A Tale of Two Brands

Why Coke and Cadillac Can Have Such Different Takes on the American Dream

Recently, Coke and Cadillac have released polarizing ads that capitalize on their American heritage.  Being quintessential American brands, both are entitled to represent a point of view on the American Dream. Yet, these ads couldn’t be further apart in their stories or the way they tell them. Coke’s ad features recent US immigrants singing ‘America the Beautiful’ in their native tongue.  Cadillac is introducing its new electric model by featuring a monologue by an affluent American who derides other cultures who value time off, and extolls the virtues of the American work ethic and the rewards and privilege that it brings.

And while you either love or hate these ads, taken together, they are fantastic examples of how brands can credibly extend their own stories while maintaining consistent brand behavior across time and borders. They both remain relevant in ways that will allow them to grow their business in new markets and with new audiences.

Ads 100 Years in the Making

Established only12 years apart, Coke and Cadillac have existed for more than a century. Each brand was founded on uniquely American ideals, from which they have never wavered. Throughout their existence, these brands have behaved consistently..so much so that if you go back in time, it seems that the briefs for these current ads were written over 100 years ago.  

Coke: The Dream of Accessibility

Coke’s long time leader, Robert Woodruff, (who took over in 1919) transformed a floundering Coke with the vision of being ‘within arms length of desire’. Coke was defined by accessibility.  And for over 100 years, accessibility has been the driver of all of Coke’s behaviors…from its global business strategy to its warm and inclusive communications tone. 

So, the ‘America the Beautiful’ ad is no more than the latest expression of Coke’s accessibility.  It is not only culturally relevant as the face of America changes, but also serves a very specific business need.  As carbonated soft drinks lose their luster,  Coke’s share of the total beverage market is shrinking.  Coke needs to win favor with the next generation of Americans if it is to maintain its position as one of the most valuable brands in the world.  So, Coke's latest  accessibility message is designed to appeal to its new target audience.  In this way, it is advancing its brand narrative, while maintaining the plot.

Cadillac: The Dream of Exclusivity

In 1915, Cadillac ran a now-famous ‘manifesto’ ad entitled ‘The Penalty of Leadership’.  Adopting a brash, arrogant tone of superiority, this ad described the higher standards to which a leader must hold ones self if they are to continue to reap the rewards of their hard work. It even goes as far as dismissing those who cannot measure up. Thus, Cadillac has always been about how American culture rewards hard work and achievement with status, and how it excludes those who don’t.  It is very clear to see that the current ad is a continuation of this narrative, in both tone and message.

Interestingly, Cadillac (and General Motors) has made a conscious decision to focus its business in the US and China.  It is expecting China to be a significant growth engine for the future.   So it is likely not a coincidence that a brash, ‘status through achievement’ tone and message is as culturally relevant to the next generation of luxury buyers in China as it is in the US.

Advancing your brand story

So what does this mean for brand owners?  

It does not mean that brands shouldn’t evolve, or that they should stay stuck in the past. Consider the fate of another iconic American brand, Polaroid...a brand that failed to advance their story. Polaroid was founded on the idea of instant access, something that has become even more relevant today than when it was founded. But Polaroid lost the plot, and tied itself to a single product proposition, rather than an enduring brand idea.

What it does mean is that regardless of current and local cultural sensibilities, brands should not bend themselves to the point of breaking. Imagine if Coke started to make and promote 14K gold cans in China, or if Cadillac sponsored the next ‘Occupy Wall Street’? Rather, brands should look for ways to respect and advance their heritage while moving into the future. Regardless of the time or location, brands must find an audience that will be receptive to their story and make it relevant to them.  This is how great brands will own a successful future.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=443Vy3I0gJs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4hI6koIRYk

Governor Christie’s Ad Scandal:

A Call For Agencies  to Stop Treating Their Creative Products Like Widgets

Early US presidential election front-runners have always been vulnerable to sometimes partisan investigations attempting to discredit them. One of several recent attempts probably did more harm to the advertising industry than it did to its intended victim, Governor Christie.

As widely reported by the press this month, the Federal government is launching an investigation into whether the Governor misused Sandy relief funds by awarding a tourism assignment to ad agency MWW, whose project ‘bid’ of $4.7 million was $2.2 million more than the losing agency, Sigma Group.

Controversial 'Stronger Than the Storm' Ad

The focus of the controversy has been about the appearance of the Governor and his family in the ‘Stronger Than The Storm’  TV ads, which were funded by Sandy relief funds, and ran during Christie’s re-election bid. And while questioning the motives of the governor makes for good headlines, everyone in the ad industry should instead be paying more attention to the underlying monetary argument.

The hair on the back of every ad agency executive should be standing on end in reaction to the quote by Shannon Morris, the president of the losing agency, Sigma Group who said, ‘We were scratching our heads as to why they would give this bid to an agency at double the price’.  Likewise, agencies should have the same reaction about the description of the winning bid as ‘labor costs and mark-up’.

Talent or Widget?

But, unfortunately, more and more, agencies are accepting their role as manufacturers of commodities, treating their talent like ‘widgets’. The reality is that not all agencies bring equal value to their clients. As my mother used to say, ‘You get what you pay for’. Indeed, the world’s most valuable brand, Apple, would likely not be in that position without the help of their ad agency, TBWA\Chiat\Day.

Yet, agencies that continually tout their brand building ability, also continually devalue their own brands in their day-to-day behaviors.  In fear of losing business, agencies have allowed clients’ purchasing departments to base fee negotiations solely on labor rates and hours, with complete disregard for the incremental value that their agency brand brings to the party. And yet, when forced to deal with resulting fee cuts, these same agencies must settle for mediocre talent.  This in turn leads to mediocre client performance, eventual loss of the account, and finally, irreparable damage to their brand that limits their ability to attract new clients.

So the real advertising conversation about ‘Stronger than the Storm’ should focus on the business motivation behind the ad campaign, and the potential economic value that the ads created for the State of New Jersey.

Mitigating The $1 Billion Problem

A Rutgers University Study estimated that, due to the effects of Hurricane Sandy, close to $1billion in New Jersey Shore summer tourism revenue was at risk in 2013. The intent of the ad campaign was to help mitigate this potential loss.  Thus, one could argue that the $2.2 million premium was paid to insure the highest return possible.  In that light, if MWW brought a stronger campaign to the table than Sigma Group, the $2.2 million incremental investment for a potential $1 billion return, seems like it was a good bet.

Regardless of your political leanings, an objective evaluation of the campaign suggest that  the campaign idea, and some of its creative components helped to drive incremental ROI.

The campaign achieved a strong 70% awareness, and high recall.  No doubt, the inclusion of Governor Christie in these ads, as well as the slick, ear-worm, pop-anthem theme song raised the profile of the entire campaign.  This, in turn helped earn strong media coverage, multiplying ROI against paid media expenditures.  And, the core creative idea, 'Stronger than the Storm' was one that could live beyond traditional advertising, as it was easily extended to include multi-media platforms, events and partnerships. And perhaps more importantly, it has the potential to serve as a rallying cry and behavioral motivator for residents of New Jersey.

Yet, when interviewed, Ms. Morris has offered little insight into the superior value that her agency could have created for New Jersey, had they been awarded the business. Instead, she continues to focus on how cheap her agency’s price was.  And this leaves me scratching my head...apparently, she must have access to cheaper widgets.

authors note: this post is intended to put politics and the potential conflicts of interest on this matter aside, and focus on the advertising and business issues at hand.  For the record, I am a registered Democrat and fan of Hillary Clinton.

To learn more about Cindy and Brand Traction, please visit the brand traction website at www.brandtraction.net

Death to Tier 2 Advertising!

Why Abolishing Tier 2 As We Know it Might Actually Help Automotive Brands Sell More Cars

It's that time of the year again.  The time when automotive companies are gearing up for their year end sales events.  Their final burst of 'traffic driving' advertising, known as 'Tier 2'... the 'call to action' to 'buy now' because of 'special deals'.

Tier 2 advertising is a time honored automotive convention that has become part of American culture, and considered an essential piece of the three-tiered communications architecture that includes brand advertising for Tier 1, and dealer advertising for Tier 3.

During the course of the year, most automotive brands will spend between 20% and 50% of their total advertising budgets in support of Tier 2 messages.  That's roughly $4.5 BILLION per year!

But is Tier 2 a vestige of the past? Is it $4.5 billion wasted?   Can it be that Tier 2 messages deliver questionable traffic ROI, and worse, likely deliver zero 'ROB'...return on brand, as these messages are rarely differentiated? There is data that suggests that this is so.

     

First, let’s look at the messages and intended audiences for automotive sales events.  Boiling down the hoopla, the messages invariably focus around being ‘a good time to buy’ because of the ‘great deals’, and are targeted to an audience who is ready to buy.

All evidence suggests that the intended message and audience is completely out of synch with the way people are actually buying cars. McKinsey, CNW, Polk, and Gfk have all documented a similar 6-9 month path to purchase.  Buyers begin with a short list of brands to which they add and subtract as they progress. And they listen less and less to automotive companies and more and more to third parties (experts, third party websites and social media peers) as they get closer to purchase.

And if that is the case, they would likely Google ‘best time to buy a car’ and multiple sources will all confirm that it is always the last few days of the month or quarter, with even better deals at the model or calendar year end. 

Similarly, a ‘best car deals’ search will yield very specific information about the available deals  from virtually every manufacturer.

So, sales events might actually be a case of spending $4.5 billion to tell an audience who has stopped listening to you something that they already know!

So what is the answer?  It appears to be time for a complete revamping of the automotive communications architecture.  One in which the objective is to get on, stay on and get added to as many lists as possible throughout the process. One which abolishes ‘tiers’, and instead, matches intended audience behavior to desired result; One in which brands stop spending money on generic, readily available information, and instead focus on behaviors that deliver unique branded experiences and sharable content.

What might this look like?

• Re-channel tier 1 & tier 2 media dollars in two directions: high profile media and events that will consistently showcase brand virtues to a broad audience and state of art digital and analytics platforms
• Leverage 3rd party sites to intercept in-market shoppers
• Develop sharable brand accentuating content that will seed earned media (traditional and social) to reach in-market audiences with engaging news and product information.

So what’s stopping this from happening? Probably inertia and a desire not to rock the boat.  Manufacturers will tell you that dealers love sales events.  Dealers will tell you that they get traffic when the sales events run.  Of course these events run at precisely the same times that 3^rd parties are saying are the best times to buy, and no one has ever served up an alternative.

My experience calling on car dealers tells me that they are reasonable business people who will take a leap of faith on a well thought out plan, particularly if it has the potential to raise the brand profile, and increase the value of their franchise.  So the onus is on manufacturers to package all available purchase process insights to make the argument, and ask the dealers to take this leap of faith by reassuring them that they will actually be seeing more shoppers and a gaining a higher share of voice through budget reallocations and stronger earned media. And the manufacturer with the guts to do this will be setting the new rules for category, while reaping the rewards a renewed brand desire and dealership traffic.