The Brand Man Speaks

Marketing #101: Under promise and over deliver. Why Gaylord Palms Resort Orlando fails

One of the first mantra's one learns studying marketing is the most successful entities/products/services are ones that under promise and over deliver to the delight of the consumer.

It doesn't take a genius to understand that if you promise something you can't deliver, you not only disappoint your audience but also you likely will lose them and they will spread negative information about your brand.

Saying and delivering outstanding customer service are too very different things. Words are fine but actions speak far louder than words.

Case in point.

I recently stayed at the Gaylord Palms Resort in the Orlando area to attend an event held in their convention center. The hotel is huge with over 1400 rooms including an indoor activity atrium and numerous themed restaurants. It is kind of Disney-like but not Disney.

Virtually all touch points from recordings on the phone to the in-person dealings with staff include efforts to communicate a commitment to extraordinary guest experiences. I like this idea especially the fact that they try to carry this brand message throughout the facility in any and every way they can.

Problem is the execution falls flat and greatly disappoints.

Examples.

I called housekeeping for extra towels and was assured they would be up to my room in a jiffy. Four hours later still no towels. Two calls to the "can do it/get it done" hotline later and the towels finally showed up along with apologies that they dropped the ball "somewhere".

I stayed two nights with different room rates for each night based on what was being offered. This required getting new keys which were delivered under our door during night one. The keys worked in the room lock but failed to allow me access to my car in the self-park. Although wanting to be very helpful, front desk staff were not consistent in their approach to solving the problem requiring a few, "let me check how this can be done", quips.

The room rate change (but still in the same room) also caused us to lose access to the internet service which never seemed to work again for us. The system did not recognize me and my room number as legitimate guests. I didn't have time to waste trying to get this fixed so I just used my cellular data plan instead.

Special meals for the fitness event I attended were supposed to be available in the sports bar restaurant. Again, the staff was not prepared and had to scramble to try to meet the expectation. The same restaurant the next day was quite busy and this seemed to completely overwhelm many waitstaff members leaving diners unhappy because of delayed food and incorrect delivery of orders. Apologies notwithstanding the problem seemed significant for a place that promises extraordinary service.

There were serveral other service delivery issues but the most insulting two occurred upon check out. I did not get the bill under my door as usual with most hotels, so I called the front desk to get it delivered. (BTW in this huge hotel it is quite a hike to the front desk from most rooms). After waiting over 30 minutes and two telephone calls later and no bill, I went down to the lobby to handle it directly. I received more apologies for the "no-show" front desk person with my bill, but that was the least of my problems. My bill was not remotely accurate requiring an extra 20 minutes of my time to get it straightened out. Despite my rate package documentation in writing, the hotel did not have this information in their system (for some unexplained reason---which generated more apologies) and the front desk staff member assisting me had to manually re-code and re-enterfix each of the four mistaken/inaccurate entries.

And the final blow came when we arrived home only to find that a family member's pillow and blanket had apparently fallen off the bellman's cart while our belongings were being transferred from the room to the hotel's front drive and was not packed into the car. (The hotel fed ex'd the items overnight with more apologies).

The lesson to be learned (hopefully) for Marriott (which runs the Gaylord Palms Resorts) is not to promise what you cannot deliver consistently. Even calling the fix it hotline required several attempts each time because the phone did not get answered or was put into perpetual hold. Not good.

All in all Gaylord Palms is a "needs a lot of work" brand especially if it continues to espouse the "extraordinary" service mantra.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

 

Abercrombie CEO Jeffries disses customers who are fat, skinny, old, unattractive

In an old interview that is being resurfaced in the new retail tome, "The New Rules of Retail",  Mike Jeffries CEO of way past its prime young adult retailer Abercrombie and Fitch is quoted as dissing anyone who doesn't fit the image of the model beautiful kids he promotes for his brand.

Jeffries is no stranger to controversial actions with the A and F brand often accused of pushing the envelope with highly charged sexual visuals in the company's catalog and instore. He is also one of the most highly [over] paid executives in the United States.

It is certainly the perogative of the company to clearly state its brand positioning and the target audience it seeks for its products. This is good business. The irony here is that "perfect" beautiful all-American look of young men and women in their late teens and early 20s is what attracts a large audience of folks to the brand who do not look that way--not remotely. That image is one many would like to align with themselves and the closest way to do so, is to buy into the brand. Large numbers of A and F loyalists are over 25--beyond the key target--, including a large grouping of gay men who are 40 plus who are fit and see themselves as in their 20s and "competitive" with young buff all-American guys.

For those consumers who do NOT like Mr. Jeffries stance, they do not have to buy his company's clothing. They should not complain or feel insulted. If they want to be a part of the A and F brand they have to deal with the fact that they are not the company's prime targets. Period. And, honestly, many of these folks should NOT be buying this brand's apparel. They truly do not look younger in those clothes and are only fooling themselves. But, hey, this is America. Dress as you wish. Just do not complain.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

 

 

JC Penney CEO Ron Johnson, who twice tried to revamp the retailer, is out.

It was no surprise to read the headline posted above earlier today, (I have written several blog posts about why JC Penney was making serious brand mistakes). After several failed attempts to revamp mid-market retailer JC Penney, it was painfully obvious that the company's board needed to cut the blood letting as soon as possible. Business was down 25% last year.

What went wrong? Johnson, a notable former Apple exec, was picked to bring retail savvy from the technology company to a tired old department store brand. The problem is trying to up-market a lower end retailer whose sales were driven by price (and big sales/discounts/coupons) has historically not worked (for anybody). WalMart tried this approach a few years ago trying to out up-market Target and it also failed miserably.

Although re-branding an entity can be done, the approach used for JC Penney that tried to eliminate its brand essence and its positioning as a price point retailer was failed from the get go. Penney's customer is price driven all the way and not interested in complicated pricing strategies (there were numerous strategies used that easily confused the regular consumer) as introduced under Johnson in an attempt to get people off sales and coupons.

Its ad campaigns looked like Target knock-offs as did the catalogues and newspaper free-standing brochures they produced.

Unless the brand had something in its bag of tricks that would re-birth JC Penney without alienating and confusing its core buyers, any new strategy that made customers sense that prices were going up and that the store was moving more towards being Macys or a boutique operation was doomed to fail.

I actually think the board waited too long to make this decision and should have cut the cord after one season since the reasoning behind the pricing strategy was flawed from the beginning and trying to make JC Penney the "Apple" of department store retailing was never going to work.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

 

BUYING ONLINE? Beware of co's using the UPS/USPS shipping method

Millions of Americans buy online everyday because of the simplicity of the purchase experience as well as competitive prices (to brick and mortar) and low or no cost shipping.

Increasingly, more online retailers are turning to a hybrid shipping method to save money and thereby offer more consumers "free shipping". Free shipping has become an almost mandatory offer to get consumers to buy from one online retailer or another.

VIPs at Zappos and Prime customers at Amazon get quick free shipping and value that amenity to the point it is now a commodity. These companies use UPS or Fed Ex for shipping and my experience has been extremely good with both.

Three weeks ago I bought items online from Under Armour clothing and then last week from Footlocker. Both companies use a new hybrid delivery system that quite frankly stinks. They use UPS and USPS together to deliver. The process starts with a UPS pickup from the online retailer but there is a hand-off to USPS (your not so friendly postal service) when the package gets to your neck of the woods.

What I have experience is the package gets lost for a while (can't be tracked by either party) and definitively arrives late. My Under Armour package just showed up one day after I had already asked for a credit and a re-order.

UPS says the problem is USPS. USPS says its UPS. The bottom line is the customer gets the bad end of the deal and no one takes any responsibility for the problem.

My recommendation? I now ask an online retailer how they ship. If they use this hybrid, I search for the product elsewhere. I believe this attempt to save money will only alienate consumers. To save a penny to lose a dollar is not good business.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

 

Lance Armstrong to "mea culpa" on Oprah. Doubtful cyclist's "confession" will enhance his brand value

Finally after years of denying he used any performance enhancement drugs of any kind, Tour de France wonderman, Lance Armstrong has decided to come clean (to some degree) about his drug use. The 7- time champion has agreed to talk to Oprah after years of insisting he was being unfairly targeted and accused.

Most people over the past few years began to believe he was guilty but very astute at avoiding a need to confess. He was very outwardly agressive against any source who challenged him. What changed? After Lance was banned from participation in sanctioned events (Triathlons for example) his career came to a stand still. He is a great athlete no doubt and that is what he does...compete. Not being able to do so was of great concern to him.

The mea culpa he chooses to give this Thursday to Oprah will likely have some admissions but I doubt he will completely come-clean. The man worth $125 Million (supposedly) from his athletic success and championships in cycling is certainly to some degree at risk. But the man stripped of all his achievements (and dumped from his LiveStrong Foundation) has little else but money (not bad in its own right) to show for his efforts. I think a great athlete is always a great athlete even if a cheater and I suspect Lance "needs" competition to feel alive.

However, his integrity and brand are unquestionably damaged. Sure athletes who get into trouble mostly manage over time to improve their image to some degree. Marital issues seem to get resolved more easily than cheating at one's sport. Just ask Pete Rose who still after years of being banned from baseball still pines to be a part of the game in some way. Also notice how suspected drug enhanced NLB stars did not get elected into the Hall of Fame this year.

Given how much attention this case has received, unlike even Tiger Woods (whose image has still not recovered nor has his game) I think Armstrong's credibility and integrity are shot for his lifetime and few sponsors despite his achievement of beating cancer are likely to come back to him. Why should they?

He probably has some civil legal battles to fight once he comes out. Supposedly lawyers had advised him NOT to talk to anyone, certainly not Oprah. I actually don't think people will forget but with Oprah people might start to forgive. I will NOT be one of them.

As a counter point to this mea culpa event, ADFNA is being launched. The Association of Drug Free Natural Athletes. This organization, the first online community of drug free natural athletes, is the beginning of what I hope is a sports culture change in this country. (Full disclosure: this is a venture I founded to honor and celebrate athletes around the globe as a result of watching sports become tainted by drug enhanced athletes.) I know many great athletes of all ages who find competiting against so many drug enhanced competitors depressing.You might be surprised how many adult amateur athletes now cheat just to get on the podium even when no prize money is involved! It's time to give this group of natural athletes a chance at being part of a meaningful community of like minded athletes around the world.

Like millions I will watch Lance on Oprah but I do not expect to be surprised or to feel any compassion for this man, just pity and sadness.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

Twinkies for life: Hostess to shut down but iconic brand will survive

Any babyboomer who has not been sleeping through his or her lifetime knows about Hostess Twinkies. The vanilla cake outside with creamy white filling inside. It was the ultimate kids feel good snack so surgary and soft so calming and satisfying.

Hostess unable to resolve a employee union dispute decided to shut down its operations this week. The reality has been in the air for sometime. The baking company has been in financial difficulty for some years but this union pay strike put the "icing on the cake".

The maker of Wonderbread, Ho Hos, Devil Dogs, Funny Bones and their most famous brand Twinkies is closing up shop rather quickly, however, I believe this will not be the end of this iconic brand.

Twinkies are a part of the fabric of babyboomer lives which is why it makes it such an important brand of long standing. Although the butt of many jokes over the years and less in demand because it is truly unhealthy food, Twinkies nonetheless has a place in our world and will continue to have one. This brand is just too important and meaningful to people to let it die. Without the baggage of the dying manufacturer, a more financially stable baker can swoop in and buy the brand and ensure it stays around for years to come.

Wonderbread, the doughy white bleached flour product that served as sandwich bread for millions in my childhood, has some iconic status as well. However, people of all ages have increasingly forgone using white bread because it is so unhealthy, there are so many alternatives that are more healthy and honestly it won't be missed. It is a symbol of our childhood when eating unhealthy was the norm and most of us have moved on from that point and only see Wonderbread in the rear window.

Twinkies remain a symbol of our collective need for mini-indulgences even today. Our stressful and complex lives yearn for such pick me up products and despite the tons of sugar and other unhealthy ingredients, we continue to need such products to turn to if for no other reason than babyboomers are into naustalgia and a need to hold on to some key elements of their childhood as they age. It also tastes amazing when you just want that small satisfaction of uummm good bad stuff in your mouth.

The bottom line is the brand value of Twinkies is very high and undoubtedly this brand will be picked up very soon and back on grocery store shelves before you know it.

Why Facebook users won't use advertising: It's elementary Watson

I remember my first Facebook. The one I got as a freshman in college that shares all those high school pictures of my fellow first year colleagues along with their hometowns, high schools and interests. Things have come a long way since that Facebook.

Today's Facebook maybe be technologically a far from the original concept but the idea remains somewhat similar. Gaining a familiarity with old friends and new, sharing information of relevance to you your friend and a similar group. Learning a little or more than just a little about a friend or acquaintance. In the number of years Facebook as we know it today has been around it has become this community of sharing, sharing with friends to the point of an addiction. As companies tried to figure out how to use the resource to "sell" they found FB users ignored them unless there was some great offer or discount if you acknowledged you "liked" them. But did users (do users?) really care about the commercial entities they liked (and still "like" today?)? No, not really.

I "like" certain companies like millions of FB users do. But I do it only for something in return and it doesn't mean I have any interest in that company beyond the "deal" and it certainly doesn't mean I am brand loyal. Definitely not. It's like a newspaper coupon. A cheaper price on something I might want to buy. Pure and simple. Or access to something you might want but don't want to wait for or pay for.

The bottom line is Facebook remained a virtual non-commercial entity for a longer period of time than a new consumer product would have had its management been motivated by profit. Now that the concept has been around for a while finding ways to provide good return on investment for companies spending millions trying to reach the 900 million FB users is going to be virtually impossible. FB users have lived without interruptive ad messages (like ones on radio and TV and other online sites from newspapers to dating sources) and do not have a "space" in their "like" book for more advertising involvement. The environment is not ad friendly, the users are not ad interested.

It is similar to what has happened at retail. Once the Xmas holiday shopping game became driven by sales and discounts it became nearly impossible for retailers to wean consumers off the special pricing. When stores try to go full price, consumers balk. They like what they have, the way they have it and have little intention of accepting anything but discounting.

Additionally, during the long length of time FB users have been involved with the online social site advertising has been mostly benign and uninterruptive. It has been a non-entity with little serious measurable sales generation (partially why GM stopped using the tool for paid marketing efforts). To start intergrating noticeably invasive ads (even for things users might have shown a previous interest in) is likely to substantially change the FB landscape and anger millions of users.

It is going to take some amazingly creative tools to meld advertising messages into peoples FB pages without them crying foul. I haven't seen one yet. But whomever figures out a way to do this, will make gobs of money.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

Sketchers has $40 Mill bill to pay FTC for deceptive advertising

In a significant win for the Federal Trade Commission against body toning shoe brand Sketchers, the company has been ordered to pay $40 Million for deceptive advertising.

The sneaker brand which primarily targeted women who wanted to lose weight and get into better physical shape advertised that wearing their shoes would not only shape and slenderize women's bodies but also help them lose weight and improve cardiovascular conditioning BETTER than other brands of athletic shoes. They cited studies to back their claims which were debunked by the FTC.

The ads indicated women would get these results without "setting foot into a gym".

The company used celebrities to endorse their product including Kim Kardashian and Brooke Burke,  (from Dancing With The Stars). No surprise Kardashian was an endorser as she seems to endorse anything that pays money.

The company is forbidden from making virtually any health claims about the shoes going forward. Reebok was forced into a smaller but similar settlement as well recently.

Although it is important for all brands to find uniqueness and distinctiveness in their categories, since Sketchers reason for being was most notably based on this premise, the brandmanspeaks feels the brand is now left empty-handed with no positioning to merit consumer interest.

Publix, Trader Joe's, Wegman's, Whole Foods among best supermarket brands in US

A recent Consumer Reports Study concluded that Publix, Trader Joe's, Whole Foods and Wegman's are among the most beloved supermarket brands in the United States. Customer service, attractive environments and variety and quality of choices contribute to creating memorable food shopping experiences.

The reality is most American's can't afford to shop in the more upmarket supermarkets these days making greatly disliked Walmart's supermarket business #1 in the US because of its prices and convenience.

I read excerpts of the report which also stated people prefer stores with shorter check out lines as part of good overall customer service. What I found interesting is my own kitchen research doesn't necessarily support this premise.

Here's what I have experienced.

First, customer service is at an all time low in virtually all supermarkets because they are trying to keep costs down. Food costs are not as easy to regulate as costs of staffing. I find customer service in Whole Foods for example in New York, LA and Miami extremely poor. Increasingly, I find behind the counter staff surly uninterested and make many customers feel like they are doing them are favor to provide service. The same is been experienced at Publix throughout Florida despite their mantra "Where shopping is a pleasure". Not necessarily so. Check out lines at Publix tend to be long and they are slow to open additional lanes when crowded. I find cashiers and baggers sometimes so involved in their own conversations they practically ignore the customer.

Another interesting observation I have found is that prices for the same items vary dramatically from market to market. I am not talking fresh foods per se (although they vary widely as well based on availability and distance from source) but rather basic commodity items from cleaning products to cookies. I did a mini research study of prices between Ralphs ( a division of Kroger Foods)  in West Los Angeles and Publix in Miami Beach. I found prices in Ralphs on such basic items as Windex and Fig Newtons were vastly higher than in Miami Beach. The differences were as much as 50% higher in Ralphs vs. Publix yet I do not believe the key variable transportation costs should merit such a price difference. Ironically, Ralphs actively promotes "low prices" in their advertising efforts.

Additionally, Trader's Joes is the anomaly. Low prices, high quality pretty decent service and an interesting variety of products. It doesn't replace a supermarket for lots of items but my research consistently shows they check off most of consumers "must have" boxes for a good food shopping experience. Wish they had stores in Florida.....

Finally, I have found sometimes pricing in stores like Whole Foods is LOWER than pricing at Publix for example and although Whole Foods is generally more expensive that is not always the case especially with fresh foods and produce.

My conclusion is that perceptions about better service, pricing and products is quite variable and it is increasingly difficult for supermarket brands to distinguish themselves substantively. Thus, consumers (which they are apparently doing in larger numbers) are shopping around going from store to store rather than only shopping with one brand.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

 

 

Intercontinental Hotels to launch Fitness-Oriented hotel brand, Even

Intercontinental Hotel Group will launch the first mainstream hotel brand focused on the fitness minded traveler. The new chain will be called "Even" and will feature a large fully equipped fitness center in the lobby and fitness minded furnishings in each hotel room.

Research shows that business travelers increasingly are looking for hotels with truly functional gyms and not small closet afterthought exercise spaces. Currently many top luxury branded hotels and spas have fitness centers comparable to health clubs. Canyon Ranch Hotel and Spas in three US locations is noted for its excellent fitness centers on-site.

Intercontinental whose brands include Holiday Inn, Crowne Plaza, Hotel Indigo, Intercontinental, Candlewood and Staybridge Suites plan to open 100 US locations of Even Hotels. The new concept is truly distinctive and quite different than their existing properties.

The Even Hotels will also serve health oriented meals in its restaurants. In room amenities will include a coat rack that doubles as a pull up bar and a luggage rack that is usable as an exercise bench.

Although many might see this as too niche oriented, I believe it is a good branding idea for the relatively stagnant hospitality industry seeking to meet the needs of travelers who want to maintain their fitness regimens on the road without having to search for local health clubs.

The first location (not yet specified) is scheduled to open in 2013.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli