Good marketing is a collaboration between client and marketing vendor. The vendor knows marketing. The client knows his business, industry and customers.

In my experience, bad marketing has two sources:

1. Clients who don't know anything about marketing but insist on overriding the vendor's recommendations.

2. Marketing vendors who don't know anything about marketing.

Neither of these is on the endangered species list.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:04 AM | Permalink

You've decided you need a new website.

Or you're going to do more advertising.

What's the first and easiest mistake most people make?

They look at what other people in their industry are doing and decide to do that too.

Whether it is the look of a website, the fact that your competitors are doing billboards, or the kind of slogan or tagline you use, this is rarely a good idea.

The fact is, the chances are small that what your competitors are doing is sensible.

We see this over and over again when we're working in an industry new to us. We survey what others in that field are doing. It is usual to find similarities that make no sense, aren't working and can only be credited to people imitating each other.

Hideously conflicting colors (classic car parts).

Overly complicated website navigation (zoo and aquarium websites).

Taglines that say nothing and do nothing for the business (almost anybody).

Direct mail invitations to free dinners (financial advisors).

Don't think that huge companies are immune to this kind of thing. There are reasons why General Motors went down the tubes - and those reasons have more to do with marketing idiocies than anything else.

Don't make yourself a victim of "me-too" marketing.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 09:22 AM | Permalink

TLA is the abbreviation for "Three-Letter Abbreviation." Cute, because it's a TLA itself.

This post is about naming companies, products and services. It's a deep subject and one reason is because the same rules don't always apply - in fact, they can be exact opposites depending on whether you are trying to name something already very well known, a new product service or company, a brand new type of product, etc.

One pretty universal rule is don't use a TLA. Or a two or four letter abbreviation for that matter.

Ries and Trout in their classic "Positioning, The Battle for Your Mind" argue persuasively that the ONLY time a name abbreviation makes sense is when the product or company is already extremely well-known, the full-name is not abandoned and continues to makes sense, and the abbreviation is easier on the ears, shorter when spoken, and more memorable.

That's a lot of conditions. And I can think of an exception - 3M. But those are few and far between.

It works for "IBM." But you can think of the tons of cases where it hasn't worked out.

Just in case you were tempted in that direction.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 01:05 PM | Permalink

Here's an article illustrating a marketing rule which should be better known. Your competition's marketing can increase your sales.

Article on Starbucks Sales.

In this case, McDonald's heavy promotion of their McCafe launch has increased the amount of gourmet coffee being purchased, not just at McDonald's. It actually increased Starbucks same-store sales.

This is not an unusual story.

A rising tide raises all boats. You can't be the leader if there aren't any followers.

So, in case you aren't overdosed yet on cliches, "Bring it!"

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:24 AM | Permalink

One of the key metrics (statistics) used in the marketing world is "impressions." This it the (theoretical) number of eyeball-pairs (or pairs of ears) that are going to see (or hear) your marketing message.

That "theoretical" is there because you can't really know. One glossary gives the definition as the number of people who have the opportunity to see your ad. But do they?

You place an ad in a magazine that has a circulation of 250,000. Your ad is on page 32. How many of those 250,000 copies are ever opened to page 32?

5000 postcards go out to Dentists. How many of them are thrown away by the Front Desk, never get seen by the Office Manager let alone the Doctor?

The same applies to most forms of marketing. People go to get a snack during the TV commercials, never look up as they drive past the billboard.

One reason the Internet keeps rising in importance in the marketing world, its version of impressions is actually pretty accurate. If your stats program is properly designed, 2000 page views means that page was on someone's screen 2000 times.

"Properly designed" means it has to detect and eliminate from its count, visits by robots (search engines visiting the site to index it, plus various types of spammers and hackers). One problem with free stats programs is none of them do this well.

So take impressions as a raw number that has to be interpreted in order to judge its value. Of course that starts with are you reaching the correct public? You sell to companies with vehicle fleets. A mailing list of companies that own 5 or more vehicles, is going to be a lot more useful than one of any old company of any size.

An ad in a paid magazine will always get more actual views per thousand impressions, than a similar free magazine. Why? You're paying for it, you're likely to read more of it. Plus impressions in free magazines and newspapers are simply the number of copies printed, who knows if anyone ever even picks them all up.

Then there's placement. Two billboards may be located on the same stretch of road, and hence, get the same number of impressions. But one is located directly in Northbound drivers' line of sight. The other is way off angle for any driver.

An ad on the back cover of a magazine is going to be seen by a lot more people than one on an interior page, towards the back, with no article on the page or its opposite page. In fact, a back cover ad will often be seen by more people than the circulation, because someone doesn't necessarily have to read or even pick up the magazine to see the ad.

Oh yeah, and impressions can be falsified. I know of a magazine - no longer in existence, no surprise there - in which ads never seemed to produce results. Turns out the publisher was lying about the number of copies he was printing and distributing.

So impressions is a useful concept. But it's only a starting point.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 07:54 AM | Permalink

In Pinellas and Hillsborough County, virtually all the billboards are owned by two companies, Clear Channel Outdoor and CBS Outdoor. That becomes less true when you get into some of the outlying areas, such as going up US 19 into Pasco and Hernando Counties.

If you're looking for boards in Clearwater, for example, you have only two companies to call.

In other areas, sometimes the only way to find out who owns boards is to drive the area and note down names and phone numbers off of the boards.

An important term in billboard rental is "avails", short for "availables." The fact that a board has or hasn't got advertising on it tells you nothing about whether or not it is available next month or not till next year or whatever. So first narrow down where you want to be placed, then see what is available, then see if there's anything suitable for when you are looking to start your campaign, and at a price that makes sense.

Sometimes you get surprised. Don't try and rent a billboard in Springhill for example. There aren't any.

Also, you can't decide to advertise today and have a board up tomorrow. Your ad has to be designed, printed, and put up (which can't be done when its raining). So figure a minimum of 3 weeks from when you say "go" to when your board goes up.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:33 AM | Permalink

We get a lot of calls for billboards, mainly because we show up high on search engine rankings in the Tampa Bay area.
Most of those calls are from people who have never done billboard advertising and are looking to find out some of the basics - what do they cost, what's the process, etc.

The first thing to know about billboards is they don't work well by themselves. Why? By their nature they can't get across a complete message.

Someone has to be able to grasp a billboard from a distance and very quickly. So the amount of material that can go on them is very limited. Traditionally, the rule is no more than 7 words and one image to a board. That's enough to get across a tagline or slogan and maybe contact info.

So you can only use them as part of an advertising campaign. Essentially, they are a reminder or reinforcer of what you are pushing with the rest of your advertising. They can, however, work extremely well as part of a well thought-out campaign.

Choosing the right location or locations is critical. As with all advertising, you want as much as possible to reach your target market and no one else. You are paying for impressions (number of people who drive past the billboard) whether they are potential buyers or not.

We love boards visible to drivers stopped at traffic lights, where traffic jams at rush hour, or placed on a curve so visible to drivers looking straight ahead.

You have to drive the locations to see what the placement is really like. The photos provided by the billboard owners don't always tell the tale. Maybe a tree grew out since they photographed the board and now half blocks the view (I didn't just make that up. We've seen that exact scenario more than once).

One big plus of billboards is the repetition factor is built in. Most people who drive past a billboard today are going to drive past it tomorrow and the next day or next week, because they go past it every time they go to work, or shopping, or to church.

Pricing also varies widely, depending on the size, placement, amount of traffic, etc. A bulletin (the largest boards, usually 48 feet long), extremely well placed on a busy Interstate, could go for upwards of $10,000 per month. A smaller board in an out of the way location could be $300 a month. This category also includes bus kiosk and bus bench signage - which can be very inexpensive.

If you have print, TV and/or radio advertising that's working, billboards can be a profitable addition to your marketing mix. It's worth considering.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:18 AM | Permalink

Most websites are on "shared hosting plans" meaning you share a web server with dozens, maybe hundreds of other websites. That's cheaper, but it also limits the amount of visitors your site can handle. Plus it's like living in an apartment building; you can be badly affected by what the neighbors are doing.

You get up to a certain point and you need a whole server to yourself.

You can stick a server in your closet - that's easy enough - but not a good idea. You probably don't have a fast enough connection, plus, what do you do if your connection goes down? And what about backups?

So the best solutions are either "co-location" where you own the server, but it is located on premises of a hosting company, or "dedicated server" where they own the server, but rent it to you. That's more expensive but if it dies, the hosting company plugs in a replacement, restores your site from backups, and you are off and running.

Dedicated servers can be "managed" or not. Managed hosting means that pretty much all the services you expect in a shared hosting plan are also provided. Backups, technical support, etc. etc.

You see where I'm going here. Unless you have lots of expertise in-house, when you get to a point where a shared server won't do (often in the 5000 to 15000 visitors a day range), then usually the best best is a managed dedicated server hosting.

As with any hosting plan, prices vary widely.

There is also another option called "cloud hosting" which is still rather new. In cloud hosting, your website isn't on a particular server. It is on a group of servers, possibly not even in the same data center. This has a couple of advantages. If one server goes down, there is no down-time at all. Also if you exceed the capacity of a dedicated server, it usually takes a few hours to add capacity, so if you get a sudden huge increase of traffic to your site - you may lose a lot of it. Cloud computing takes up the volume seamlessly.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 01:51 PM | Permalink

I've written at length about how the disadvantages of Content Management Systems (CMS) usually out-weigh the benefits.

The latest, hottest CMS is WordPress. People are building websites using it and touting it as the greatest thing since sliced bread.

The first thing to know about WordPress is it is blogging software. So why are people using it to build websites? Yes, you can do it, but it isn't designed for that.

It is, however, free, and for free software, it is pretty good. It may well be the best free CMS for rapidly and easily building a website.

Of course, saying something is the best free software is like saying "the best car manufactured in Croatia."

Not that there's anything wrong with Croatian cars.

We've done a website in Wordpress ourselves - but it was a situation where the website was mainly a blog, and the person couldn't afford the professional grade software we normally use for blogs (Movable Type). And guess what, it was harder to work with and there were things you couldn't do or that didn't quite work right. About what you expect for free software.

Claims that WordPress is great for SEO are exaggerated. In contrast to many CMS, it doesn't make it very difficult or impossible to do SEO.

My two cents worth.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 07:44 AM | Permalink

I've written before about password security.

Recently, 310 pieces of confidential corporate information from Twitter were publicly posted.

Here's the story of how it was done.

Adequate password security isn't difficult. But your main protection is the fact that probably no one is trying to hack you!

Anyway, this article points out a couple of additional points to ensuring adequate security on your accounts:

1. Make sure any secondary email addresses on your accounts are active.

2. Make any "secret question" answers something that can't be easily guessed or Googled.

It's worth paying attention to.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 07:12 AM | Permalink

Just as musicians don't much need record labels any more, authors don't much need publishers any more. It's that Internet that's made all the difference.

Even if you have a publisher, they probably aren't going to do much to market or publicize your book unless you are already a best-selling author or you are already famous.

If you self-publish, you definitely are going to have to market it yourself.

So how do you market a book? There is a successful pattern:

1. Build a good, professional website for the book that includes a picture of the cover, biographical info and photos of the author, reviews and one or more downloadable excerpts. The site then either has a store or sends people to Amazon.com, etc. to purchase.

2. Build traffic to the site through social networking and publicity.

Now that is a very simple formula, and I think, pretty obvious. The oddity is that few authors actually do it.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 07:22 AM | Permalink

I've written previously, more than once, on competitor intelligence (CI).

The fact is, CI is only a part of a broader subject - the marketing environment.

It is the height of folly to try and market something without studying the environment into which you are trying to market.

Besides the competition and what they are doing, it includes the potential target markets, and everything useful you can find out about them. It includes potential marketing channels, their pluses and minuses.

The amount of study you can do or must do varies. But I'll give you an example of an absolute minimum. If you are doing a Yellow Page ad, study last year's book, the section or possible sections into which your ad might go.

What other ads are running, and what do they look like, how big are they? What colors do they use? Do they use pictures of people? What buttons are they trying to push?

But also, if I run different sized ads, where can I expect them to be placed? What is the potential if I run two smaller ads instead of one larger one?

Another example. Planning a direct mail campaign to dentists, I had a dentist friend save two weeks worth of junk mail. Not just competitive junk mail, ALL junk mail. Then I knew what to do to get noticed amongst the garbage.

This is VERY fruitful in terms of improving the effectiveness of a marketing effort.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 04:42 PM | Permalink

I long wondered who was the real genius between Al Ries and Jack Trout. In partnerships like that it is usually one or the other, not both.

Well, I've read some books Ries has written without Trout and they are all Gems.

Now I'm reading Jack Trout's "The New Positioning" and wow! The book is wall-to-wall psycho-babble. I'm having to read the book with a highlighter and mark the one sentence per page, on average, which isn't a complete waste of paper and ink. And my time.

Oh well. Got my answer.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:46 AM | Permalink

A term used in several arts, including in marketing, is "voice." People refer to an "authentic voice", "consistent voice", "believable voice", etc.

This isn't just the sound of a person speaking. It is the tone, flavor, personality that comes across in written, spoken, or graphic communications. It is a part of branding.

If you are selling to rural Southerners, would you want to sound like a Harvard professor? Probably not. If you are selling Caribbean vacations, do you want to sound like a California surfer? I don't think so.

In spoken communications, It isn't just about accent. Choice of words and grammar are vital, both in written and spoken communications.

But it starts with determining what an appropriate voice would be.

That is a matter of appropriateness, believability, and domination.

1. What kind of voice is appropriate, both to the product or service being sold, the market it is being sold to, and other aspects of the branding?

2. What kind of voice would be most believable, delivering the message you are trying to get across.

3. What kind of voice tends to dominate in that market and for that type of product and service, meaning, it's communications tend to be taken as orders?

For example, in the U.S., an upper-class British accent, spelling, grammar and word choice tend to dominate. That's not true across the boards but it is surprisingly universal. I don't know why that is - but notice how often commercials use a British accented speaker. Funny, but in the U.K. it's the reverse - a brash American voice dominates.

Listen for the voice in marketing. I think you'll find it enlightening.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 07:13 AM | Permalink

One of the challenges for small businesses is building a brand identity despite not having the budget to "do it right."

You could easily spend hundreds of thousands of dollars just on research and design. Just a logo design can cost that much!

The good news is that you can get a very usable brand identity on a relative shoestring. The challenge often comes at the other end - at the marketing company which has been hired perhaps to design and build a new website.

If the client doesn't have an established look to their materials, one that properly represents the company and does the job it needs to, then branding is going to be a part of that website project. That is true whether the client or even the designer is aware of it.

When you are establishing the look of a website, you are either creating a portion of that company's brand identity, or you are applying an existing brand identity to that particular instance. One or the other.

The development of a website look is, in most cases, a large portion, even a majority of the cost of a professional website development project.

Developing a look is more than art. It's a thoughtful exercise in marketing.

It's also one of the huge differences between a bargain priced website and a professional development.

Professional developers think marketing. Others think art, or "I like the way that looks."

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 05:54 AM | Permalink

I've said more than once that website navigation needs to be simple and obvious.

Otherwise you lose people because they can't figure out how to get where they want to go, or maybe even if you are offering what they are looking for.

Errors on this aren't restricted to small business websites. I've written of the horror of trying to navigate the Verizon website. They've improved their site since, but it is still in the "pretty bad" category.

It's amazing how many of the world's largest retailers, when you go to their website it's hard to find the "store locator" link.

So what are some of the basic rules of website navigation?

The first is that you shouldn't depart much from expectations.

There is a lot of room for creativity and uniqueness in website design, but think about this: If your navigation is out-of-the-ordinary, people are going to be looking for it in the wrong places, or not understanding how it works!

That goes for the main menu, which should usually be in a horizontal bar somewhere near the top of the page. Why? That's where most main menus are, so that's where people look for them!

Our own main menu is about as far from the ordinary as it's safe to get. It is across the top. It's also not in a bar, and the main buttons move a bit when you roll over them. People really like the whimsy factor on this. Yet, if we pushed it a bit further, we would have upset and lost visitors.

Secondary menus in a column down one side are common, especially in stores, so that is a very acceptable solution if needed.

We also always provide multiple ways of navigation, including a series of text links in the footer (bottom of page) and text links within the body of content on many pages. That's because different people have different preferred ways to navigate or have different expectations. These, along with "site search" functions, comprise a safety net so the vast majority of visitors can get around without getting frustrated.

This is one of the factors that needs to be carefully worked out when designing a site.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 06:35 AM | Permalink

Flash is a plug-in (add-on) available on some 98% of all website browsers. As such it is the tool of choice for "special effects."

I'm using "special effects" for the variety of multi-media and motion effects which can add a big chunk of pizzazz, interest, and attention-grabbing to a website.

These include:

audio (music or voiceover)
video (YouTube style)
walk-on-screen video
slideshows
morph effects
other animations
exotic menu effects

We love these kinds of effects but there's always a balance between impingement (getting someone's attention) and creating interest, versus being distracting or too over-the-top.

We almost always avoid "splash screens" (the introductory screen before you get to the home page).

In most cases sound or video should not start automatically but should be under the control of the visitor. If automatic they should be brief, and ideally the website should recognize and not offer it up on repeat visits.

Flash animations in many cases should play once through, then stop.

This is a matter of judgment and sometimes you don't know until you've tried it where that balance is. And, of course, there's no absolute answer for every visitor.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 11:04 AM | Permalink

Just because it's art.

Hemesferic, Valencia Spain.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:08 AM | Permalink

I've written many times on the fact that search engines generally consider a larger site more important than a smaller one, and rank it higher.

A larger site means more material for a visitor to be interested in, and makes it easier to be well ranked for a larger variety of search terms.

But how big is big?

Our site, FastF.com, dominates in many categories for local searches (Tampa, Tampa Bay, Clearwater, etc.). It has 300 pages in the Google index.

Our client Electronic Search, a national recruiting company specializing in the wireless (cell phones and radio communications) industry, has top rankings for a wide variety of terms. The site has over 500 pages indexed.

Our client Through The Woods, a high-end hardwood flooring completely, completely dominates for Tampa Bay area searches in their industry, on page 1 for nearly 300 important search terms. The site has over 200 pages indexed.

All three of these sites also are very effective in generating leads from visitors. All three businesses have had their bacon saved in this down economy through Internet leads.

Of course, there are many industries where so large a site isn't necessary. But, for example, sites with thousands of pages aren't rare in sites attempting high rankings in national health care rankings.

The point is, if you really want to make it with Internet Marketing, a 5 or 10 page site probably isn't going to cut it. And you really need a plan as to how you are going to build a huge site.

It doesn't have to be done all at once - in many cases it isn't practical to do so. But have a plan, one that is workable in terms of time, expense and content.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 01:06 PM | Permalink

Another of our Internet Marketing clients has come up nowon the national rankings radar screen. This is a recruiting company, so you know they are in a highly competitive field to say the least. I mean when you are competing against the likes of Monster.com and the New York Times classifieds....

Outside of the brag - they've gone from 2 to 11 #1 rankings, from 7 to 48 page 1 rankings for key search terms - the other point is that national search engine rankings are a very different game from local rankings.

It took the better part of a year to get there with this client, and that is typical dealing with competitive national ranking territory. It takes a commitment. You need a LOT of pages (their site is now over 1000 pages), you need to know what you are doing, and you need TIME. Time put in on the project, and time to work your way up the rankings.

The main point is, it CAN be done.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 09:50 AM | Permalink

This may be a bit of an idiotic obviousness, but you market for now - not eternity.

Your ad will probably look horribly dated 10 years from now.

Any website more than 3 or 4 years old is going to look old-fashioned.

What's popular or important or stylish changes. It's also different from place to place, industry to industry, culture to culture.

You just can't think about the ages when you do marketing. You have to be immersed in the here and the now.

Here are some great examples:

Creepy ads.

Ironic ads.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 09:53 AM | Permalink

Back in the dark ages of marketing, the 1960's, a Canadian professor Marshall McLuhan coined the expression "The Medium is the Message." For whatever reason that caught on and he became famous for it.

There is more than a grain of truth to it - though it is grossly exaggerated.

In this age of cynicism, twice-burnt consumers, over-hype and under-deliver, and a gazillion marketing messages a day, believability becomes huge.

It used to be you could make a statement about your product or service, back it up with pictures, testimonials, etc., and you were off and running.

There are still places in the world where advertising like that works.

The U.S. isn't one of them.

You always have to ask, what does it take for what I'm saying to be believable, and believed?

An important part of that is the medium. We see this every day and in many ways:

Joe is supposedly a successful businessman but drives a beat up 10-year-old car.

Fred sends out an email about how he can make you a millionaire. The email comes from a gmail account (free email).

A marketing company is promoting their expertise with postcards that were built using clip art.

Such elements as the kind of paper your message is printed on, the marketing channel used, all come into play.

The moral of the story is put yourself in the shoes of the person you're trying to reach, and ask, what would it take for me to believe you? What would make me disbelieve you.

It's a valuable exercise.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 09:47 AM | Permalink

There's no substitute for a great idea.

AND

Recognizing a great idea when you see one.

Al Ries' latest article.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:10 AM | Permalink

Continuing my theme of Marketing - Good or Bad, do you realize that the concept of America was originally sold back in the late 18th Century?

If it wasn't for the series of 85 articles called "The Federalist Papers", probably there would be no U.S.A. There was significant opposition to the Constitution, and it might otherwise never have been ratified.

Even the best ideas need marketing.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:24 AM | Permalink

Orange is the warmest color.
The color of fire and fun, there is no shade of orange that doesn't speak of life and vitality, if not downright wit and sass.

Unless for kids or you are designing detergent boxes, it is best used in small quantities, as an accent color.

Consider it the King of Spices of colors.

Like pepper, it transforms the entire flavor of a design. From staid to lively, somber to cheerful, motionless to top gear.

Sure, there are cases where orange doesn't work.

Aren't there?

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:44 AM | Permalink

Everyone in the marketing world knows a company can make money more easily with good marketing and bad products or services, than the other way around. It's the old "just because you have a better mousetrap doesn't mean the world will beat a path to your door."

Whereas clever marketers CAN sell ice to Eskimos.

BUT.

Good quality products or services, and customer service, ARE the starting point of effective marketing.

Part of effective marketing is sustainability. That means return-on-investment: your marketing isn't too expensive for what it produces.

It also means the company doesn't have to pull up stakes and open business in another state because the police are on your tail.

I know, I know, I'm a dreamer. After all, who ever heard of ethics in a marketer?

But, like many other marketing companies, at Fast Forward we have a list of who we won't do business with. Besides certain specific types of businesses, like gambling and adult sites, that includes any business whose "success" is based on ripping off their customers.

I just don't want to be a part of it.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 06:23 PM | Permalink

Just to reinforce slightly my previous post....

Do you realize that good marketing helps the economy? When I say "good marketing" I mean "as opposed to evil marketing." I also very much mean EFFECTIVE marketing -- that creates desire, is informative and reaches the right people.

It improves the standard of living because people are more likely to buy something that does the job, instead of a bad or overpriced product that wastes their money.

Companies with good marketing don't waste sales and marketing dollars and so can bring their prices down or deliver more for the money.

Finally, it makes people WANT things, so they are more likely to spend money, and more likely to work harder to make more money so they can afford that shiny Corvette or new dress....

All an economy is, is the exchange of goods and services for money. The faster that occurs, the better the economy. When people are unsure about the future, hold onto what money they have (as they are now), or their money is being wasted (as by governments), the economy slows down.

When people look to the future, when their dreams overcome their doubts, the economy cranks up.

Amongst the freedoms we should celebrate this July 4th are the Freedom to Market.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 06:20 AM | Permalink

I've been posting a lot lately about branding and about logos because of a book I'm reading, "Building Brand Identity" which is a fantastically competent, textbook really.

The interesting thing is, having gone through 2/3 of the book, learning a great deal, I come to the last 1/3 of the book which consists of many examples, illustrated and described.

Wow.

Here you have fantastic skill applied to the development of brand identity. What the book doesn't cover is what that rests on: the definition of the brand and how the brand identity should express that. They only describe a process for getting agreement.

This is where the whole subject often goes completely off the rails. I mean, nowhere in sight.

Three out of four of the examples could be classed as sheer foolishness based on their philosophical premises. Many times the brand identities still work because they are aesthetic, distinctive, set the right tone, and have all the mechanical characteristics of good branding in terms of clarity and usability across a wide range of media and applications.

But not all.

And that's where it ends. The common sense that is.

These are companies that have spent a fortune on re-branding. Cingular when it was created by a merger spent $200 million on its new brand launch. Accenture (the new name for the consulting company half of Arthur Andersen when it split from the accounting company) spent $160 million launching their new brand.

And yet they are doing stupid, stupid things.

I saw this recently when I judged the Sizzle Awards (a national trade show marketing competition). Fortune 500 multi-national corporations were spending as much as $900,000 for trade shows and being beaten out by companies spending $20,000.

I guess if there's any point here it's being big and spending lots of money doesn't mean you are doing anything sensible or going to succeed.

But I guess we knew that from the recent examples of General Motors and Fannie Mae.

Not to speak of the Federal Government.

Just to end on a positive note, the flip side of that is: You don't have to spend a fortune to achieve sensible and successful things with your brand.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 07:02 AM | Permalink

Since I'm feeling philosophical, what's your feeling towards Marketing? Good? Evil? Evil turned towards Good Ends? A Mixed Bag? None of the Above?

The answer, of course, is "Yes."

Every day you see marketing skill turned to peddling scams. Get-rich-quick schemes with no hint of ethics or hope of success. Pharmaceutical companies peddling harmful, useless drugs. Politicians selling bad ideas and themselves.

Every day you see marketing skill turned to spreading good ideas and useful or fun, products and services.

Disney World. Stores that sell the goods you need at reasonable prices. Kindness. A really good cup of coffee.

Every day you see ads that are cute, fun, informative or uplifting.

Other forms of art have been used to serve Good or Evil. The Nazi's used Wagner's music. Soviet Russia had skilled artists designing posters to promote how wonderful life was in the Soviet Union.

So don't condemn marketing if you see it used for Evil or simply the banal.

Condemn the person who is turning their talent to the dark side.

Posted by Richard R. Byrd at 08:26 AM | Permalink