Radio Ads

in

I know this has been talked about a lot in marketing circles but I need to say it myself.

Is there anything more annoying on this planet that radio advertisements? Anything?

I was just down the street at the coffee shop and they were tuned into some hip hop station. They went to commercial and, WOW, did they start playing some annoying ads. I almost got up and left. Literally, one ad was nothing more than a man snoring really loud and a woman screaming at him. I don't know what they were selling -- mattresses I think -- but just on principal I would never buy anything from that company. They almost ruined my day.

It's not too hard to understand why they have to be so annoying; radio is an interruption-based marketing channel that, unlike TV and email, doesn't have access to your eyes. To compensate, they use intensity and volume which, when combined, can easily lead to bad things.

Think about your most profitable customers for a moment. Think back to before they knew who you were -- before they became loyal, before you loved and respected them. If you had 30 seconds to talk to them to them back then, what would you say? What would it sound like?

Candidate Marketing

in ,

The other night on 60 Minutes Hilary was asked how she stays healthy.

She said that she washes her hands as much as possible or uses a hand sanitizer like Purell and eats hot peppers. I wonder if Purell will see a spike in sales this week. I'm also curious if candidates deliberately try not to mention brand name products that they use; i.e. she might have lost votes from a lot of employees at Purell's competitors. Sounds silly but I'll bet they think about these things.

Super Bowl Advertisers' Stock Prices

in ,

Here a list of Friday's stock prices for the top Super Bowl advertisers as well as the S&P.  As I've written before, because these companies are still embracing broadcast marketing, I'm convinced that, on average, their prices will fall (though I'm not sure about the timing of this -- Super Bowl ads aren't a bad short term strategy.).  Let's start with one year from the game. Pepsi Co. - $69.81 E-Trade - $5.71 Anheuser Busch - $46.83 Coca Cola - $59.25 Bridgestone - 5108 (TYO) FedEx - $144.70 S&P 500 - 1,331.29

Note that these were the public companies responsible for the top 10 most popular advertisements.  See the list here.

Radiohead

in ,

I don't think there's a really great business model here but if I'm going to write about the economics of music, I have to write about Radiohead's democratic pricing model.  Basically, fans could pay whatever price they wanted for the album.  I hear that they got, on average, 8 bucks.  There aren't a lot of bands that could pull this off so I'm not sure this is an emerging trend.  Worth thinking about though.  Could this work for other industries?

12 Reasons Why I Like Mike

in

michael_bloomberg.jpg I'm sitting here watching Hilary and Barack on 60 Minutes.  For some reason they just don't get me excited.  I mean, I wouldn't move to Canada if one of them was elected but there's something missing from each.

Here are just a few reasons why I'd love to see Bloomberg run (and win!).

  1. He's a self-made man
  2. He has an MBA -- he's pro-business
  3. Amazing philanthropist
  4. He's from Massachusetts (so am I)
  5. He's a social liberal
  6. He's a fiscal conservative
  7. Supports government involvement in climate change and strongly in favor free trade
  8. He's short
  9. He got rid of smoking in bars in New York (this eventually spread throughout the U.S. and Europe)
  10. He has a 30 year plan for global warming -- what mayor has a 30 year plan for global warming?
  11. He's adapted his politics to the city he governs -- New York is a luxury city so people have to pay high taxes to live here
  12. He acknowledges that taxes are a necessary evil

In the end, I don't think he's going to run.  I wouldn't want him to be a spoiler and he wouldn't want be one either.  However, if there is a real opportunity -- even in 2012 -- I'd happily join his campaign.

Leasing Everything?

in , ,

I heard about a pretty cool idea on the Harvard Business Review podcast today. There's a company (can't remember the name) that is basically leasing high-priced handbags to women. Women can't afford to buy more than one or two of these things but they'd like to be seen with way more than that. Leasing them allows them to use several different handbags based on the season or to match the outfit they plan to wear. The idea could easily be applied to cars as well -- you could have a convertible in the summer and an SUV in the winter.

I suppose you could also do it with a high-end snowboard and a high-end bike. Maybe an HDTV during football season? Or a BBQ during the summer?

I think this model is consistent with consumer's increasing demand for mobility. That is, I believe consumers want less stuff and more of the ability to move around; freedom is becoming more important than material items. If I'm right the economics could work for this model.

I think we're going to see a lot more leasing in the future.

Advertise and Monetize

in

I'm still trying to get my head around music surviving as an ad supported business and I don't think it works.

Fred Wilson, the great blogger, seems to -- he has an interesting post on it here.  

Let's take it from the top.

Advertising, a marketing activity, is a way for sellers to communicate with buyers.  Along the chain of communication there are many opportunities for people with many different skills to cash in; creative people, copywriters, distribution networks and really anyone that gets people's attention.  The problem with the last group is that, generally, those companies that get people's attention don't get it because their clientele wants to see advertisements.  They're providing them with some other form of value and they say, in return for that value you have to look at these advertisements. That's the deal.

So given this logic I suppose it makes sense that the music industry should use the ad model to monetize its product.  But doesn't this model have the same problem as the copyright model?  Technology did away with that one and won't it just do away with the ads as well?  TiVo and other ad killers are brilliant but they're only going to get smarter as the demand for avoiding ads becomes more intense.

Music (a form of art) can be reproduced and shared extremely cheaply because of technology.  Ads can also be avoided with technology.  Technology is killing both models.

So instead of searching for a way to monetize the music, artists need to realize that it can't be effectively monetized -- at least in the long run. 

Therefore you've got to start selling something else.  I say give away the music and sell interactivity -- that's a sustainable business model.  Something that people will pay for that can't reproduced.

So really, I think the songs are the ads -- the ads for the artist.  Once the consumer is hooked, then the consumer can be monetized.

The bottom line?  Everyone can hear the music but not everyone can talk to the band.

Bloomberg

in

Most of my friends know that I'm holding out on choosing a candidate until I'm certain that Mike isnt running. I simply can't imagine a better candidate.

After seeing Romney drop out, though, it occurred to me that Americans always seem to talk about wanting a businessman President but they never actually elect one.

This doesn't bode well for Mike.

Super Bowl Advertisers

in

I need to remember to post the list of companies that advertised during the Super Bowl and see what happens to their stock prices over the next 6-12 months. My theory is that these companies clearly haven't realized that broadcasting is dead and haven't embraced the new marketing - or at least they're doing it slowly.

I'll post the prices as well as the S&P 500 on the day of the game. In the meantime, here are the companies that were responsible for the top 10 ads - E-Trade had two.

Anheuser-Busch

Bridgestone

Coca Cola

Life Water (Sobe >> Pepsi Co.)

E-Trade

NFL.com

Pepsi Co.

Doritos (Pepsi Co.)

FedEx

Music & Business Models

in ,

I've been thinking more and more about monetizing music and I have to say that I would much rather continue to pay $14 for a CD then to see the whole industry shift to an advertising model.  Supporting art with ads is depressing and just plain wrong.

I mean how far can this go?

Imagine if museums didn't charge admission?  Instead, you could get in for free but all of the art would be covered in advertising?