The Brand Man Speaks

Paula Deen may have swallowed her own poison pill. High Fat Food Chef hides Diabetes

Paul Deen the southern chef who rose to prominence in the past few years with her high fat generally unhealthy but delicious (to many-but not me) cuisine has finally disclosed that she has Diabetes. What is worse and threatens to destroy her brand is the fact that she hid this information from her "fans" and the public in general and then has gone on to become a spokesperson for a Diabetes drug called Victoza.

The problem lies in the fact that her claim to fame are foods that are unhealthy and could directly relate to causing Diabetes in those who indulge in such fat-ladden meals. Ms. Deen has said she "didn't know how to handle" disseminating the news of her Diabetes or her new spokesperson status given the nature of her brand's identity.

Famous recipes have included Deep Fried Mac and Cheese and Fried Butter Balls. Can you say "it might kill you" foods?

Fans of the Food Network have spoken loudly condemning Ms. Deen for making millions and not being honest with her fans and the American public in general.  Other notable chefs have gone as far as to make public statements about Ms. Deen that are not complimentary about this situation.

From a brand point of view, this latest twist (which includes now offering low(er) fat recipes and tweaking her famous Paul Deen Southern Cooking approach dramatically) may create empathy but it undercuts what her brand was all about specifically all her cookbooks and shows that are completely tied to fatty foods.

If she radically changes her shows books and endorsements the Paula Deen brand will be no more and likely to become a footnote in celebrity chef history.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

Mercedes Benz uses Che Guevara in promotional presentation causing outrage

In a bumbling effort to promote what Mercedes called "revolutionary" new developments in automotive technology the luxury automaker is scrambling to do damage control over the use of marxist revolutionary Che Guevara's image with a Mercedes 3 point star in his beret in a Las Vegas CES presentation this week.

In a rare moment of joining forces, liberal and conservative individuals and groups have cried foul and condemned the automaker for the use and reference. For example:

"Mercedes-Benz Uses Communist Madman Che Guevara to Sell Luxury Cars," said the headline on a blog from the Heritage Foundation, a prominent conservative political organization in Washington.

"Che Guevara... was a psychopath whose sadistic lust for blood was not easily quenched. He killed for pleasure," noted Heritage Vice President Mike Gonzalez.

It blows my mind sometimes how smart marketers do very dumb things without thinking about them. Mercedes has apologized for the use but the PR which is very negative can't be that easily ignored this time because key customer targets are expressing outrage throughout both traditional and social media.

Ernesto Suarez, who organized an effort to get Mercedes to apologize for using the image of a man often  called "a racist, homophobic, anti-semitic and tyrannical killer who admitted in his own writing to his endless blood thirst, " expressed relief that his effort to generate the apology was realized.

Some social media pundits have called for a boycott of Mercedes Benz cars. (Mercedes Benz just completed an oustanding sales year running neck and neck with BMW for top honors in the luxury automotive arena.)

A german automaker like Mercedes has to be very careful doing such polarizing activities because of its association with Hitler's operations during World War II and beliefs among segments of the American population (Conservative and Orthodox Jews for example) that Mercedes along with other German companies will never be cleared of their anti-semitic alliances from the War.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

Sears Holdings to close 120 or more Sears and Kmart stores

It should come as no surprise to anyone who shops brick and mortar stores these days that Sears Holding the parent to Sears and Kmart is planning to close 120 or more stores around the US.

Most retail competitors did fairly well this year and particularly this holiday season. Why did Sears not enjoy the same benefits of consumers going out and spending?

Simple.

Sears has no brand identity and hasn't for many years. Yours truly has written numerous times that Sears is a retail brand dinosaur that should close up and die. The brand hasn't had a positioning of note since maybe the "softer side of Sears" over a decade or more ago that helped consumers understand they were also sellers of soft goods (apparel) besides hard goods, (tools).

Sears used to be the catch all retailer one could go to, to get anything (besides food) you needed. It was America's store. They sold virtually everything. As WalMart exploded as the mega retailer of the past decade and retailing in general became more defined and brand specific, Sears lost its way. It isn't known for good pricing, service or selection or unique goods (that are consistent with its mid-America brand--Kardashian products make absolutely NO sense at Sears but don't get me started about that emperor's new clothes business). Sears exists because of inertia not because of any reason to exist and that is why I expect the brand to be out of business within two years or less. Sears is just completely out of step with the world in which we live today. Period.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

 

Free shipping becomes commodity offering vs benefit for holiday shoppers

For the past number of years, many millions of consumers had chosen to buy online vs in brick and mortar retail (Including on Black Friday) because of two reasons. First, no sales tax (in most states). Second, free shipping. Not all online sites had offered free shipping in the past. It might have required a minimum expenditure of say $50 but it did entice people to shop one place versus another.

This year it appears that "Free Shipping" has become a commodity offering. This means that it is offered by a much larger number of online only retailers and is being matched by many brick and mortar retailers on their online sites. It has in marketing parlance become "a price of entry" into the online shopping game. You have to offer it to survive and compete.

This is very good for consumers but could pose financial problems for retailers. Shipping costs are not inexpensive for retailers to absorb and could hurt profitability numbers at the end of the holiday season when all is tabulated.

One online retailer that appeals to young urban hipster types, Karmaloop.com, throws "free shipping" and percentage discounts out to its loyal buyers pretty frequently all year long. However, when you click through to final payment terms on your purchase you find they charge a $1.50 "handling" fee and don't see that has a shipping charge. I have expressed to the CEO that I feel this is a bit disceptive to consumers. The company's response has been they need to offset the huge costs of free shipping and this is how their bean counters told them to do it. Bad idea.

Personally, I have become a heavy Amazon.com shopper because of free shipping and very low cost two day and overnight shipping options as a "prime" member, (which costs $79 a year and is worth it in my opinion). I also have found from the comfort of my beach side lounge chair better deals on Amazon then some advertised Black Friday offerings at brick and mortar stores with the added bonus of no sales tax and no shipping fees. Pretty hard to beat without facing the vicious Black Friday crowds.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

 

LA Times "brand" story on Kardashian brand has follow up.

Here is the link to the follow up piece by writer Adam Tschorn. He explores my point of view.

Kardashian a Brand?

 

Watching out for you everday.

Eli

Black Friday moves to Turkey Day, Thanksgiving but will consumers respond positively to this move?

Getting a jump on Black Friday retail sales has become an obsession for millions of Americans. In the past few years most electronic and mass merchandiser retail concerns have opened their doors in the wee hours of the Friday after Thanksgiving. Some open at Midnight to lure shoppers to (supposedly) great bargains. Consumers have been seen lining up for hours to get into these special shopping events. But there maybe a backlash this holiday season.

This year a handful of retailers are pushing the time frame even earlier announcing they will open at 10pm on Thanksgiving. Some consumers think this is great news. However, a growing number are publicly saying they think stores opening in the evening of Thanksgiving Day is "crossing the line".

The line being crossed is the one which says making employees shorten their holiday family time to come to work is unfair, unreasonable and at one extreme a violation of workers rights. In many news articles over the past few days, thousands of consumers have expressed concern to full blown outrage that greedy retailers are forcing their employees (even with holiday pay) to give up time with family to work. Is this going to far? Are these outraged consumers right? Will retailers who open "too early" see a negative feedback in their sales? It is too early to tell but things are a brewing.

The "Occupy" rallies around the US have shown many Americans are fed up with corporate greed and the needs of the wealthy to make more and more money off the backs of the average guy. It is within this cultural paradigm shift that such a backlash against retailers forcing workers to work on holidays is getting much of its fuel.

It is a tricky line to cross because many retailers feel they must be competitive and lure shoppers in as quickly as possible to "snap up" the available holiday gift buying dollars especially in this on-going weak economy. Those retailers who will not open on Thanksgiving evening have expressed support for workers and their families but also acknowedge it could be a costly risk to lose valuable consumer sales.

Personally I cannot imagine being a part of this craziness and have found many of the same desirable items available from the comfort of one's home office online at comparable prices. But what is important here is the underlying voice of average Americans which has until the "Occupy" rallies been kind of quiet. I think it is very important for consumer products and service companies to be mindful of this increasingly vocal group and not to dismiss it as unimportant or minor in anyway. There will be changes in our culture that come out of this still undefined movement across the US. As of yet, as always when you are in the middle of a paradigm shift, it is unclear what kind or what magnitude of change will be forthcoming. Be rest assured, however, that an important shift is coming.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

Bank of America likely to pull a "Netflix": About face based on consumer anger

Looks like Bank of America is learning that you cannot keep pissing off your customers and nickel and diming them and think you can keep them loyal. In a move pundits are calling a "Netflix", B of A is expected to change a recent decision and drop its intent to charge customers for ATM/Debit Card use. Several other banks (who did not get the same flack as B of A) have already dropped the idea.

Companies have to realize in the world we occupy today, information, especially consumer dissatisfaction news spreads like wildfire in minutes not days or weeks. Companies are trying so hard to manipulate social media to generate business and open dialogues with consumers but seem to forget that these same tools can damage and possibly destroy a business easily and quickly.

The bad news is be sure B of A will find another way to levy more fees on its consumers. This is why millions of people are switching to Credit Unions for banking services where fees are low or non-existent and the service is far better and more helpful than at traditional banks.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

 

Netflix isn't Doomed.

So says Holman Jenkins Jr. in an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal today. I do not agree. His conclusion? Despite the huge fall off in subscribers and the costs involved in obtaining more streaming content (of value to subscribers---not just stuff nobody wants to watch) he believes both investors and subscribers will see that no one source will meet their needs because of a fragmented marketplace for at- home entertainment content and that Netflix is still a good value and will survive.

The Netflix premise that took consumers on a "journey" was for a very good price (less than going to the movies) you had a bunch of choices that you could order online delivered right to your door sometimes next day for viewing for as long as you wished. Brand loyalty was built on this premise along with a very identifiable icon, the red Netflix envelope. Streaming was the next order of business but there were many subscribers who wanted both, one or the other, but wanted the choice their way. I am one of the those folks who wanted it his way. Both DVDs and streaming at a fair price. I was a huge fan of Netflix so much so that I bought the stock because I believed the vision and the journey was exciting to many millions of people despite the other options out there and on the horizon.

However, (and I will keep reminding people for some time to come) great companies should not fail to understand that building that brand loyalty is as important (if not more so) than what may appear to be great strategic business modeling to analysts. Many analysts said that Netlfix couldn't maintain the value proposition they had given consumers for much longer and the price increase was a necessity for survival. That may be true. Unfortunately, when a key element of your brand strategy involves price-value you have to be extremely careful when you increase your pricing structure not to go to the point (too quickly) where price elasticity of demand along with sheer shock value hits consumers hard in the face.

Many companies deal with increasing prices all the time as a course of doing business. When you do so in such a way to make the consumer stop in their tracks to say, "wait wow that's a big increase do I still need or want this service?", you are in trouble. If you don't have a very demonstrable plan to show those consumers the value they are getting (as well as if you are smart--adding more value along with the price increase) you are taking a huge risk that likely will alienate your core audience and destroy your business.

In my opinion that is what has happened to Netflix and although I would love to see them fix this mess and get their stock price back up (for me to break even) I just haven't seen or read anything that convinces me that this will occur. I also know that the company's cash flow has been greatly weakened by the greatly devalued stock and huge subscriber base loss over the past few weeks and there is now question if they can survive to pay their current bills, forget acquiring more content.

Lesson: Never underestimate your customers, their emotional connection to your brand or their expectation of your product or service.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

 

Why the Print Version of Newspapers needs to exist: Even tech wizard Steve Jobs was a fan. [Second in a series]

Steve Jobs loved newspapers. He was obsessed with how consumers should and would consume news. But he was convinced the printed newspaper would be dead by 2011.

In a recent Wall St Journal article by Gordon Crovitz, Jobs was noted as someone who felt the printed newspaper was once an important tool but felt that the newsprint version of news lost its way, failed to take consumers on a journey (something all great brands must do) and was easily replaced by new media versions of information dissemination. The issue was one of print quality as Jobs was known for being obsessed with excellence especially when it came to the quality of printer matter, especially for his ads. If the ads in print form weren’t glossy and beautiful he wouldn’t use the medium.

 Although Jobs said newspapers would be obsolete by this year, he was to a great extent challenging the newspaper industry, according to Crovitz. Although Jobs is no longer with us, he leaves an important assignment for the news business.  Our lives have changed but newspapers have failed to evolve with us. What the newspaper industry has forgotten is the internet is just a new distribution tool, not a new brand, and the industry needs to better understand the relevance of the print form to consumers better than it does today, ( For example you can be reading the news with a newspaper on a plane without interruption when the flight attendant says TURN OFF ALL electronic devices when preparing to take-off and/or land. A case of print being more convenient than electronic!)

I contend there is something very special about holding and reading a newspaper (or a magazine for that matter). It is a combination of a vehicle of information mixed with the cultural experience of reading through the pages. One thing the glitzy online versions of news (as exampled on the iPad) lack is the tactile sense of going through the news and ads where the eye may pick up on stories (or ads) adjacent to ones you plan to read but would not have done so directly without the adjacency. Personally, I find the online version of news can create a sensory overload and finding the stories you want to read can be challenging in its own right and those you might have not known you want to read are not discovered. Some graphic versions of news online is so glitzy it is actually too hard to read.

Jobs said the quality of the newsprint was a problem. I realize it is expensive to make newspapers look like glossy online presentations of information. However, the lesson, if there is one to be learned, is that the print medium has important value in our culture and the newspaper industry has to figure out how to improve the quality of this distribution channel as well as remind people how meaningful this channel of information dissemination really is.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli

PS HOT NEWS: Just read that the Newspaper Association of America is launching a new ad campaign that extols the virtue of newspapers with the slogan, "Smart is the new sexy". Now only if the print medium is made a bit more sexy they have a story to tell!

Why Netflix is failing: CEO Hastings doesn't understand branding

In an interview with the New York Times (appearing in the magazine section today), Netflix CEO Reed Hastings proved why Netflix is failing. As is common with most CEOs, he (admittedly) fails to understand what makes a brand in the first place and what makes one successful in the long term.

In the interview, Hastings says describing the major screw up that Neflix has encountered, "I think it was just a mistake in underestimating the depth of emotional attachment to Netflix". You think? Companies try (mostly unsuccessfully) to build emotional attachments with consumers. It's called brand loyalty and a very key ingredient to long term success. Not understanding this concept is a fundamental admission that one does not know how to market a product something CEOs arrogantly won't readily admit since they mostly think branding is an expense not a revenue builder.

Hastings also puts himself in a comparative role to Steve Jobs (hardly) and Jeff Bezos of Amazon saying his mistakes are all short term and CEOs understand the measurement of success is long term. However, and a big however, Jobs and Bezos understood and understand (respectively) how to build great brand loyalty and nuture it. Jobs was the master at it because he had a vision and took consumers on a "journey" which all great brands do. Hastings was on the right track, but missed an important station stop and went way off track to the point he may not be able to get his business back in gear.

I for one would like to see him resign and hire a more marketing savvy CEO to take the reigns and get the brand somewhat back on track by creating a new "journey" for consumers. It is going to take some great creativity and some concessions (to the brands most loyal consumers). Unfortunately, Hastings says he will not resign.

Watching out for you everyday.

Eli