Comments on: Why Can’t Johnny Brand?

By: Alston

Alston — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 00:48:29 +0000

As a small business owner, I’ve got no money in my budget for branding. Branding seems to me to be a term cooked up by advertising agencies to muddy the water when their ads don’t perform.

Show me the money. I don’t want a brand on my rear end. I want some money in my back pocket.

I can’t track the source of every penny we generate, but I can track most of the dollars. The metrics available from an online campaign can be very precise. The concept of branding is just a desparate attempt to get me and other business owners to ignore the statistics and buy more ads.

By: Jim Novo

Jim Novo — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 00:15:07 +0000

John, thanks for the comments, good to have a “mixologist” looking over my shoulder. Yes, the pre-disposed part in the intereting part, isn’t it? And perhaps we could get people to be predisposed by using (dare I say it) – TV, the great pre-disposer? I have some examples coming up.

The classic example of the “compare” function you mention is Progressive Insurance, (I believe) the first major player to actually show you the prices from the competitors when you get a quote from them.

Your last sentence is a major challenge for people I think, they are so used to measuring single “campaigns” at this point as opposed to the cumulative effects of a messaging strategy. Not sure that will change anytime soon…

Ron, this whole area of what I’d call “less friction” in terms of comparing notes on products really runs to the heart of what a Brand is or can be, I think. Calls for a bit of a change in Brand land thinking, from “telling” to “showing”. It’s the main reason I think “Brand” isn’t created now until there is trial, an actual experience of some kind. Similar to John’s ”evaluation”, but more tangible, and after the evaluation.

I’m also thinking web sites are becoming a proxy of sorts for actual product usage, especially in services: “If their web site sucks this much, their service probably sucks too”; I believe you’ve pointed to some of this effect before in financial. More on this down the road…

Thanks both!

By: Ron Shevlin

Ron Shevlin — Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:00:04 +0000

John — You jump to an interesting (and arguable) conclusion regarding products that “require” lots of research before purchase. People research their automotive, electronic, and financial decisions not necessarily because they have to — but because: 1) they can, and 2) they’ve been trained to. Fifty years ago in the US, you didn’t research your car purchases — you were either a Ford guy, a Chevy guy, a Buick guy, etc. You didn’t call around to 20 insurance companies to find out who gave you the best rate.

Both supply and demand increased, where supply = information available about choices, and demand = demand for information about the choices.

But, it’s dangerous to conclude that certain products require research. Consumers can be influenced to make a more considered decision for products that aren’t researched today, and loyalty building efforts can help reduce the amount of research a consumer conducts on certain purchases.

By: John Dawson

John Dawson — Sat, 09 Jun 2007 07:18:34 +0000

In my experience (I’ve been a marketing mix analyst for 8 years), you’re spot on about online and our ability to measure significant business performance benefits over and above other activities. Online ads are a great prompt to action IF a consumer is already pre-disposed to purchase. However the number of online campaigns which actually change that predisposition to purchase are few and far between.
Having said this, online banner ads are at least affordable for small advertisers and they offer a great opportunity to do something different for niche audiences if you are a large advertiser.
I guess the question which is up for debate is that of complex purchase decisions and engagement. I’m thinking of products which require lot’s of research before purchase (automotive, electronics, banking). Online offers a great way to prompt people to evaluate a product alongside others. This is where online as a medium is totally different to the others (TV, press etc) and I guess that the term branding is being used in place of evaluation.
Your point about landing sites from online ads is 100% correct and I can’t believe any advertiser would direct users to a non-specific generic site. I also can’t believe it when users aren’t directed to a multitude of landing sites enabling test & learn as to the best way to engage with customers (assuming that the advertiser has a real measure for this). Of course, the engagement measure which matters is sales. However sales results need to be evaluated across all channels – not just one at a time.