the mighty have fallen. Remember not too long ago - okay maybe about 15 or 20 years ago - when Sony made the flat-out coolest stuff on Earth? Everybody wanted a Sony Discman or boombox or TV or game console or... anything. It's sad that they're relegated now to playing the "me too! me too!" game to Apple like so many other formerly powerhouse companies.

When are these companies going to learn that they can't copy their way into beating Apple? That's not entirely true, actually. They do have to copy what Apple did to get where it is today. They need to come up with great products again that people actually want to use. They need to innovate, not just come up with an also-ran product and slap their name on it. A Sony (or a Microsoft or a feel-free-to-insert-a-company-name-here) has to stand for something in people's minds.

And the last thing we need is another online media platform, especially from Sony. They would be wiser to adopt another platform and add their weight to it.

Gatorade: A Case Study on How to Confuse Your Customers

From AdAge:

Gatorade is looking to innovate itself out of a sales slump and will spend some $30 million on product and packaging development to do so. The granddaddy of the sports-drink category is pushing forward with plans to introduce "G Series," a grouping of three product categories, while giving another facelift to its core product lines.

As part of the new product introduction, the core Thirst Quencher and G2 lines will also receive another facelift, the second in just over a year. Mr. d'Amore said the new packaging would be "more functional." The redesigned graphics will more prominently feature a low-calorie message for the G2 brand, which will have its calories reduced to 20 per 8-ounce serving, from 25. A spokesman declined to comment on the redesign of the Thirst Quencher products beyond saying that the brand is committed to G, the logo it introduced last year.

Then why change it? Gatorade, as well as its parent company Pepsi, just seems to be floundering around trying any stunt or change that will bring it sales in the short term. Pepsi reminds me of the comic book market in the '90s, when everything suddenly became about foil embossed holographic #0 die-cut covers. Everything was really, really flashy. Image comics was the worst about it. Oh, it sold boatloads of comics at first - until the novelty wore off. Pretty soon things settled back down to regular covers with story-driven issues inside. People were lured by the flash for awhile, but what people want is good, quality storylines and characters to read with their expendible money. And the same can be said of soft drinks. People are more concerned with dependable, consistent quality over the long run than a flash in the pan.

Just focus on the quality of the product, Pepsi, not gimmicks. And please develop a long-term strategy for your products that is built on the actual product rather than fads and marketing slight of hand. You're only confusing, well, everyone. And that leads to lower sales. People like the tried and true, especially in brand names they know and grew up with.

Gatorade has said this year's marketing efforts are on track, but sales and market share both fell in the first half, when the "What Is G?" marketing campaign was most prominent in the marketplace. In the first half of this year, volume dropped 18%, according to Beverage Digest, while market share dipped four points to 75%. Year-to-date volume is down 14% for the brand.

The reason both sales and market share have both fallen is because Gatorade is competing too heavily with itself and watering down the market. Al Ries said it best: "Then there’s Gatorade Tiger, with three flavors. Gatorade A.M. with two flavors. Gatorade Endurance Formula with three flavors. Gatorade Energy Bar with two flavors. Gatorade Nutrition Shake with three flavors. Gatorade Thirst Quencher with seven flavors. And Gatorade G2 with three flavors. Total: 23 flavors or varieties of Gatorade.

23 flavors? That's ridiculous. I'm assuming that includes the Gatorade Rain line. Or have they discontinued that? See what I mean? You can't just say "go get some Gatorade" anymore. It almost takes a college degree to figure out which Gatorade you want. Let me help them out: When I buy Gatorade for cycling, I still buy original Gatorade in either lemon/lime, orange or fruit punch flavors (just for variety). When I was mascotting, it was the same thing. I prefer the taste of Gatorade over Powerade, but I still stuck to those basic three flavors in the original formula. I tried the rain and the dew and the Tiger, but they didn't have the same effect that straight-up Gatorade did. And let me assure you that if there are any athletes out there who know about and value good hydration - it's mascots.

That's it. It's just that simple. Less is more. Wake up, Pepsi, and focus on why people drink your products and less on what will drive sales in the next quarter. Sales are going to slump, especially in a recession. But if you build a brand that people can depend on, the sales will be there for the long haul. Ask Coca-Cola.

Quote of the Day...

Brand New on AOL:

After making the announcement in May of this year, this upcoming December 10, 2009 AOL will become independent from Time Warner, nine years after the two merged to create one of the largest entertainment companies in the world. In that span of nine years, the online world that AOL ruled at the turn of the century, is a completely different organism, populated by people for whom AOL is a punch-line, or a sad reminder that they paid $10 to see You’ve Got Mail, or, most probably, people that have never used AOL at all.

My previous post on the subject is cross-referenced here for your viewing pleasure.

The Battle of the Piney Woods Moves to Houston

From the Houstonian:

The second oldest rivalry in Texas will have a new home next season as the Battle of Piney Woods will be moving to Reliant Stadium next year.

Sam Houston State University, Stephen F. Austin University and Lone Star Sports and Entertainment have come to terms on a four year contract for an unspecified amount of money.

This is an odd move and a genius move. Having the game in Reliant Stadium seems odd because it's such a big venue. The crowd is going to seem ridiculously small in such a large stadium.

On the other hand, from a marketing perspective, this is a genius move. The vast majority of the students at Sam Houston State come from the Houston area and SHSU still has the perception that it's only slightly better than a junior college. But stepping up its game and by presenting a more big-time, big-school image it might raise Sam Houston's perception and elevate its status - in the NCAA, in the minds of potential students and in the local media.

It worked very well for Texas State.

Obama's Iconography

I disagree with him somewhat. I think the DNC logo is amateurish and poorly rendered. Other than that, he's spot on. I posted about Obama's iconography during the campaign. So far, my observations seem to be holding up.

Kellogg to Brand Corn Flakes with Frickin' LASERs!!!

From Advertising Age:

Kellogg Co. is introducing new technology in the U.K. that allows it to burn its famous signature onto individual cereal flakes by using lasers.

The technology, which was developed in Britain, is being used in a trial to stamp out imitation cereals -- which Kellogg calls "fake flakes" -- by branding Corn Flakes with the company logo.

Helen Lyons, lead food technologist at Kellogg, said in a statement, "There has been an increase in the number of [private labels] trying to capitalize on the popularity of Kellogg's corn flakes. We want shoppers to be under absolutely no illusion that Kellogg's does not make cereal for anyone else. We're constantly looking at new ways to reaffirm this, and giving our golden flakes of corn an official stamp of approval could be the answer."

Yeah... but it's till just corn flakes! If your corn flakes taste just like your competitors, but they sell theirs at a cheaper price, you've got a problem. There are some things that people just aren't going to pay extra for, and adding expense to your product for additional (unnecessary) branding is a horrible idea. People might pay for a gimmick once, but if it has no bearing on the taste or the quality of the product, they're not going to buy it again.

I can hear Kellogg's market share hitting the floor already.

GM Returns to Form: Too Many Models at Too Many Pricepoints

Great article at AdAge:

Between now and 2011, GM will launch an astounding 25 models, according to CEO Fritz Henderson: 10 for Chevrolet, five for Cadillac and 10 for Buick-GMC.

"The problem isn't that 34 is too many models; it's the number of distinctive models," said Maryann Keller, an auto consultant who has authored two books on the company. "It just feels like the same old GM." She noted that several models under each of GM's brands are butting heads with similar models at sibling brands. For example, the new Chevrolet Traverse is up against its sibling at Buick, the Enclave, and GMC's Acadia. "The problem is they overlap and compete for the same buyer."

Exactly. It's not coincidence that it was most profitable when it was focused - when a Cadillac was a Cadillac and a Chevy was a Chevy. They were created for a very distinct buyer. All the auto makers have fallen into the trap of trying to be everything to everyone.

Appreciation is dictated by your surroundings

I got this in an e-mail from my grandma. It's very true and very deep. Find the Washington Post story here, complete with video of the Master playing.

Washington, DC Metro Station on a cold January morning in 2007. The man with a violin played six Bach pieces for about 45 minutes. During that time approx. 2 thousand people went through the station, most of them on their way to work. After 3 minutes a middle aged man noticed there was a musician playing. He slowed his pace and stopped for a few seconds and then hurried to meet his schedule.

4 minutes later:

the violinist received his first dollar: a woman threw the money in the hat and, without stopping, continued to walk.

6 minutes:

A young man leaned against the wall to listen to him, then looked at his watch and started to walk again.


10 minutes:

A 3-year old boy stopped but his mother tugged him along hurriedly The kid stopped to look at the violinist again, but the mother pushed hard and the child continued to walk, turning his head all the time. This action was repeated by several other children. Every parent, without exception, forced their children to move on quickly.

45 minutes:

The musician played continuously. Only 6 people stopped and listened for a short while. About 20 gave money but continued to walk at their normal pace. The man collected a total of $32.

1 hour:

He finished playing and silence took over. No one noticed. No one applauded, nor was there any recognition.


No one knew this, but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the greatest musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, with a violin worth $3.5 million dollars. Two days before Joshua Bell sold out a theater in Boston where the seats averaged $100.


This is a true story. Joshua Bell playing incognito in the metro station was organized by the Washington Post as part of a social experiment about perception, taste and people's priorities. The questions raised: in a common place environment at an inappropriate hour, do we perceive beauty? Do we stop to appreciate it? Do we recognize talent in an unexpected context?

One possible conclusion reached from this experiment could be this: If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world, playing some of the finest music ever written, with one of the most beautiful instruments ever made.... How many other things are we missing?

Microsoft Says You're Wrong and Stupid

Microsoft thinks that after Windows 7 debuts that people will change their perceptions of Windows Vista.

"I think people will look back on Vista after the Windows 7 release and realize that there were actually a bunch of good things there," [Steve] Guggenheimer said in a recent interview. "So it'll actually be interesting to see in two years what the perception is of Vista."

I'd fire that guy right on the spot. Who is he kidding? This is someone who has absolutely no clue about how the public's perception of a brand or a product work. Millions of people aren't suddenly going to change their minds that Vista wasn't a complete debacle, especially if Windows 7 is a better product. People just aren't wired that way. The only thing that would cause people to look back fondly at their good old Windows Vista days is if Windows 7 is a complete piece of crap. And for Microsoft's sake, let's hope that that's not the case.

Take Apple, for example. Perceptions of Apple are just starting to come back around to overwhelming positive after a decade of mismanagement and crappy products that began in the late '80s. The Mac still has a stigma that it's an overpriced computer, even though that hasn't been true for almost five years. And just last week I had to answer, yet again, the question "but what if I have to send files to someone on a PC? Does it run Microsoft Office?" For those who are wondering - Office files have worked seamlessly across platforms since at least 1998. It took almost a full generation for Apple's momentum to swing around. They've always had their rabid and loyal fan base, just like most companies who make products do. But we're talking about the general public.

But that makes my point. People, much less a complete society, just aren't going to all suddenly change their mind about something that is part of the zeitgeist. Richard Nixon was a pretty damn good president and did a lot of great things, but no one thinks about that. Think about Nixon and you think about scandal and corruption and shame. A couple of decades haven't even changed that perception.

Microsoft is kidding itself.

via Channel Web

Flavors of Booty Cream

This begs the question... "Does it come in chunky?"

The disturbing imagery of Barack Obama

With just hours left until the election, there's something that has really been bothering me, and that is how Barack Obama has gotten this far in this race. I can't quite put my finger on it, but there's definitely something that doesn't feel right about him. I don't know whether it's because he's a Socialist running as a Democrat or because we actually know so very little about him or because he seems to embrace imagery and symbolism that has run contrary to American ideals.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not a big McCain supporter either. In fact, I can't stand the guy, but I'm voting for him because at least with him we know what we'll be getting. And please save the "more Bush doctrine" crap. You know it's not true just as much as I do. McCain isn't a Bush guy - they've been bitter rivals since the 2000 primaries. "But he'll just tow the Republican line," you say? McCain is barely a Republican and certainly isn't a conservative. He's made a career of bucking his own party. Besides, the Republican party is in such an impotent state these days that there's not much of line to tow, anyway. The majority of Republican representatives and senators have compromised their principles at the alter of "bipartisanship" and have even outright betrayed their conservative principles, especially in the past few months. The lone exception is a representative - who happens to be my representative in Congress - named Michael McCaul.

But back to Obama. For months now I've been searching for words - trying to put my finger on exactly what it is that is so distressing to me about this guy. Being an artist - a visual guy, I was having a tough time. His marketing and delivery is slick, polished and more subtle than any I've ever seen before. People, the media especially, are treating him like a celebrity - like a rock star - like a god - and like a savior.


There are so many aspects to the marketing of this guy. The "heartland O" logo. The owning of the words "hope" and "change." The constant inspirational photography that pops up on the internet and in newspapers with the sun shining behind him or that shows him towering over the crowd while giving a speech. And the posters that carry his image. It's these posters that predate the logo and all the other imagery. And that's because I believe they were specifically designed to bring to mind, very subtly, other revolutionary images. It's the very core of his campaign, and it finally occurred to me why I'm so disturbed. his entire message, his entire philosophy is telegraphed in his imagery.



The images of him are reminiscent of Communist posters featuring radicals such as Stalin and Che Guevera. It's this kind of symbolism that I think is very telling, and very dangerous. Why am I so disturbed by simple imagery? Because i know that imagery can be very powerful, very evocative, very sly and very persuasive. I've also seen these posters hanging as banners and over-sized prints on the sides of buildings (in Austin) as far back as March. You haven't seen these things until you've seen them looming over you three stories tall like some kind of giant overseer - like Big Brother.

Even the day before the election, there's so much we don't know about Barack Obama. There's so much that feels like it's been off limits for whatever reason. As someone with a degree in journalism, it's unthinkable to me that reporters haven't asked Obama the really tough questions.

And it scares me.

My eyes! My eyes!!!!!

I have new thing to add to my list of top ten things I never wanted to see.... Bill Gates shaking his rump.

In case you haven't heard, Microsoft's new pitchman is Jerry Seinfeld. I'll wait a minute while the irony of that sinks in... done yet? no? ... okay. good.

Ad agency Crispin Porter & Bogusky out of Miami was hired to create a $300 million ad campaign to try to rejuvenate Microsoft's image and to complete with Apple's "Get a Mac" campaign. Their first task was to find a spokeman who just reeks of "fresh" and "hip" and cutting edge." Naturally, they picked Jerry Seinfeld (for kids in the audience, Jerry Seinfeld is a standup comedian who had a hit TV show that ended in 1998.) And the collective advertising and internet community said, "huh?" while Apple fanboys everywhere wet themselves with laughter since Seinfeld's apartment frequently had Macintosh computers laying around.

So a few weeks pass and we finally get to see the train wreck we were all waiting for:

I think parts of this ad are really, really funny. Jerry Seinfeld cruising around the mall eating a churro, for instance. The irony of Bill Gates shopping at a bargain basement shoe store wasn't lost on me - I just didn't think it was funny. But the best part of the whole spot was Bill Gates' lack of acting ability. And the fact that he's still using his 1977 mop-haired jail mugshot photo on his ID. That is what makes this spot funny.

Too bad Bill just retired and isn't the "face" of Microsoft anymore.

Where was this spot ten years ago? It would have been timely when Seinfeld's show had just gone off the air, while he was still on the top of everyone's collective mind. Bill Gates was still the face of Microsoft back then, which was in dire need of some good PR while it was knee-deep in its Internet Explorer anti-trust case.

There's no doubt that Microsoft needs a shot of positive PR. Following the Vista debacle, it's seen as a bloated, unwieldy giant that is out of touch with the mainstream. Choosing two aging icons of the '90s was a mistake. Someone like Jon Stewart would have been better. That would have also served as a subtle link - a little jab at Apple - because John Hodgman (PC) is a correspondent for the Jon Stewart show. Using PC's boss to pitch Microsoft would have been classic. That, and Stewart is still relevant and funny. Seinfeld ... not so much.

BTW- it should be noted that Bill Gates KNOWS that he's this wooden, dorky figure. He plays it well, and he's done a good job making fun of it in the past. Just check out his hilarious retirement video. He's definitely a better choice than Microsoft's current CEO, the always scary and never loveable Steve Ballmer. But Seinfeld? Seriously?

Microsoft continues to make a joke of their brand. Even though I'm an Apple guy, I still find it sad.