On a Mission
A day with Mike Harris
Stand for Something
Building trusted brands
The Upside of the Downturn
Ten Management Strategies
 |
|
         |
Key Marketing Questions for 2010Thursday 07th January 2010 There’s no doubt that 2010 will throw up major new challenges for financial marketers. How we equip ourselves to deal with these in a recession is entirely down to the the questions we ask of ourselves and our organisations. Over the week, I will endeavour to ask the most important ones. Find the answers and you will be well on the way to taking these challenges head on. Authenticity – Are you keeping your message real and staying true to the core essence of your brand?
Personality – Have you established brand characteristics that resonate at a human level – e.g. trust, fun, dependability, understanding and caring?
Frugality – Is this really the best time to show overt corporate wealth or waste at a time when many will be finding life more challenging? Creativity – How can your team show greater use of imagination and brand innovation, without impacting on underwriting risk? Velocity – What can you do to improve speed of delivery of messages and products to market, harnessing online reach and metrics? Social Media Index AnnouncedWednesday 06th January 2010 Vitrue’s Social Media Index (SMI) published on Mashable assigns brands and products a score based on overall buzz from status updates, videos, photos and blog posts. The company has tallied its results for 2009 and released its top 100 social brands based on index scoring, with last year’s winner — the iPhone — reigning supreme once again. Alarmingly, there is only one financial brand (Visa #87) featured within the top 100, indicating that financial services firms need to redouble their social media plans and start to engage with more heavyweight activity. Whilst listening is a prerequisite first step in both banking and social media engagement, there is only so much you can do before you generate some regular, relevant and meaningful dialogue! Although the index focuses on consumer mentions and reactions — as opposed to indexing brand engagement via social media — the list is still a veritable powerhouse of information in terms of consumer buzz and word-of-mouth recommendations. So who tops the list? iPhone, Disney, CNN, MTV, NBA, iTunes, Wii, Apple, Xbox and Nike rounded out the top 10 in 2009, respectively. We also learn from Vitrue’s blog post on the list that Adidas was the biggest gainer, jumping up from the number 85 slot in 2008 to take over the number 14 spot in 2009. NBA, Nike, MLB, Nissan, Victoria’s Secret, HP and KFC also showed significant improvement from the previous year. Some other interesting findings from Vitrue include: - Game consoles dominate the top of the list: (Wii #7, Xbox#9, PlayStation #13, Nintendo #21) - Luxury brands appear on the list this year with good representation: (Gucci #27, Louis Vuitton #81, Prada #88 and Burberry #94) - Media brands make up 8 percent of list: (CNN #3, MTV #4, ESPN #23, CBS #32, ABC #33, Turner #36, Fox News #56, NBC #68) This perhaps illustrates our socialisation of their content. Many thanks to Paul Hinds, MD at Seven Advertising, once again for this great spot. Here is the list in detail: Vitrue’s Top 100 social brands for 2009: 1. iPhone 2. Disney 3. CNN 4. MTV 5. NBA 6. iTunes 7. Wii 8. Apple 9. Xbox 10. Nike 11. Starbucks 12. NFL 13. PlayStation 14. Adidas 15. BlackBerry 16. Sony 17. Mercedes 18. Microsoft 19. Samsung 20. BMW 21. Nintendo 22. Best Buy 23. ESPN 24. Ford 25. Honda 26. Ferrari 27. Gucci 28. Nokia 29. Major League Baseball 30. Dell 31. Coca-Cola 32. CBS 33. ABC 34. iPod 35. Mac 36. Turner 37. Nissan 38. Toyota 39. eBay 40. Amazon 41. Victoria’s Secret 42. Nutella 43. NASCAR 44. Disneyland 45. Audi 46. NHL 47. Red Bull 48. Verizon 49. Intel 50. Subway 51. Hewlett-Packard 52. Puma 53. Kia 54. Fox News 55. Porsche 56. Jeep 57. Dodge 58. Pandora 59. Walmart 60. Zappos 61. Suzuki 62. McDonald’s 63. Krystal 64. T-Mobile 65. Skittles 66. KFC 67. Volkswagen 68. NBC 69. Sprint 70. Pixar 71. Motorola 72. IKEA 73. Pepsi 74. Cisco 75. REI 76. LG 77. AT&T 78. Converse 79. The Gap 80. Chevrolet 81. Luis Vuitton 82. Toys”R”Us 83. H&M 84. Philips 85. General Motors 86. Pringles 87. Visa 88. Prada 89. Panasonic 90. IBM 91. VH1 92. Hulu 93. Oracle 94. Burberry 95. SEGA 96. Sears 97. Avon 98. Jet Blue 99. Lacoste 100. Comcast Tiger Costs Shareholders Billions?Tuesday 05th January 2010 UC Davis Assistant Professor Victor Stango has studied stock market tendencies, stock value and the timeline of Tiger's accident, concluding that significant shareholder losses resulted from the ensuing saga.
I have my doubts as to the plausibility of drawing a causal relationship between the Tiger Woods scandal and fluctuations in share price. However, I have read the account from Christopher R. Knittel and Victor Stango and here is the abstract which I hope you will find of interest. We estimate that in the days beginning with Tiger Woods’ recent car accident and ending with his announced “indefinite leave” from golf, shareholders of companies that Mr. Woods endorses lost $5-12 billion in wealth. We measure the losses relative to both the entire stock market and a set of competitor firms. Because most of the firms that Mr. Woods endorses are either large or owned by large parent companies, the losses are extremely widespread. Mr. Woods’ top five sponsors (Accenture, Nike, Gillette, Electronic Arts and Gatorade) lost 2-3 percent of their aggregate market value after the accident, and his core sports-related sponsors EA, Nike and PepsiCo (Gatorade) lost over four percent. The pace of losses slowed by December 11, the date on which Mr. Woods announced his leave from golf. The report can be read at http://faculty.gsm.ucdavis.edu/~vstango/tiger004.pdf Whatever the losses incurred or not, give a thought to Accenture – the firm has had to scrap its entire global marketing strategy and start from scratch. What’s more, Accenture’s total Tiger-related marketing spend is vastly greater than the $20 million a year it’s paying Tiger personally. Who says all publicity is good publicity? When Brands “Go Dark”Monday 04th January 2010 It can be argued that marketing in a downturn is an “opportunity to gain market share at the expense of weaker businesses that choose, or are forced, to cut marketing expenditure,” observes Peter Field in the Autumn issue of Market Leader magazine. I echo this completely. I’ve seen the financial organisations who have cut their budgets struggle to compete in the upturn cycle last time around, while the players who maintained a market presence have since flourished. What I have found particularly interesting was the analysis of the extensive Millward Brown database on the impacts of budget cutting. The article concludes: “Its data shows a strong correlation between market share and the level of 'bonding’ – an aggregate measure of multiple brand–consumer relationship metrics. The clear implication being that if budget cutting results in a decline in ‘bonding’, then market share can be expected to decline. Crucially, further data demonstrates that two key constituent brand relationship metrics – brand usage and brand image – suffered considerably (13% and 6% declines respectively) when brands ‘went dark’ (i.e. ceased to spend on communications) for a period of six months or more. More broadly, 60% of brands ‘going dark’ see decline in at least one key relationship metric after just six months.” In the past year, I have seen evidence first-hand that suggests that brands that cut their budget relative to competitors are at greater risk of share loss. It’s time to shine out in the financial media blackout.
|
 Maximise your Online ROI. Request your FREE Web Site Audit now.  |
RSS Feed
| Strand Financial Limited | Adam House | 7-10 Adam Street | Strand | London WC2N 6AA | Privacy Policy | © Strand Financial Limited 2010 |