Trends in Advertising
By Paul Herbig
Advertising has ventured into new areas, gray areas, in a similar obvious mood to capture the attention of a desired target audience.
1) First, they're spending more in odd places. Not just on traditional TV ads, but a wide range of interesting and obscure media. Campbell's Soup bought ads on parking meters. Macy's spends a fortune each year on its Thanksgiving parade. Kellogg's has spent millions building a presence on the World Wide Web-a fascinating way to sell cereal.
Companies have seen that a mass-market broadcast strategy isn't working as well as it used to, especially when targeting the hard-to-reach upper income demographic. As this lucrative audience spends less time watching TV, marketers are working overtime trying to find media with less clutter, where their interruption techniques can be more effective.
Marketers hire Catalina Corporation to print their coupons on the back of receipts at the grocery store. They buy ads on the floor of the cereal aisle. There are ads atop taxis in New York City and on the boards around the rink at the hockey game. Fox even figured out a way to sell the rights to the small area over the catcher's shoulder, so TV viewers would see the ad throughout an entire baseball game.
(2) The second technique is to make advertisements ever more controversial and entertaining. Coca-Cola hired talent agency CAA to enlist top-flight Hollywood directors to make commercials. Candies features a woman sitting on a toilet in its magazine ads (for shoes!). Spike Lee's ad agency did more than fifty million dollars in billings last year.
Of course, as the commercials try harder to get your attention, the clutter becomes even worse. An advertiser who manages to top a competitor for the moment has merely raised the bar. Their next ad will have to be even more outlandish in order to top the competition, not to mention their previous ad, to keep the consumer's attention. The cost of making a first-rate TV commercial is actually far more, per minute, than a major Hollywood motion picture. Talking frogs, computer graphics and intense editing now seem to be a requirement.
A side effect of the focus on entertainment is that it gives the marketer far less time to actually market. In a fifteen second commercial (increasingly attractive as a cost-cutting way to interrupt people even more often), ten or even twelve seconds are devoted to getting your attention, while just a few heartbeats are reserved for the logo, the benefit and the call to action.
Take the interruption challenge! Write down all the companies who ran commercials during your favorite TV show last night. Write down all the companies that paid good money to buy banners on the Web during your last surfing expedition. If you can list more than ten percent of them, you're certainly the exception.
(3) The third approach used to keep mass marketing alive is to change ad campaigns more often in order to keep them "interesting and fresh." Tony the Tiger and Charlie Tuna and the Marlboro man are each worth billions of dollars in brand equity to the companies that built them. The marketers behind them have invested a fortune over the last forty years, making them trusted spokesmen (or spokesanimals) for their brands.
Nike, on the other hand, just ran a series of ads without the ‘swoosh’, arguably one of the most effective logos of the last generation. Apple Computer changes its tagline annually. Wendy's and McDonald's and Burger King jump from one approach to the other, all hoping for a holy grail that captures attention.
In exchange for these brief bits of attention (remember the hoopla when they replaced Mikey on the Life box?) these marketers are trading in the benefits of a long-term brand recognition campaign. It's a trade they're willing to make, because Interruption Marketing requires it. Without attention, there is no ad.
(4) The fourth and last approach, which is as profound as the other three, is that many marketers are abandoning advertising and replacing it with direct mail and promotions. Marketers now allocate about 52% of their annual ad budgets for direct mail and promotions, a significant increase over past years.
Of the more than $200 billion spent on consumer advertising last year in the US, more than $100 billion was spent on direct mail campaigns, in-store promotions, coupons, free standing inserts and other non-traditional media. Recently Wunderman, Cato, Johnson, did more than $1.6 billion in billings for its clients.
The next time you get a glossy mailing for a Lexus, or enter an instant win sweepstakes at the liquor store, you're seeing the results of this trend toward increased direct marketing efforts. Advertisers are using them because they work. They are somewhat more effective at interrupting you than an ad. They're somewhat more measurable than a billboard. Best of all, they give the marketer another tool to use in their increasingly frustrating fight against clutter. After all, there are only five or ten pieces of junk mail in your mailbox every day-not 3,000. And another few feet of shelf space at the supermarket can lead to a dramatic upturn in sales
A Providence based company pays collegians up to $150 to wear temporary logo tattoos on their foreheads for one week. Called Headvertise, eight clients have signed up, all seeking recognition in the coveted 18 to 24 crowd. Over fifty students have worn the decals. What next: ads on the cheeks for beachwear?
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Portability
Portability. Now You can take it with you!!
By Paul Herbig
.
Cellphones highly competitive before have now become almost volatile.
Portability: switch vendors and still have same cell number. You may be able to buy the phone from one vendor, service from a second, and have the same cell number you obtained earlier from a third vendor. This presents a whole new twist to the world of cellular phones. Whereupon earlier vendors could use a lock-in strategy, this is not possible any more.
In an industry already plagued with a 25 percent annual customer attrition rate, one estimate is that out of the 145 million cell phone customers in the U.S., an additional 10 to 12 million customers will switch, increasing the expected attrition rate to as high as 35%. Even this number could be low.
Marketing strategy is to lock-in customer through some non-duplicable property of the product offered. For example, Sun computers operate on their own operating system. Many high level Enterprise software systems (that operate the overall business entity) are not compatible with others competitive systems, you must often reconfigure your computing system and ways of business around their software. Your people must be trained on their system. And a definite learning curve is evident; it may take a year or more before you become truly proficient on the system. From a vendor’s point-of-view, this is most preferable situation—a truly captive customer base. You can give considerable abuse to your customers once you have locked them in, raise prices as often as contractually permitted, provide poor to non-existent service, and the customers often have no choice but to stick with you (sounds sort of like the local cable company doesn’t it) because they are locked in. To change vendors or systems would incur considerable “switching costs” which most customers really do not want to pay. So they stay. And you can boast about your large customer base but rarely do you mention anything about customer satisfaction. And rarely do you provide references or give testimonials. But it can be quite profitable.
That is, for a while. Then it will catch up with you. Sooner or later the dam will break. Even with tremendous switching costs, at some point customer’s ire will overcome and take the plunge and costs necessary to switch vendors. Good luck on every getting them back. Or technology changes (as it did from word processing units to PCs) which make switching to the new technology a requirement and switching costs become mute in the vendor selection process (as you must pay them no matter which vendor you select). Even if your current vendor decides to upgrade and offer the new technology, you escape as fast as you can. So lock-in (get ‘em and string’ em) strategy is a short run success (short run being 5-8 years) but does not offer longer sustainable advantages. It works much like a crooked used car dealership: you must continually be looking for new customers. Even with proprietary software or patents or processes, lock-in without customer focused marketing is not viable in the long run.
Now that cellular companies cannot use the lock-in strategy and must compete for customers head=on, what will they do? History tells us there are only 3 viable strategies: low-cost, focused, or differentiated. Usually only one company can be the low-cost vendor. We are likely to see numerous companies during vie for that position but only one will survive to fulfill that niche (And become known as the ‘Walmart of cellphones’?). Price competition will be fierce but only one firm will become the price leaders.
Other companies will attempt to be the generalists, something for everybody. This too is not a winning strategy as if you stand for everything, you stand for nothing. The fall from grace of the generalist department stores show the end path for that strategy. If you build devices that everyone can use for all options for all, it will be either too bulky, too expensive, have too many functions most people will not want, or be just plain undesirable by many segments. Some generalists may survive but a few and not well.
Others could well zero in on specialty segments: teens, Gen Y’ers, parents, etc and work to become expert on that segment and offer phones keyed to that segment’s special needs. You are already seeing some of that in action as phones for teens and tweens are being marketed that are considerably different than those for businesspersons. This strategy has its down side: being a niche player does not make you a market leader and has limited upside potential but it can certainly be profitable. This is the route I believe most players in the cell market will take if they expect to be in for the long run.
Who says you can’t take it with you!!
Paul Herbig is managing Partner of Herbig Marketing Associates, (www.herbigandsons.com) a marketing consulting company and former Professor Marketing and Dean, Ketner School of Business for Tri-State University. He can be contacted at mktgandme@aol.com.
By Paul Herbig
.
Cellphones highly competitive before have now become almost volatile.
Portability: switch vendors and still have same cell number. You may be able to buy the phone from one vendor, service from a second, and have the same cell number you obtained earlier from a third vendor. This presents a whole new twist to the world of cellular phones. Whereupon earlier vendors could use a lock-in strategy, this is not possible any more.
In an industry already plagued with a 25 percent annual customer attrition rate, one estimate is that out of the 145 million cell phone customers in the U.S., an additional 10 to 12 million customers will switch, increasing the expected attrition rate to as high as 35%. Even this number could be low.
Marketing strategy is to lock-in customer through some non-duplicable property of the product offered. For example, Sun computers operate on their own operating system. Many high level Enterprise software systems (that operate the overall business entity) are not compatible with others competitive systems, you must often reconfigure your computing system and ways of business around their software. Your people must be trained on their system. And a definite learning curve is evident; it may take a year or more before you become truly proficient on the system. From a vendor’s point-of-view, this is most preferable situation—a truly captive customer base. You can give considerable abuse to your customers once you have locked them in, raise prices as often as contractually permitted, provide poor to non-existent service, and the customers often have no choice but to stick with you (sounds sort of like the local cable company doesn’t it) because they are locked in. To change vendors or systems would incur considerable “switching costs” which most customers really do not want to pay. So they stay. And you can boast about your large customer base but rarely do you mention anything about customer satisfaction. And rarely do you provide references or give testimonials. But it can be quite profitable.
That is, for a while. Then it will catch up with you. Sooner or later the dam will break. Even with tremendous switching costs, at some point customer’s ire will overcome and take the plunge and costs necessary to switch vendors. Good luck on every getting them back. Or technology changes (as it did from word processing units to PCs) which make switching to the new technology a requirement and switching costs become mute in the vendor selection process (as you must pay them no matter which vendor you select). Even if your current vendor decides to upgrade and offer the new technology, you escape as fast as you can. So lock-in (get ‘em and string’ em) strategy is a short run success (short run being 5-8 years) but does not offer longer sustainable advantages. It works much like a crooked used car dealership: you must continually be looking for new customers. Even with proprietary software or patents or processes, lock-in without customer focused marketing is not viable in the long run.
Now that cellular companies cannot use the lock-in strategy and must compete for customers head=on, what will they do? History tells us there are only 3 viable strategies: low-cost, focused, or differentiated. Usually only one company can be the low-cost vendor. We are likely to see numerous companies during vie for that position but only one will survive to fulfill that niche (And become known as the ‘Walmart of cellphones’?). Price competition will be fierce but only one firm will become the price leaders.
Other companies will attempt to be the generalists, something for everybody. This too is not a winning strategy as if you stand for everything, you stand for nothing. The fall from grace of the generalist department stores show the end path for that strategy. If you build devices that everyone can use for all options for all, it will be either too bulky, too expensive, have too many functions most people will not want, or be just plain undesirable by many segments. Some generalists may survive but a few and not well.
Others could well zero in on specialty segments: teens, Gen Y’ers, parents, etc and work to become expert on that segment and offer phones keyed to that segment’s special needs. You are already seeing some of that in action as phones for teens and tweens are being marketed that are considerably different than those for businesspersons. This strategy has its down side: being a niche player does not make you a market leader and has limited upside potential but it can certainly be profitable. This is the route I believe most players in the cell market will take if they expect to be in for the long run.
Who says you can’t take it with you!!
Paul Herbig is managing Partner of Herbig Marketing Associates, (www.herbigandsons.com) a marketing consulting company and former Professor Marketing and Dean, Ketner School of Business for Tri-State University. He can be contacted at mktgandme@aol.com.
Where the boys where
Where the Boys Are
By Paul Herbig
During a recent Fall , advertisers and networks were surprised to find one coveted segment, Males 18 to 34, were MIA to the tube, down 7% from the previous year for all TV sets and down a whopping 22% for the major networks. NBC’s flagship youth sitcom lost nearly 30% of its young adult viewers over the previous year; Fox’s “24’ fell an equally remarkable 37% among those youthful viewers. Other productions showed a similar type of falloff among the desired market. The usual suspects were called in and interrogated at length: Nielsen. The networks accused Nielsen of sloppy research and claimed the ancient devices used by Nielsen were defective and not registering the correct numbers. After considerable deliberation and rechecking of the numbers, the jury found Nielsen not guilty and the facts were left as before (to put this in perspective, over the same timeframe, cable showed a high percentage growth and videogames, a twenty percent increase in games played).
Which brings us to: Where did the boys go? With over 500 cable/satellite channels, with channels for every niche and taste, with Pay-for-View, downloadable films, plentiful video rental outlets, with TIVO and recorders that allow them to view now and watch commercial-free later, with PCs that are becoming another entertainment vehicle, the options for entertainment are unlimited. With Ipods, Iphones, YouTube, MySpace, a host of other social networking web sites (Facebook, etc), Downloadable Programs and Movies, and Peer produced media, their options are becoming virtually unlimited. On demand videos, clips, links, you name it exists out there in virtual space. And advertisers are flocking to the net in droves trying to take advantage of the demographics that exist (and to a limited but trendy extent are replacing network TV ads for those on the web—how else would Google become so power and valuable so quickly?) They may be viewing, but not at the hour (8-11 prime time) nor channel (network TV) desired. They watch what they want, when they want it, and how they want it. The networks better accept this and work with it; the youth are not going to change; the networks must if they want to stay around.
Where are the boys going? Far, far away from Network TV. To Cable. To Video Games. To DVD. To whomever will provide them with the content they demand. Network programmers can either take the chance to provide the more controversial, extreme, programming the younger males are demanding (at the risk of offending the older clientele) or lose them to other media. It is not an easy decision. But all signs indicate to the first choice being made—at the risk of losing the older, more traditional clientele.
The networks must worry about the Oldsmobile effect: that misguided effort by GM to go after the youth market at any cost without regards to its potential effect upon its current users with the end result being not only not gaining the youth market but losing the seniors as well (who then left in droves saying in effect if they do not care about me-- “It is not your father’s Oldsmobile”—then whose is it anyway?-- why should I care about them) and hence leading to the demise of one of the great historic brands of the automotive marketplace. Seeing what has been playing on the tube lately and the resulting numbers, makes me believe they too will be just as successful as Oldsmobile was.
Only time will tell whether it was the right decision.
Paul Herbig is managing Partner of Herbig Marketing Associates, (www.herbigandsons.com) a marketing consulting company and former Professor Marketing and Dean, Ketner School of Business for Tri-State University. He can be contacted at mktgandme@aol.com.
By Paul Herbig
During a recent Fall , advertisers and networks were surprised to find one coveted segment, Males 18 to 34, were MIA to the tube, down 7% from the previous year for all TV sets and down a whopping 22% for the major networks. NBC’s flagship youth sitcom lost nearly 30% of its young adult viewers over the previous year; Fox’s “24’ fell an equally remarkable 37% among those youthful viewers. Other productions showed a similar type of falloff among the desired market. The usual suspects were called in and interrogated at length: Nielsen. The networks accused Nielsen of sloppy research and claimed the ancient devices used by Nielsen were defective and not registering the correct numbers. After considerable deliberation and rechecking of the numbers, the jury found Nielsen not guilty and the facts were left as before (to put this in perspective, over the same timeframe, cable showed a high percentage growth and videogames, a twenty percent increase in games played).
Which brings us to: Where did the boys go? With over 500 cable/satellite channels, with channels for every niche and taste, with Pay-for-View, downloadable films, plentiful video rental outlets, with TIVO and recorders that allow them to view now and watch commercial-free later, with PCs that are becoming another entertainment vehicle, the options for entertainment are unlimited. With Ipods, Iphones, YouTube, MySpace, a host of other social networking web sites (Facebook, etc), Downloadable Programs and Movies, and Peer produced media, their options are becoming virtually unlimited. On demand videos, clips, links, you name it exists out there in virtual space. And advertisers are flocking to the net in droves trying to take advantage of the demographics that exist (and to a limited but trendy extent are replacing network TV ads for those on the web—how else would Google become so power and valuable so quickly?) They may be viewing, but not at the hour (8-11 prime time) nor channel (network TV) desired. They watch what they want, when they want it, and how they want it. The networks better accept this and work with it; the youth are not going to change; the networks must if they want to stay around.
Where are the boys going? Far, far away from Network TV. To Cable. To Video Games. To DVD. To whomever will provide them with the content they demand. Network programmers can either take the chance to provide the more controversial, extreme, programming the younger males are demanding (at the risk of offending the older clientele) or lose them to other media. It is not an easy decision. But all signs indicate to the first choice being made—at the risk of losing the older, more traditional clientele.
The networks must worry about the Oldsmobile effect: that misguided effort by GM to go after the youth market at any cost without regards to its potential effect upon its current users with the end result being not only not gaining the youth market but losing the seniors as well (who then left in droves saying in effect if they do not care about me-- “It is not your father’s Oldsmobile”—then whose is it anyway?-- why should I care about them) and hence leading to the demise of one of the great historic brands of the automotive marketplace. Seeing what has been playing on the tube lately and the resulting numbers, makes me believe they too will be just as successful as Oldsmobile was.
Only time will tell whether it was the right decision.
Paul Herbig is managing Partner of Herbig Marketing Associates, (www.herbigandsons.com) a marketing consulting company and former Professor Marketing and Dean, Ketner School of Business for Tri-State University. He can be contacted at mktgandme@aol.com.
Generations
Generations
By Paul A. Herbig
A century or more ago many of our forefathers lived in log cabins, houses made out of sod or clay , or a few hundred square feet of living area in a multi-family environment. Compare that to today’s lifestyles with thousands of square feet of living area and all the modern conveniences we have today. Try extrapolating that difference into the future? What will life be like a century hence? What will the next generation perceive as the necessities of life?
This is not just a rhetorical question. My grandparents moved to Indianapolis by 1920 and settled in a typical urban double—a two story house (and a basement) split down the middle (with each side having half of each floor). A high school education was the exception at that time and graduates were noteworthy. My aunt, now in her eighties, remembers when they paved Webb Street during the nineteen-twenties. It was a big deal when they finally added an indoor bathroom that same decade—one bathroom (with tub no shower) for a family of six (during the depression years there were times ten or more people lived in that house, camped out on the sofa and living room, all sharing that single overused bathroom!). They had 3 bedrooms upstairs (my grandparents in one room, my aunts shared a bed in one room and my father and his brother shared a bed in the third room). Hand-me downs were the norm and the baby of any family rarely had anything bought just for him. Necessities of life were simple: a roof overhead, clothes to wear, and enough food to keep from going hungry. The ice man cometh daily to provide coolant for the refrigerators of the time; coal was often shoveled into the basement for the furnace; washer boards for the housewife were typical.
During their entire childhood they had one wagon and perhaps one or two bicycles (for all the four kids to enjoy). No organized youth sports existed; the kids would call out to each other to play ball or some other game and the entire neighborhood would join in or march down two blocks to a city park and play, doing their own umpiring. Entertainment was either attending church socials, watching first run feature films at any of the many neighborhood cinemas, or sitting by the radio as a family listening to the great stars of the time come into your home. Neither of my grandparents ever learned to drive a car; the trolley and buses were quite sufficient for all their transportation needs. Family vacations meant a trip to the next county seat to visit relatives. Trains were the country’s primary transportation mode. Perhaps the family had one phone line that was a party line and you had to wait for the ring to determine if the call was for you or for another party on the line. And yes, they did have electricity but it hadn’t been for long.
They have been called the Great Generation (and few would disagree with that nomenclature), those that were born after WWI or in the twenties, lived through the depression, survived military combat during World War II and launched the great baby boom. The men married in their early twenties, most women married right out of high school. Most did not wait to start a family. Many went to school on the GI Bill, surviving on bare necessities while completing their studies. Prior to the Second War, a high school diploma was considered a superior degree and college education was basically reserved for the elite. These returning GI s found crowded conditions at colleges, housing at a premium, and barracks-like living conditions. But they never complained; they were exhuberant at the opportunity to get a college degree, to better themselves, and to provide all sort of things for their children they did not have themselves. They were determined not to deprive their children of any of the luxuries of life. This they did well. They found jobs in large companies and stayed there for life, thirty, forty years were not atypical; they were the first of the organizational men. They worked hard and long supporting a wife and many kids and nary said a word about their awesome responsibilities.
Their children, the baby boomers, of which I am one, were not, contrary to modern tales told by their parents to their grandchildren, spoiled by rich living. A multi-bedroom ranch home (perhaps 1200 square feet) is not a mansion. But each house had its own refrigerator, washer and dryer and central heating unit. Everyone typically knew everyone in the neighborhood and people stayed for decades. The kids probably had to share rooms like their aunts and uncles but they at least had their own beds. And not one bathroom but at least two. They had their own bicycles, old perhaps even purchased used but it was theirs and theirs alone. Clothing was mostly purchased for the individual. Christmas gifts were typically elaborate. Most families had one car which Dad usually drove (many Moms still did not drive during the fifties); station wagons ruled the roads. Airlines were in their infancy and to fly for many during the fifties and early sixties was an experience you would talk about for years. My allowance was $5 a week (A princely sum I thought) from which I had to spend lunch money (.35 to .50 daily).
Entertainment was watching the one TV in the house—black and white for most of their childhood (during the early years blurry pictures were the norm and we would take turns holding the antenna just so to get the right angle for the best picture)(during those early years few families possessed TVs and block parties around the TV set to watch the prime time shows were not atypical). Most families still had one phone line for the entire family (party lines were quickly phasing out). Little League was about as organized as youth teams got, no soccer; athletics were primarily found through the school system. And Sports for Girls were only a dream for most girls. Pre-School in the fifties meant Mom and perhaps grandma. Many but by no means all had cars—used cars, often very used cars--when they became sixteen (usually purchased by us with the fruits of our hard earned after school work)(Being a baby Boomer meant competing with thousands of other boomers for even the simplest of jobs—every McDs during that time had file cabinets full of applications from Boomers. You worked knowing that there were dozens of other kids just waiting for you to goof up or get fed up and quit—talk about incentive). Family vacations were to bundle up in the station wagon and spend a week or two in the summer traveling the highways to a distant relative or friend’s house, spending the nights in cheap motels all in one room. Not necessarily enjoyable but we didn’t know any better, complained very little, and enjoyed what we could when we could.
We Baby Boomers—both boys and girls now, not just mainly boys as were our fathers the GI s-- went to college during the sixties and seventies, some thrust on by parents who worked their entire lives so their children could live better than they had and some to escape the drama that was Vietnam and the draft. We were thrilled to go to college and appreciated schools would take us (during our interview trips we wore suits and our finest apparel to impress the admissions folks for like everything boomer, there were often many of us and comparatively few spots open; we took very little for granted) We lived in dorms with one large barracks style bath area per floor. No air conditioning; opening the window was the only cure for most of us. Working our way through school, even at state schools, was expected for many.
By the time the boomers grew up, a high school diploma was a necessity and a college degree was quickly on its way to becoming the expected and norm for up and comers. Once out of college, jobs were scarce (and competition tough) so we took what we could get and worked hard. Few of us believed we would work for the same company forever as our parents did. We did join the workforce believing in the American dream, work hard, work long and you will advance and go far up the ladder of success. The Myth of that Dream, for many of us, was by far our life’s worst experience. We found many a disconnect between ability, performance, and outcomes. Life Was (is0 Not Fair we discovered the hard way. But we also discovered life goes on, and so did we.
The Baby Boomers eventually married; often, however, 5-10 years later in life than had our parents. Like our parents before us, the Baby Boomers wanted only the best for our children and a better life for them then we had (and in retrospect, we remembered only what we didn’t have and forgot all we had). Our houses had to be bigger and better (2000 to 3000 or more square feet), two or three car enclosed garages, all the modern conveniences (I wouldn’t dream of buying a house without a dishwasher; to this day my mother still refuses to buy one—she says she already has one called my father) How can you live without Air conditioning (no room AC units, Central A/c and Heating only). Often both parents work (to afford their dream castle) and at-home moms are the exception not the norm. Child care and Mom’s Day outs have blossomed. Suburbia living is a must. We are a nomadic bunch—three years, four if your lucky, and it is off to a new assignment, a new city. You may or many not even know the names of your neighbors and then they move and you must meet the new people. Vacations. We Fly. Aspen for Skiing, the Caribbean over Spring break, Europe during Summer. Spare no expense, nothing is too good for my kids. Forget trains, air is the only way to go/
Our children (the so called Generation Y or baby boomlet) must have only the best. Each have their own room. With perhaps their own computer and cable modem internet hook-up (otherwise you won’t be a good parent and will be contributing to their falling behind their peers). Oh yes, their very own TV—color with cable no less. Their wardrobes are bulging with apparel, much of it last year’s in-clothes--they would die if they didn’t have them then and would die now if they wore them now. Bicycles—not just one per child but a new one every year or so. Organized sports—Soccer Moms in their SUVs require a datebook to keep track of all the events they have enrolled their children in—abound and all tightly organized with coaches, referees, and thick rule books (where has children just playing gone?) With passive entertainment and well organized sports leagues, few kids know what to do by themselves if left alone for any long periods of time (which purposedly many parents book solid to minimize such free time).
Individual phone lines for the kids has become routine (and often not just phones but cell phones for each child as well). Allowances can be twenty dollars or more a week, all too little for all the expenses a child has (movie tickets, make-up, jewelry). Oh , and cars for the little darlings when they turn 16. Not used cars but new cars and the more fashionable the better (can’t embarrass poor dear in front of his friends can we?) Work? During the nineties, every establishment was begging for bodies and if they didn’t like the way they were being treated (often times actually being asked to work!) or if the pay was lower than what they felt they should be earning, they would leave in an instant and go next door where they would be welcomed and working within the hour.
All boomlet kids are expected to go to college. You start thinking about college before you enter high school. The colleges start besieging you with materials your sophomore year (some even have tracking programs for kids in middle school!). SAT or ACT can be the most frightening three letters in your life, those that could well determine your fate for the rest of your life. As all colleges are recruiting heavily, the central question in the student’s mind is what are you going to do for me. Colleges beg you to visit and when the student does, be glad he/she is wearing clothes: Jeans, sneakers, T-shirts, baseball hats on backwards, often unwashed, all body jewelry on and plainly visible. What no lunch, what kind of place is this? What kind of trinkets do you have for me to take home—gee, you’re a cheapskate compared to all the stuff I got at the other schools I visited. If you bore them (any discussion past 3 minutes usually does), they either will tell you to your face or nod off. Take me as I am. If you don’t me like his, a dozen other schools are knocking on my door (and they are right). Who has the best financial aid package? Let’s negotiate some more. I. I. I. I. . . me. me . me. me. …
When they finally select a college, the modern dorms have a two bedroom suite with an adjoining bathroom Many Gen Yers are even demanding private rooms with private baths quickly becoming a necessity. Air Conditioning better be present or scratch this school off my list. Computer hookups in every room with fastest internet connections available so I can download thousands of my favorite songs. And the cafeteria food? No more meatball sandwiches or “guess the entrée” contests as their parents had to contend with. Many universities have decided to enunciate their food as a competitive advantage to recruit students. Perhaps not quite yet French cooks or trained sous-chefs but a menu most restaurants would be proud to have. Deli sections, salad bars, pizza, you don’t see it let us know and we will get it for you. If a student is having trouble in his classes, it becomes the responsibility of the instructor and institute to assist him and to provide instruction according to what learning style he may have. History? History is bunk. If it occurred before 1990, it is irrelevant (Several Yers have told me they will not watch a film if it is over a decade old as it could not possibly have any meaning for them!)
Not that Gen Yers have it totally easy. For most of today’s Gen Y students, an undergraduate degree is just the start of their academic preparations. Graduate degrees are quickly becoming the norm and expected for today’s entry-level employee (a statistic I heard is that there were more Masters degree being given today than undergraduate degrees!). After they graduate, no waiting for them. They want to have it all and want it now. House, car, furnishings, vacations, all the good parts of life they have become used to. It is all for the present. The model of many Yers is the past is irrelevant and the future is unpredictable so enjoy today for today is all there really is.
Within ten years, we will have a fourth generation, the children of the boomlet, our grandchildren. I am not certain what they will be called: Perhaps Generation Z (since X and Y have already been taken). I can only imagine their lifestyle and how they will raise their children. If the pattern continues (and I have no reason to doubt it will), they will spoil their children even more than we spoiled ours and our parents spoiled us. Their children, being like children everywhere, will accept what they can get and always push for more, attempting to find the limits to what they can have and what they will not get. What will their lives be like?
How much larger a home can one have? Do we need one plus cars for every person in the household? Does each child need to have his/her own bedroom and own bath and Jacuzzi? Should each child have his/her own guest house on the property? Should each have own phone/computer/fax/internet connection and fiber optics network? Are they going to demand private day cares with educational experiences guaranteed for their children? What type of demands will be made on public schools systems? Colleges? What will the boomlet as parents be expected to provide to Gen Z to indicate to their peers they are good parents? In attempting to make life better and easier for our kids , will they be expected to do likewise for our grandkids? When will enough be enough?
The United States, with only 5% of the world’s population, already consumes a far greater proportion of the world’s resources (25% of its energy and 33% of its resources). The gap between the world’s rich and poor continues to grow. If the fourth generation is like the previous three plus, it will demand far more resources and luxuries as a means of placating its youth. Can the U.S. or the world afford this drain or will the world even allow us to consume more? At some point will the gap becomes so large, it becomes unbearable to those on the bottom? At what cost will these youthful demands be on the economy and productivity? Already, obesity for the boomlet has reached almost epidemic proportions. Should we expect any less for the next generation? Can this trend continue or will it collapse on its own weight?
What does the future hold? Have we created a Frankenstein we cannot control and that inevitably will destroy us by trying to outdo each other and each previous generation? What will Generation Z be like? More of the same? Or a return to a more balanced lifestyle? The answer to this no doubt holds the answer to how the entire 21st century will develop.
By Paul A. Herbig
A century or more ago many of our forefathers lived in log cabins, houses made out of sod or clay , or a few hundred square feet of living area in a multi-family environment. Compare that to today’s lifestyles with thousands of square feet of living area and all the modern conveniences we have today. Try extrapolating that difference into the future? What will life be like a century hence? What will the next generation perceive as the necessities of life?
This is not just a rhetorical question. My grandparents moved to Indianapolis by 1920 and settled in a typical urban double—a two story house (and a basement) split down the middle (with each side having half of each floor). A high school education was the exception at that time and graduates were noteworthy. My aunt, now in her eighties, remembers when they paved Webb Street during the nineteen-twenties. It was a big deal when they finally added an indoor bathroom that same decade—one bathroom (with tub no shower) for a family of six (during the depression years there were times ten or more people lived in that house, camped out on the sofa and living room, all sharing that single overused bathroom!). They had 3 bedrooms upstairs (my grandparents in one room, my aunts shared a bed in one room and my father and his brother shared a bed in the third room). Hand-me downs were the norm and the baby of any family rarely had anything bought just for him. Necessities of life were simple: a roof overhead, clothes to wear, and enough food to keep from going hungry. The ice man cometh daily to provide coolant for the refrigerators of the time; coal was often shoveled into the basement for the furnace; washer boards for the housewife were typical.
During their entire childhood they had one wagon and perhaps one or two bicycles (for all the four kids to enjoy). No organized youth sports existed; the kids would call out to each other to play ball or some other game and the entire neighborhood would join in or march down two blocks to a city park and play, doing their own umpiring. Entertainment was either attending church socials, watching first run feature films at any of the many neighborhood cinemas, or sitting by the radio as a family listening to the great stars of the time come into your home. Neither of my grandparents ever learned to drive a car; the trolley and buses were quite sufficient for all their transportation needs. Family vacations meant a trip to the next county seat to visit relatives. Trains were the country’s primary transportation mode. Perhaps the family had one phone line that was a party line and you had to wait for the ring to determine if the call was for you or for another party on the line. And yes, they did have electricity but it hadn’t been for long.
They have been called the Great Generation (and few would disagree with that nomenclature), those that were born after WWI or in the twenties, lived through the depression, survived military combat during World War II and launched the great baby boom. The men married in their early twenties, most women married right out of high school. Most did not wait to start a family. Many went to school on the GI Bill, surviving on bare necessities while completing their studies. Prior to the Second War, a high school diploma was considered a superior degree and college education was basically reserved for the elite. These returning GI s found crowded conditions at colleges, housing at a premium, and barracks-like living conditions. But they never complained; they were exhuberant at the opportunity to get a college degree, to better themselves, and to provide all sort of things for their children they did not have themselves. They were determined not to deprive their children of any of the luxuries of life. This they did well. They found jobs in large companies and stayed there for life, thirty, forty years were not atypical; they were the first of the organizational men. They worked hard and long supporting a wife and many kids and nary said a word about their awesome responsibilities.
Their children, the baby boomers, of which I am one, were not, contrary to modern tales told by their parents to their grandchildren, spoiled by rich living. A multi-bedroom ranch home (perhaps 1200 square feet) is not a mansion. But each house had its own refrigerator, washer and dryer and central heating unit. Everyone typically knew everyone in the neighborhood and people stayed for decades. The kids probably had to share rooms like their aunts and uncles but they at least had their own beds. And not one bathroom but at least two. They had their own bicycles, old perhaps even purchased used but it was theirs and theirs alone. Clothing was mostly purchased for the individual. Christmas gifts were typically elaborate. Most families had one car which Dad usually drove (many Moms still did not drive during the fifties); station wagons ruled the roads. Airlines were in their infancy and to fly for many during the fifties and early sixties was an experience you would talk about for years. My allowance was $5 a week (A princely sum I thought) from which I had to spend lunch money (.35 to .50 daily).
Entertainment was watching the one TV in the house—black and white for most of their childhood (during the early years blurry pictures were the norm and we would take turns holding the antenna just so to get the right angle for the best picture)(during those early years few families possessed TVs and block parties around the TV set to watch the prime time shows were not atypical). Most families still had one phone line for the entire family (party lines were quickly phasing out). Little League was about as organized as youth teams got, no soccer; athletics were primarily found through the school system. And Sports for Girls were only a dream for most girls. Pre-School in the fifties meant Mom and perhaps grandma. Many but by no means all had cars—used cars, often very used cars--when they became sixteen (usually purchased by us with the fruits of our hard earned after school work)(Being a baby Boomer meant competing with thousands of other boomers for even the simplest of jobs—every McDs during that time had file cabinets full of applications from Boomers. You worked knowing that there were dozens of other kids just waiting for you to goof up or get fed up and quit—talk about incentive). Family vacations were to bundle up in the station wagon and spend a week or two in the summer traveling the highways to a distant relative or friend’s house, spending the nights in cheap motels all in one room. Not necessarily enjoyable but we didn’t know any better, complained very little, and enjoyed what we could when we could.
We Baby Boomers—both boys and girls now, not just mainly boys as were our fathers the GI s-- went to college during the sixties and seventies, some thrust on by parents who worked their entire lives so their children could live better than they had and some to escape the drama that was Vietnam and the draft. We were thrilled to go to college and appreciated schools would take us (during our interview trips we wore suits and our finest apparel to impress the admissions folks for like everything boomer, there were often many of us and comparatively few spots open; we took very little for granted) We lived in dorms with one large barracks style bath area per floor. No air conditioning; opening the window was the only cure for most of us. Working our way through school, even at state schools, was expected for many.
By the time the boomers grew up, a high school diploma was a necessity and a college degree was quickly on its way to becoming the expected and norm for up and comers. Once out of college, jobs were scarce (and competition tough) so we took what we could get and worked hard. Few of us believed we would work for the same company forever as our parents did. We did join the workforce believing in the American dream, work hard, work long and you will advance and go far up the ladder of success. The Myth of that Dream, for many of us, was by far our life’s worst experience. We found many a disconnect between ability, performance, and outcomes. Life Was (is0 Not Fair we discovered the hard way. But we also discovered life goes on, and so did we.
The Baby Boomers eventually married; often, however, 5-10 years later in life than had our parents. Like our parents before us, the Baby Boomers wanted only the best for our children and a better life for them then we had (and in retrospect, we remembered only what we didn’t have and forgot all we had). Our houses had to be bigger and better (2000 to 3000 or more square feet), two or three car enclosed garages, all the modern conveniences (I wouldn’t dream of buying a house without a dishwasher; to this day my mother still refuses to buy one—she says she already has one called my father) How can you live without Air conditioning (no room AC units, Central A/c and Heating only). Often both parents work (to afford their dream castle) and at-home moms are the exception not the norm. Child care and Mom’s Day outs have blossomed. Suburbia living is a must. We are a nomadic bunch—three years, four if your lucky, and it is off to a new assignment, a new city. You may or many not even know the names of your neighbors and then they move and you must meet the new people. Vacations. We Fly. Aspen for Skiing, the Caribbean over Spring break, Europe during Summer. Spare no expense, nothing is too good for my kids. Forget trains, air is the only way to go/
Our children (the so called Generation Y or baby boomlet) must have only the best. Each have their own room. With perhaps their own computer and cable modem internet hook-up (otherwise you won’t be a good parent and will be contributing to their falling behind their peers). Oh yes, their very own TV—color with cable no less. Their wardrobes are bulging with apparel, much of it last year’s in-clothes--they would die if they didn’t have them then and would die now if they wore them now. Bicycles—not just one per child but a new one every year or so. Organized sports—Soccer Moms in their SUVs require a datebook to keep track of all the events they have enrolled their children in—abound and all tightly organized with coaches, referees, and thick rule books (where has children just playing gone?) With passive entertainment and well organized sports leagues, few kids know what to do by themselves if left alone for any long periods of time (which purposedly many parents book solid to minimize such free time).
Individual phone lines for the kids has become routine (and often not just phones but cell phones for each child as well). Allowances can be twenty dollars or more a week, all too little for all the expenses a child has (movie tickets, make-up, jewelry). Oh , and cars for the little darlings when they turn 16. Not used cars but new cars and the more fashionable the better (can’t embarrass poor dear in front of his friends can we?) Work? During the nineties, every establishment was begging for bodies and if they didn’t like the way they were being treated (often times actually being asked to work!) or if the pay was lower than what they felt they should be earning, they would leave in an instant and go next door where they would be welcomed and working within the hour.
All boomlet kids are expected to go to college. You start thinking about college before you enter high school. The colleges start besieging you with materials your sophomore year (some even have tracking programs for kids in middle school!). SAT or ACT can be the most frightening three letters in your life, those that could well determine your fate for the rest of your life. As all colleges are recruiting heavily, the central question in the student’s mind is what are you going to do for me. Colleges beg you to visit and when the student does, be glad he/she is wearing clothes: Jeans, sneakers, T-shirts, baseball hats on backwards, often unwashed, all body jewelry on and plainly visible. What no lunch, what kind of place is this? What kind of trinkets do you have for me to take home—gee, you’re a cheapskate compared to all the stuff I got at the other schools I visited. If you bore them (any discussion past 3 minutes usually does), they either will tell you to your face or nod off. Take me as I am. If you don’t me like his, a dozen other schools are knocking on my door (and they are right). Who has the best financial aid package? Let’s negotiate some more. I. I. I. I. . . me. me . me. me. …
When they finally select a college, the modern dorms have a two bedroom suite with an adjoining bathroom Many Gen Yers are even demanding private rooms with private baths quickly becoming a necessity. Air Conditioning better be present or scratch this school off my list. Computer hookups in every room with fastest internet connections available so I can download thousands of my favorite songs. And the cafeteria food? No more meatball sandwiches or “guess the entrée” contests as their parents had to contend with. Many universities have decided to enunciate their food as a competitive advantage to recruit students. Perhaps not quite yet French cooks or trained sous-chefs but a menu most restaurants would be proud to have. Deli sections, salad bars, pizza, you don’t see it let us know and we will get it for you. If a student is having trouble in his classes, it becomes the responsibility of the instructor and institute to assist him and to provide instruction according to what learning style he may have. History? History is bunk. If it occurred before 1990, it is irrelevant (Several Yers have told me they will not watch a film if it is over a decade old as it could not possibly have any meaning for them!)
Not that Gen Yers have it totally easy. For most of today’s Gen Y students, an undergraduate degree is just the start of their academic preparations. Graduate degrees are quickly becoming the norm and expected for today’s entry-level employee (a statistic I heard is that there were more Masters degree being given today than undergraduate degrees!). After they graduate, no waiting for them. They want to have it all and want it now. House, car, furnishings, vacations, all the good parts of life they have become used to. It is all for the present. The model of many Yers is the past is irrelevant and the future is unpredictable so enjoy today for today is all there really is.
Within ten years, we will have a fourth generation, the children of the boomlet, our grandchildren. I am not certain what they will be called: Perhaps Generation Z (since X and Y have already been taken). I can only imagine their lifestyle and how they will raise their children. If the pattern continues (and I have no reason to doubt it will), they will spoil their children even more than we spoiled ours and our parents spoiled us. Their children, being like children everywhere, will accept what they can get and always push for more, attempting to find the limits to what they can have and what they will not get. What will their lives be like?
How much larger a home can one have? Do we need one plus cars for every person in the household? Does each child need to have his/her own bedroom and own bath and Jacuzzi? Should each child have his/her own guest house on the property? Should each have own phone/computer/fax/internet connection and fiber optics network? Are they going to demand private day cares with educational experiences guaranteed for their children? What type of demands will be made on public schools systems? Colleges? What will the boomlet as parents be expected to provide to Gen Z to indicate to their peers they are good parents? In attempting to make life better and easier for our kids , will they be expected to do likewise for our grandkids? When will enough be enough?
The United States, with only 5% of the world’s population, already consumes a far greater proportion of the world’s resources (25% of its energy and 33% of its resources). The gap between the world’s rich and poor continues to grow. If the fourth generation is like the previous three plus, it will demand far more resources and luxuries as a means of placating its youth. Can the U.S. or the world afford this drain or will the world even allow us to consume more? At some point will the gap becomes so large, it becomes unbearable to those on the bottom? At what cost will these youthful demands be on the economy and productivity? Already, obesity for the boomlet has reached almost epidemic proportions. Should we expect any less for the next generation? Can this trend continue or will it collapse on its own weight?
What does the future hold? Have we created a Frankenstein we cannot control and that inevitably will destroy us by trying to outdo each other and each previous generation? What will Generation Z be like? More of the same? Or a return to a more balanced lifestyle? The answer to this no doubt holds the answer to how the entire 21st century will develop.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
CustomerExpectations
Customer Expectations
By Paul Herbig
Customer expectations have been rising over the past few decades. Graduates expect to find that perfect job and be managers and owners within a few years out of school; everyone is searching to find the ‘perfect’ spouse, often discarding those with one or two frailties; and our children should be perfect, beautiful, smart, athletic (picking those characteristics genetically is not as far off as one might think). As the number of choices increase in our life, many consumers believe they should never have to settle for that which is just “good enough” and instead shoot for perfection—given the plethora of options available, They know it is out there and theirs to be found. Those that do aim for only the best have been repeatedly found to be less happy, less optimistic, and more depressed . . . the making of a dissatisfied customer who cannot make up his/her mind (sounds familiar?).
Recently a "Husband Shopping Center" opened in Houston, where women could go to choose a husband from among many men. It was laid out in five floors, with the men increasing in positive attributes as you ascended up the floors The only rule was, once you opened the door to any floor, you must choose a man from that floor, and if you went up a floor, you couldn't go back down except to leave the place never to return.
A couple of friends went to the place to find their perfect mate. First floor, the door had a sign saying "These men have jobs and love kids." The women read the sign and said, "Well, that's better than not having jobs, or not loving kids, but I deserve better so I wonder what's further up?" So up they go. Second floor says "These men have high paying jobs, love kids, and are extremely good looking." Hmmm, say the girls, “Better but not the best. I deserve better. I wonder what's further up?” To the Third floor they go: "These men have high paying jobs, are extremely good looking, love kids and help with the housework." Wow! Say the women. Very tempting, BUT, Not quite good enough. There's more further up! And up they go. Fourth floor: "These men have high paying jobs, love kids, are extremely good looking, help with the housework, and have a strong romantic streak." Oh, mercy me. Sounds heavenly but not quite perfect. I only deserve the absolute best. Just think what must be awaiting us further on! So up to the fifth floor they go. The sign on that door said, "This floor is empty and exists only to prove that women are impossible to please."
This is funny. Take away the sexist implication (substitute men for women, substitute looking for perfect) and you have an excellent example of seeking perfection and never be satisfied with anything less. The result: constant dissatisfaction.
Customer expectations are often misaligned with company objectives. This could be due to the customer having unrealistically high expectations or the company having created levels of expectations it either cannot or will not fulfill.
Setting expectations. You must set the level of expectations you are able to meet and then sell to that point or just below it. Tell customers what you want them to want. Messages must be crafted to give the appropriate level of expectations. Hype might bring customers to your door but if your product and delivery cannot match the hype, you will not close the sale or keep the customer. What are you promising to the customer? Are you willing and able to meet the promises?
A study by the University of Illinois found customers willing to hang around even with lower actual satisfaction if their expectations were of higher actual future use. And conversely, those customers whose future value of products were minimal (not very useful to them in the future) tended not to hang around even with high ratings of customer satisfaction. In other words, if you provide a product valuable to them in the past, present and future, they will tend to stick with you regardless of the level of satisfaction (up to a point that is). You must 1) Effectively set expectations for customers; 2) Understand all the expectations of your customers. Not just those overtly expressed but just as well trying to understand those hidden; and 3) Deliver on their expectations or exceeding them Remember, Dissatisfaction is often derived from failed customer expectations
If your major benefit or sustainable competitive advantage is service and customer support, do not send messages of aggressive pricing. You will attract the wrong type of customer who will not be happy with the actual product offered. The expectation you create for your customers must match the message they hear.
By Paul Herbig
Customer expectations have been rising over the past few decades. Graduates expect to find that perfect job and be managers and owners within a few years out of school; everyone is searching to find the ‘perfect’ spouse, often discarding those with one or two frailties; and our children should be perfect, beautiful, smart, athletic (picking those characteristics genetically is not as far off as one might think). As the number of choices increase in our life, many consumers believe they should never have to settle for that which is just “good enough” and instead shoot for perfection—given the plethora of options available, They know it is out there and theirs to be found. Those that do aim for only the best have been repeatedly found to be less happy, less optimistic, and more depressed . . . the making of a dissatisfied customer who cannot make up his/her mind (sounds familiar?).
Recently a "Husband Shopping Center" opened in Houston, where women could go to choose a husband from among many men. It was laid out in five floors, with the men increasing in positive attributes as you ascended up the floors The only rule was, once you opened the door to any floor, you must choose a man from that floor, and if you went up a floor, you couldn't go back down except to leave the place never to return.
A couple of friends went to the place to find their perfect mate. First floor, the door had a sign saying "These men have jobs and love kids." The women read the sign and said, "Well, that's better than not having jobs, or not loving kids, but I deserve better so I wonder what's further up?" So up they go. Second floor says "These men have high paying jobs, love kids, and are extremely good looking." Hmmm, say the girls, “Better but not the best. I deserve better. I wonder what's further up?” To the Third floor they go: "These men have high paying jobs, are extremely good looking, love kids and help with the housework." Wow! Say the women. Very tempting, BUT, Not quite good enough. There's more further up! And up they go. Fourth floor: "These men have high paying jobs, love kids, are extremely good looking, help with the housework, and have a strong romantic streak." Oh, mercy me. Sounds heavenly but not quite perfect. I only deserve the absolute best. Just think what must be awaiting us further on! So up to the fifth floor they go. The sign on that door said, "This floor is empty and exists only to prove that women are impossible to please."
This is funny. Take away the sexist implication (substitute men for women, substitute looking for perfect) and you have an excellent example of seeking perfection and never be satisfied with anything less. The result: constant dissatisfaction.
Customer expectations are often misaligned with company objectives. This could be due to the customer having unrealistically high expectations or the company having created levels of expectations it either cannot or will not fulfill.
Setting expectations. You must set the level of expectations you are able to meet and then sell to that point or just below it. Tell customers what you want them to want. Messages must be crafted to give the appropriate level of expectations. Hype might bring customers to your door but if your product and delivery cannot match the hype, you will not close the sale or keep the customer. What are you promising to the customer? Are you willing and able to meet the promises?
A study by the University of Illinois found customers willing to hang around even with lower actual satisfaction if their expectations were of higher actual future use. And conversely, those customers whose future value of products were minimal (not very useful to them in the future) tended not to hang around even with high ratings of customer satisfaction. In other words, if you provide a product valuable to them in the past, present and future, they will tend to stick with you regardless of the level of satisfaction (up to a point that is). You must 1) Effectively set expectations for customers; 2) Understand all the expectations of your customers. Not just those overtly expressed but just as well trying to understand those hidden; and 3) Deliver on their expectations or exceeding them Remember, Dissatisfaction is often derived from failed customer expectations
If your major benefit or sustainable competitive advantage is service and customer support, do not send messages of aggressive pricing. You will attract the wrong type of customer who will not be happy with the actual product offered. The expectation you create for your customers must match the message they hear.
Wheredidtheygo
Where did they go?
By Paul Herbig
When Nielsen Media Research's fall sweeps ratings came out this past November, they clearly showed that men between the ages of 18 and 34 were watching less television, particularly fewer prime-time shows. For the time period during the autumn weeks, when many vaunted network shows hit the airwaves for the first time, Nielsen's data concluded that men 18-34 watched a hotly debated 7.7% less, or 270 fewer seconds, of prime-time TV programming a day than they did a year earlier. That may seem an insignificant drop, but Nielsen's research shows that younger men have been watching less television for the past 12 years and are no longer glued to the boob tube
This is not a trivial audience. For ad-supported network and cable TV channels, with more than $37 billion in annual revenue, 18- to 34-year-old men account for about $4.3 billion. So every minute that young males don't watch prime-time programming could carry a potential price tag of about $77 million across network, cable, national syndication, and national Hispanic TV channels
Where did the boys go? The Online Publishers Association (OPA) conducted a study
that addresses the where-the-boys-are problem TV networks are struggling with
(they appear to have found the girls, too). The coveted 18-34-year-old demographic
composes 24 percent of the U.S. population. Yet it accounts for a disproportionate
34.1 percent of the online population. This group takes access for granted, wherever,
whenever, and under their control. It is the first generation that grew up with the Internet. These young people are ditching their PCs in favor of laptops -- with wireless
broadband access.. It is not as if these people don't watch TV. They do. But "chaotic" schedules make concepts such as primetime all but meaningless. And when they do watch, it's often with laptop and cell phone at hand (they own lots of gadgets). When this demographic sees something in a brick-and-mortar store that catches their fancy, they'll often go home and buy it on the Web. "No lines,"
As TV loses its appeal among younger men, advertisers are using divining rods to follow the money. The PGA Tour, which tries to attract younger fans, sponsored EA Sports' golf video game, "Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2004." It even includes a section where the player can outfit his virtual persona with accessories from Nike, Tag Heuer, and Adidas. Says Kris Magel, senior vice president/group director of national broadcast at Optimedia, a New York advertising firm, "Partnerships with the developers of these games is a really interesting way to try to get in front of these guys." And while Volkswagen spent over $125 million on television advertising in 2003, the car company also paid Sony Computer Entertainment to have one of its vehicles featured in "Gran Turismo 3: A Spec." In the car racing game, the player can buy different car models from the Dodge Viper to Volkswagen's new Beetle
Research consistently shows men ages 18-34 watch less TV and go online
more. But research also says people who own DVRs watch more hours of TV.
Maybe people don't just watch more TV (since they can skip commercials),
but they watch it differently (because they control the schedule), at different
times (customized and managed to their availability and leisure), and only
the programs they want to watch. It resembles opt-in permission to exchange
personal information for tailored, relevant content.
TV media executives and advertisers should be glad they are not in the news print industry due to plummeting readership among younger consumers. I asked my son in college if he would like a subscription to The Wall Street Journal. His response: “If I want to read any articles I will check its web site.” This generation demands instant content on what matters to them and the newspapers must adapt their methods to customer’s behavior or die.
Behavioral targeting and DVR are ultimately about the consumer. Allowing
people to consume what they individually deem relevant will only increase
product affinity It is a war out there: the media and advertising versus the consumer. As you can’t win by fighting the customer, perhaps it is time to cooperate with him.
By Paul Herbig
When Nielsen Media Research's fall sweeps ratings came out this past November, they clearly showed that men between the ages of 18 and 34 were watching less television, particularly fewer prime-time shows. For the time period during the autumn weeks, when many vaunted network shows hit the airwaves for the first time, Nielsen's data concluded that men 18-34 watched a hotly debated 7.7% less, or 270 fewer seconds, of prime-time TV programming a day than they did a year earlier. That may seem an insignificant drop, but Nielsen's research shows that younger men have been watching less television for the past 12 years and are no longer glued to the boob tube
This is not a trivial audience. For ad-supported network and cable TV channels, with more than $37 billion in annual revenue, 18- to 34-year-old men account for about $4.3 billion. So every minute that young males don't watch prime-time programming could carry a potential price tag of about $77 million across network, cable, national syndication, and national Hispanic TV channels
Where did the boys go? The Online Publishers Association (OPA) conducted a study
that addresses the where-the-boys-are problem TV networks are struggling with
(they appear to have found the girls, too). The coveted 18-34-year-old demographic
composes 24 percent of the U.S. population. Yet it accounts for a disproportionate
34.1 percent of the online population. This group takes access for granted, wherever,
whenever, and under their control. It is the first generation that grew up with the Internet. These young people are ditching their PCs in favor of laptops -- with wireless
broadband access.. It is not as if these people don't watch TV. They do. But "chaotic" schedules make concepts such as primetime all but meaningless. And when they do watch, it's often with laptop and cell phone at hand (they own lots of gadgets). When this demographic sees something in a brick-and-mortar store that catches their fancy, they'll often go home and buy it on the Web. "No lines,"
As TV loses its appeal among younger men, advertisers are using divining rods to follow the money. The PGA Tour, which tries to attract younger fans, sponsored EA Sports' golf video game, "Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2004." It even includes a section where the player can outfit his virtual persona with accessories from Nike, Tag Heuer, and Adidas. Says Kris Magel, senior vice president/group director of national broadcast at Optimedia, a New York advertising firm, "Partnerships with the developers of these games is a really interesting way to try to get in front of these guys." And while Volkswagen spent over $125 million on television advertising in 2003, the car company also paid Sony Computer Entertainment to have one of its vehicles featured in "Gran Turismo 3: A Spec." In the car racing game, the player can buy different car models from the Dodge Viper to Volkswagen's new Beetle
Research consistently shows men ages 18-34 watch less TV and go online
more. But research also says people who own DVRs watch more hours of TV.
Maybe people don't just watch more TV (since they can skip commercials),
but they watch it differently (because they control the schedule), at different
times (customized and managed to their availability and leisure), and only
the programs they want to watch. It resembles opt-in permission to exchange
personal information for tailored, relevant content.
TV media executives and advertisers should be glad they are not in the news print industry due to plummeting readership among younger consumers. I asked my son in college if he would like a subscription to The Wall Street Journal. His response: “If I want to read any articles I will check its web site.” This generation demands instant content on what matters to them and the newspapers must adapt their methods to customer’s behavior or die.
Behavioral targeting and DVR are ultimately about the consumer. Allowing
people to consume what they individually deem relevant will only increase
product affinity It is a war out there: the media and advertising versus the consumer. As you can’t win by fighting the customer, perhaps it is time to cooperate with him.
XADS
X-Advertising
By Paul Herbig
Extreme Sports (X-games) are now the rage. It is the ultimate in obtaining the more-fickle-than-ever-before consumer’s attention. Just as X-games are getting the attention of the coveted younger crowd, a new set of X-advertising (Extreme Advertising) is being broadcasted to get the younger consumer’s attention.
TRAVEL advertising is “predictable, bland and boring”—unless you’re advertising UK youth package tour company Club 18-30, that is. Unsurprisingly, this is the view of Club 18-30 managing director Andy Tidy, whose controversial advertising created by Saatchi & Saatchi London won a Grand Prix at Cannes last year.
The entry featured a group of gorgeous young things in recreational situations, much in the manner of a Breughel painting, and incorporated a number of visual gags in each poster
Tidy was a speaker at the Cannes International Advertising Festival last week on the topic of ‘extreme advertising’—in which Club 18-30 indulges. The brand has been created around the consumer insight that for the majority of its customers, a Club 18-30 trip means sun, fun and, most of all, getting laid. Most of its marketing, including a variety of ambient and stunt campaigns, focuses on the latter point. For example, the brand ran a pseudo-demonstration outside the U.S. embassy in London recently, with people carrying placards and chanting “We want Bush”. On the back of the signs was a Club 18-30 logo.
“Within the travel industry, very few ‘brands’ exist,” Tidy told B&T. “The Club 18-30 logo adds meaning and completes the ad.”
Interestingly, however, a brand that is so strongly and controversially positioned contributes to a limited lifespan with its consumers. Tidy said there is a three-year window where Club 18-30 is the right travel brand for a person.He says the brand—which is owned by mainstream travel company Thomas Cook, but run by a separate management company at which Tidy is the only person aged older than 27—needs to expand its market to include slightly older travelers (who prefer ‘unpackaged tours’), and further generate word-of-mouth and loyalty .“Traditional loyalty programs are useless,” he said. “The real loyalty is when our customers tell other people what a great time they had and it gets passed on.”
As part of its efforts to generate word of mouth, the company spends time and effort on getting close to its market—and oddly, even their parents. For example, it runs local model competitions in local newspapers—something that is popular with its potential target market—and their parents—who might otherwise be expected to be rather anxious about sending their offspring on a Club 18-30 holiday.
“We have one rep to every 25 guests. A lot of the other companies only have one rep to every 200 guests,” Tidy says. “We’ve very successfully used this tactic for years..We also have an annual reunion—9000 people—it’s the biggest indoor event in Britain.” This is also where the ‘extreme’ advertising approach comes in. Club 18-30’s advertising must be “talked about”.
“It’s very, very important for the advertising to be award-winning,” Tidy says. “There’s no way I want to be a ‘me-too’ brand. It’s got to lead, not follow.We are so close to the target audience that we know if something is working. We know if we’re losing it. It’s anecdotal evidence—if we’re not being talked about.”
Tidy says for the longer-term, there’s little alternative but to launch new brands that target older travelers. For example, Cultura is set to launch at the end of August this year offering partly-packaged tours to Spanish and Italian cities and Prague.“It’s not a package holiday,” he says of the new brand. “You’re opting out, not in.
“We have a new reservation system. We’ll be able to work with partners like EasyJet. It will be very different from Club 18-30. But budgets will never be huge [so we need to] define another strong brand.”
Extreme Advertising—the future?
By Paul Herbig
Extreme Sports (X-games) are now the rage. It is the ultimate in obtaining the more-fickle-than-ever-before consumer’s attention. Just as X-games are getting the attention of the coveted younger crowd, a new set of X-advertising (Extreme Advertising) is being broadcasted to get the younger consumer’s attention.
TRAVEL advertising is “predictable, bland and boring”—unless you’re advertising UK youth package tour company Club 18-30, that is. Unsurprisingly, this is the view of Club 18-30 managing director Andy Tidy, whose controversial advertising created by Saatchi & Saatchi London won a Grand Prix at Cannes last year.
The entry featured a group of gorgeous young things in recreational situations, much in the manner of a Breughel painting, and incorporated a number of visual gags in each poster
Tidy was a speaker at the Cannes International Advertising Festival last week on the topic of ‘extreme advertising’—in which Club 18-30 indulges. The brand has been created around the consumer insight that for the majority of its customers, a Club 18-30 trip means sun, fun and, most of all, getting laid. Most of its marketing, including a variety of ambient and stunt campaigns, focuses on the latter point. For example, the brand ran a pseudo-demonstration outside the U.S. embassy in London recently, with people carrying placards and chanting “We want Bush”. On the back of the signs was a Club 18-30 logo.
“Within the travel industry, very few ‘brands’ exist,” Tidy told B&T. “The Club 18-30 logo adds meaning and completes the ad.”
Interestingly, however, a brand that is so strongly and controversially positioned contributes to a limited lifespan with its consumers. Tidy said there is a three-year window where Club 18-30 is the right travel brand for a person.He says the brand—which is owned by mainstream travel company Thomas Cook, but run by a separate management company at which Tidy is the only person aged older than 27—needs to expand its market to include slightly older travelers (who prefer ‘unpackaged tours’), and further generate word-of-mouth and loyalty .“Traditional loyalty programs are useless,” he said. “The real loyalty is when our customers tell other people what a great time they had and it gets passed on.”
As part of its efforts to generate word of mouth, the company spends time and effort on getting close to its market—and oddly, even their parents. For example, it runs local model competitions in local newspapers—something that is popular with its potential target market—and their parents—who might otherwise be expected to be rather anxious about sending their offspring on a Club 18-30 holiday.
“We have one rep to every 25 guests. A lot of the other companies only have one rep to every 200 guests,” Tidy says. “We’ve very successfully used this tactic for years..We also have an annual reunion—9000 people—it’s the biggest indoor event in Britain.” This is also where the ‘extreme’ advertising approach comes in. Club 18-30’s advertising must be “talked about”.
“It’s very, very important for the advertising to be award-winning,” Tidy says. “There’s no way I want to be a ‘me-too’ brand. It’s got to lead, not follow.We are so close to the target audience that we know if something is working. We know if we’re losing it. It’s anecdotal evidence—if we’re not being talked about.”
Tidy says for the longer-term, there’s little alternative but to launch new brands that target older travelers. For example, Cultura is set to launch at the end of August this year offering partly-packaged tours to Spanish and Italian cities and Prague.“It’s not a package holiday,” he says of the new brand. “You’re opting out, not in.
“We have a new reservation system. We’ll be able to work with partners like EasyJet. It will be very different from Club 18-30. But budgets will never be huge [so we need to] define another strong brand.”
Extreme Advertising—the future?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
