Category: Brand Names

GooGLE Divides to Conquer.

8/13/2015

The news that Google was creating a new entity to contain itself plus the company’s more speculative ventures came as welcome news to the investment community today -- and to armchair business strategists, as well. Google will become a subsidiary of Alphabet (www.abc.xyz), which also will hold (and develop) a portfolio of products aimed squarely at the future.

As the illustration shows, Google's vision allows it to continue marketing and growing its search business, YouTube, Google AdSense and other endeavors while Alphabet concentrates on creating leading edge opportunities, thus giving the company a mix of separately managed business units in different stages of development. It's all very much in keeping with what Peter Drucker declared some time ago:

“Business has only two functions: marketing and innovation.”

Google’s move is not surprising given a 30-something friend’s recent hiring by Google after an exhaustive assessment process to determine whether he’d be a good cultural fit. Apparently he is, because three weeks into the new job he’s off and running, although I don’t know exactly what he’s doing. It wouldn’t surprise me to discover that he’s working on some high-potential Alphabet project given his unusual mix of talents and experience: a coder who can discern and dissect client problems with an eye toward solving them in a practical, profitable way. He's also a talented graphic artist and has a mind that allows him to imagine products into being and help make them successful.

I am reminded, in thinking about Google’s fascinating strategic move, of a quote by Bob Waterman in the landmark 1980s book In Search of Excellence -- something like “The best businesses are always in the process of becoming something new.” I may not be remembering the quote precisely, but you get the idea. It’s a perfect description of what Google is up to.

“As Sergey (Brin) and I wrote in the original founders letter 11 years ago,” says Google co-founder Larry Page in his introduction to Alphabet’s new Web site, ‘Google is not a conventional company’ … we did a lot of things that seemed crazy at the time. Many of those crazy things now have over a billion users, like Google Maps, YouTube, Chrome, and Android. And we haven’t stopped there. We are still trying to do things other people think are crazy but we are super excited about … (because) in the technology industry, where revolutionary ideas drive the next big growth areas, you need to be a bit uncomfortable to stay relevant ..."

Of course, the wags on Twitter are all about making fun of the novel company name, such as calling the new campus “Alphabet City”. Or check out this would-be headline: “Google restructures under ‘Alphabet.’ - Corp headquarters to move to Sesame Street. Bert & Ernie to be co-COOs.”

Yuk it up all you want. To my way of thinking, Google has scored big with its new structure, and at the end of market trading today, investors appear to have agreed -- on an otherwise down day for stocks. With the Dow having fallen more than 200 points on China’s currency revaluation, GOOG was up, somewhere north of 4%.

Somebody in Mountain View must have been reading Drucker.

TakeAway: Build on your present successes while investing in imaginative new opportunities that your future customers don’t even know they need yet.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

sources: http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/10/google-announces-plans-for-new-operating-structure.html http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/11/why-investors-like-googles-alphabet-news-analyst.html

0 Comments

Pricing Prestidigitation: One Nissan, Two Prices.

6/5/2015

0 Comments

- Nissan image -

Tags: Nissan Rogue, Rogue Select, Infiniti G37, Q40, Q50, Acura Integra
I thought what I was reading was possibly ... bogus. If it had been April 3rd instead of June 3rd, I’d have been pretty certain somebody was attempting to snooker me. The article was published on Jalopnik.com, a site for fans of high-performance automobiles with occasional pieces about mainstream auto marketing, fast fighter planes, dumb drivers and generally hoonish fun with cars.

Since the article’s author, Doug DeMuro, has been known to add a dash of silliness to his writing (he's a former manager with Porsche Cars North America), I thought it likely that his claim of Nissan selling two versions of its popular Rogue SUV at the same time might have been written with a sly wink.

DeMuro cited a press briefing in Nashville some two years ago during which a Nissan exec casually mentioned that “Oh by the way, we’re not cancelling the old Rogue. We’re just going to keep it around and sell it to people on a tighter budget.”

He’d never heard of anything like that. Nor had I, which is why his Jalopnik article at first seemed like a put-on.

So I called an old friend at the local Nissan store, who confirmed that it was indeed true that Nissan had two different Rogues for sale. I checked out the dealer’s web site to see this new car novelty for myself. And there they were, the current Rouge and the previous model (now called Rogue Select) offered side by side. And both were selling quite briskly, thank you!   In fact, Rogue was the 14th best-selling vehicle in the country during May (presumably both models together).

DeMuro further piqued my curiosity by mentioning a similar marketing strategy over at Nissan’s high-line Infiniti brand. Sure enough, the strong selling, long running G37 four-door has been renamed the Q40 and is being offered for less money (with attractive lease terms) alongside its eventual replacement, the Q50, a kissin’-cousin of a car outfitted with more advanced cabin style and electronics as well as a small increase in horsepower .

During our conversation, my friend and I swapped stories about times when arrival of the new models used to be a big deal. My dad worked at a Dodge-Plymouth dealership, and we got to see the new cars before the public did, which was a great coup for us kids. Nowadays, however, the new models arrive largely without fanfare – so much so, apparently, that Nissan has slipped two new cars into the marketplace while keeping the old model around for a while and giving it a nameplate switcheroo – with a similar strategy at Infiniti.

There have been other examples of car companies selling last year’s model after the new ones have been launched. The 2013 Chevy Impala remains available to fleet buyers through this year, apparently to keep Chevrolet’s sales to rental car companies cranked without diminishing appeal (or resale value) of the much improved 2014-15 Impala.

I can see the sense in what Chevy is doing, but I truly must admire Nissan’s play!   Not only does the company save money, because much of the Rogue Select tooling has long been paid for, but car buyers get more choice.   People who don’t want to pay something like $3,000 more for the “regular” Rogue – and would prefer not to buy used – now have another option.

Will this less-is-more strategy migrate to other car brands?   I hope so, because it makes good marketing sense from the perspective of both buyer and seller.

Perhaps some day in the not too distant future we’ll be able to purchase not only last year’s car brand new but also models from two or three iterations back – improved in performance and safety but looking essentially the same. DeMuro suggests bringing back an Acura favorite, the Integra coupe, discontinued in 2006.   My son certainly would agree after driving one quite enthusiastically until a new baby in the family dictated not only their move to a roomier (and considerably older and safer) four-door Mercedes.

Should the marketing savvy Nissan is exhibiting today spread to other auto brands, perhaps not too far down the road we’ll find ourselves having taken a much-needed stop toward eliminating planned obsolescence altogether.

-O-

TakeAway: What's old can also be new in today's marketing world.

(To see a “new” old Mustang, see my post, Experience Mustang -- All Over Again: http://www.brianefaulkner.com/blog/experience-mustang-all-over-again

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

0 Comments

A Mercedes by Another Name.

5/22/2015

0 Comments

- Image © by Brian E. Faulkner -

Tags: Mercedes-Benz, Steinway & Sons, Daimler Motor Company, Daimler-Benz
While researching the origin of the current Mercedes-Benz tagline, I was reminded how close the car came to being called something else – at least here in America.

Were it not for a promising young man’s extended illness, Mercedes most likely would have been called by a name that had nothing to do with automobiles, a name known around the world by the time Gottlieb Daimler rolled out his high-speed internal combustion-powered automobile in 1886. Carl Benz developed his own car the same year, but the business entities that survived the inventors didn’t come together as Daimler-Benz AG until 1926.

In addition to automobiles, Daimler built engines for boats and industrial applications. That caught the eye of one William Steinway, of the famed piano family. He got in touch with Daimler, and on October 6, 1888, the Daimler Motor Company was organized in New York, where Steinway & Sons had already been in business for 35 years.

Steinway was convinced he could sell Daimler’s engines in the United States and acquired the rights to manufacture and market them for use in such things as cream separators, sewing machines, pumps, ventilating fans, printing presses and other applications that required a single-cylinder stationary engine.

In 1893, Steinway experienced Daimler’s “motor carriage” for himself and began to envision a motorized America. So he set about developing his own automobile, one more adapted to American road conditions because he thought Daimler’s car too light for the “rough cobblestone streets we have in this country.”

“The cars which we intend to produce for the American market will be capable of carrying between two and four people and will be driven by engines with between 2½ and 3½ hp,” Steinway told a newspaper reporter in 1895. “Each car will have four different speed settings: 3½, 6, 9, and 14 miles per hour.”

However, this perspicacious man’s dream was not to be. He died at age 35 in November of the following year after a stubborn period of undiagnosed illness (probably tuberculosis). By that time he’d invested a frustrating amount of additional capital in the car company to offset continuing losses, so it’s likely he would have pulled out anyway. After William’s death, Daimler Motor Company’s holdings, including a factory built on Steinway’s land, was sold to newly organized Daimler Manufacturing Company, which in 1905 produced an “American Mercedes” based on the German model. This car was on the market for only eight years before its factory was destroyed by fire.

So had William Steinway lived and helped Daimler Motor Company overcome its ongoing financial problems, the American Mercedes just might have been called a Steinway ... which no doubt would have worked out fine, because both brands exemplify the best in their categories to this day.

Best is subjective, of course, but Steinway & Sons instruments are the pianos on which the overwhelming number of concert artists choose to perform – or aspire to perform, as they have almost since day one.   William’s father, Heinrich Engelhard Steinweg, emigrated to New York from Germany during mid century, founded his business in a Manhattan loft, changed his name to Henry Steinway and set a quality standard that has endured through successive generations.   His maxim was “Build the best piano possible. Sell it at the lowest price consistent with quality.”

And although the company has passed through a number of different owners since it was purchased from the Steinway family by CBS in 1972, Steinway & Sons remains at the top of the piano hierarchy and is the brand to which other fine pianos are most often compared.   The company now is owned by American hedge fund manager John Paulson, a long-time admirer of its products.   His stated goal is to assure Steinway & Sons’ "continuing greatness."

Henry and William clearly would have agreed on that.

Mercedes-Benz’ latest tagline also reflects the philosophy of its founder, as well as the quality bedrock on which the brand stands as it moves deeper into the 21st century.

You may recall the TV spot where Gottlieb Daimler nods off at his desk and dreams about the Mercedes-Benz of the future, with its now-familiar look, technology and style. As Daimler is awakened by a lovely assistant, we see a handwritten phrase scratched on the notepad beside him: The best or nothing -- underlined with a flourish.   Though Mercedes-Benz has experienced some quality issues in recent years (not unlike Steinway), the brand is still held in high esteem, evidenced by frequent references to the “Mercedes of this” and the “Mercedes of that” as the marketers of other high-end product seek to compare their offerings to the car with the three pointed star.

“In the end, all any of us has is our good name,” a Mercedes print ad declared a while back. That’s true of Mercedes-Benz and true of Steinway & Sons. The two vaulted brands that nearly became kissin’ cousins a hundred-odd years ago have prospered -- and will continue to prosper -- in large part because of the quality foundation put in place by their founders.

TakeAway: Build your brand on bedrock quality and your reputation will follow, helping smooth the way over the inevitable bumps you encounter on your road to success.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

0 Comments

Why Toyota's Camry Is Like The Velveteen Rabbit -- and Cadillac's CT6 Is Not.

4/6/2015

0 Comments

- image courtesy of Toyota -

Tags: Toyota Camry, Cadillac CT6, Buick, Ford Fusion, The Velveteen Rabbit

Two creative approaches to automobile advertising have caught my eye of late: spots on TV and online for Cadillac’s revolutionary new CT6 luxury performance sedan and a television / online campaign for Toyota’s competent but non-revolutionary Camry. One campaign engages the mind, the other tugs at the heart. One campaign is daring, the other is bold. One is cool and self-centric, the other warm and other-centric. Both ads are effective.

Let’s start with Toyota, for whom Saatchi, LA has created a series of spots declaring the heretofore ordinary Camry now to be bold – at least by association, because the car only plays a bit part in the ads. The real drama happens in stories that wrap themselves around the car:

A young woman finds B.B. King’s guitar in a storage unit, and after “tracking down a legend” in her Camry, returns it to him.

Another young woman escapes from her wedding just in time, and the getaway car is … a Camry.

A man comes to realize that “being a dad is more than being a father” as he reflects on those growing-up moments with his daughter, intercut with scenes of them together in a Camry.

Then there’s Sochi medalist Amy Purdy’s paean to her dad, who not only encouraged her through her many physical trials but donated one of his kidneys to save her life.

Not to mention the spot featuring Amy competing, dancing and modeling as Mohammed Ali narrates.

- image courtesy of Cadillac -

This is heartfelt stuff. And although the Camry spots barely move the cool-meter, they do a good job of whacking you in your emotional center (especially if you’re a dad) – and millions of people seem to like them given the YouTube plays they’ve racked up. But bold?

Like Cadillac and other auto brands (Buick has been notably successful), Toyota has been trying to crank up their style to generate wider appeal. Will their “Bold” campaign help attract new buyers, as cars like Ford’s fast-selling Fusion (with a much cooler name) take a bead on Camry’s sales lead?

Marketing experts are divided. Some say Toyota is headed in the right direction with their Bold campaign but that turning around brand impression takes years, if not generations. Other say “not so fast,” a Camry is a Camry and no matter how good it may become, it was born to blend in.

Cadillac, too, is all about changing prospective buyers’ impression of their brand – and in recent years they appear to have been succeeding for the most part. In fact, they appear to have just about exorcised the image of the slab-sided, boat big ‘80s and ‘90s models from people’s minds. Short of buying up and crushing all the clunky old Caddys left on the road, about all Cadillac can do is (1) design cars that truly stand out in their market niche and (2) have something truly bold to say about them.

Thus, the CT6 “Dare Greatly” campaign, created by Publicis Worldwide, a low-key exercise in creative edginess that presents the car in SoHo, slo-mo style.

“How does a fashion intern (Jason Wu) become an arbiter of style?” the spot asks.
“How does a college dropout invent the personal computer?” it asks of Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak.
“How does a director take 12 years to shoot a film?” the spot asks of “Boyhood” director Richard Linklater.
And in conclusion also asks, “How does a 112 year old carmaker reinvent itself?”

The CT6 launch ad, created by Publicis Worldwide and set to Edith Piaf singing Non, je ne regrettes rien (No, I regret nothing), presents thumbnail descriptions of “only those who dare” in a noir-like New York setting that evokes a sense of mystery and glamor as the newest Cadillac lurks in the background, almost as if an afterthought.

One does not so much “like” this ad as inhabit it – that is, if you’re in the demographic that GM hopes will lust after this car, which has been designed to raise the game against their European competitors, not so much by emulating them but by establishing a new standard of automotive performance and luxury.

The CT6 and Camry ads both wrap their product in an image they hope will attract buyers – Camry warms the heart and speaks of “love stuff” while Caddy quickens the pulse and addresses the “daring”.

Both carry off their creative well. But only Cadillac’s approach seems authentic.

Ironically, I prefer watching the Camry spots (which makes me older-than-cool and more in their target market). I like Camrys, which perform their middle-ground, mid-sized sedan function admirably and without pretending to be cool. When I rent one on an out-of-town trip, I am assured of enjoying a competent, quality, unpretentious ride. Which is what makes a Camry a Camry and part of the reason that nameplate remains the best-selling one in the U.S.

I think of Margary Williams’ story of The Velveteen Rabbit when considering whether Toyota may be missing the strategic mark with its otherwise well-executed Camry creative. You may recall the story, where a stuffed bunny yearns to become “Real”.

“Real isn't how you are made,” the rabbit is told. “It's a thing that happens to you. When a child loves you for a long, long time, not just to play with, but REALLY loves you, then you become Real."

Camry is already “real” in its market’s mind. So why go to such lengths to pretend it really is something else?

TakeAway: Don’t sell bold unless you’ve got bold to sell. Instead, communicate what’s really real. Be authentic!

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

0 Comments

MCdONALD'S & aPPLE uP tHEIR eXPERIENCE.

3/31/2015

0 Comments

Image © by Brian E. Faulkner

Years ago, when McDonald’s first started its march to fast food dominance, during the days when you could buy a burger, fries and a drink and still get change back from your quarter, consistency was the company’s stock in trade (yes, the price was under 25-cents, about the cost of a gallon of gas back then). Another plus – and a critical success cornerstone – was that you could get the same McDonald’s fare about anywhere. Eventually, the price of a Big Mac even became a statistical measure for global economic well being because of their international availability.

These days, Ray Kroc’s golden-arched vision has come up against a new reality. Fast food customers expect more in the way of service, décor and food quality. In short, the same old McDonald’s experience will no longer do, even though the neon glow red and yellow plastic has been gone for several years now after a major restaurant re-do. But more change is underway and down the road. Food quality is on the upswing, driven both by consumer demand for fare unsullied by artificial ingredients and by fast casual competitors like Chipotle Mexican Grill that are upping the dining experience, forcing change upon the entire quick serve category.

McDonalds’ new CEO, Steve Esterbrook, calls himself an “internal activist.” Which means he's all about the business of change. A Brit, he's known for simplifying the McDonald’s menu and turning the business around, in a world where the company’s business generally is declining.

“This is where McDonald’s is headed,” Esterbrook said, referring to their stylish new 500-seat restaurant at the Frankfurt airport, where you can order at the counter or use a number of kiosks that fall easily to hand as you enter the store. There’s even a sit-down ordering option, thanks to a waiter with a tablet – and your food is brought to you so you don’t have to waste time milling around the counter.

McDonald’s isn’t the only iconic business that sees change in its immediate future. Apple, too, is upping its customer experience to accommodate the more upscale presentation demanded by luxury watch buyers.   The Apple Watch hits stores in about three weeks and reportedly may be had for as little as $349 (with a sapphire crystal screen) or in 18k at upwards of $10,000 (as rumor has it). But some marketing mavens are cautioning caution as the brand evolves. Can Apple stretch itself into the luxury category without losing its everyman base? Probably not without this store redesign, which – Apple Watch aside -- can’t come too soon for those serious Apple technology buyers who have tired of having to cut through the gadget gawkers to get serious attention – even out here in the burbs.

Customer experience is inextricably entwined with brand. Brand impression, a critical strategic distinction not so readily established, can be sullied in an instant by a buying or service experience that doesn’t match.

As for me, I’d be more inclined to check out McDonald’s given the new décor and ordering options exhibited in their Frankfurt airport store.   However, I’m not in the market for a watch at any price (haven’t worn one in well over 30 years), although I have been conversing with myself about a MacBook Pro purchase for some time (not to mention the iPhone 6 my family keeps after me to buy) and would genuinely appreciate a less carnival-like, more “considerate” atmosphere in which to make up my mind.

TakeAway: Where does your product or service stand? Does your customer experience match the brand impression you’ve created?

Read about my iPhone 6 dilemma here: www.brianefaulkner.com/blog/you-gotta-get-an-iphone-dad
Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

0 Comments

Brand Names Mentioned in THIS Blog To Date:

2/20/2015

0 Comments

Search brand name mentions above:

3M
AFLAC
Affordable Care Act
Alcoa
Alamo Rent A Car
Allegiant Air
amazon.com (2)
American Airlines
Andy Boy
Apple (7)
AT&T
Audi
Avenir
Bali
B&H Photo-Video
Ben & Jerry’s
Best Buy (2)
BMW (3)
Bosendorfer
Budweiser
Buick (2)
Burger King
Cadillac (4)
Camaro
Camry
Campers Inn
Carvana
CBS
Chevrolet (4)
Chrysler / Chrysler Corporation (3)
Chrysler 300
Chipotle Mexican Grill
Clarion
Coca-Cola (3)
Coach
CoachNet
Colorado (pickup truck)
Corvette
Comcast
Costco (2)
Craftsman
D’Arrigo Bros. Company (2)
Datsun
Delta Airlines
Democrat Party
DeSoto (2)
Discover
Disne
Dodge (2)
Dunkin’ Donuts (2)
Earth Fare
eBay
Ehrenberg-Bass Institute of
   Marketing Science
Energizer Holdings / Energizer
   Bunny (3)
FedEx (4)
F-150
Food Lion
Ford (6)
Fox News
Frontier Airlines
gawker.com

G.E.
Geek Squad (2)
GeekWire
GEICO (2)
GM, General Motors (4)
GoDaddy (2)
Godiva Chocolatier (2)
Goodman Millwork
Google
Grand Bohemian Hotel
Greentoe.com
Hanes
Harry’s Razors
Honda
House of Cards
Hyundai (2)
Impala
Interstate Batteries
J. C. Penney (2)
Jos. A. Bank
Joyce Farms
Kenmore
Kodak
Krispy Kreme (2)
Kohl’s (3)
L’eggs
Lincoln (2)
Linkedin
Lowes Foods
Lowes
Marriott (2)
Martin & Co.
Mason & Hamlin
Maytag
McKinsey & Company (2)
Men’s Wearhouse
Mercedes-Benz (5)
Merchant & Gould
Mercury
Microsoft (3)
Modern Quik-Ship
Mountain Dew
Music Trades
Mustang
Neilsen North America
NCR
Netflix (2)
Nike
Nikon
Nissan
Olympus
Orbitz
Oreck (2)
Package Containers (2)
Pepsi (2)
Plymouth (2)
Pontiac
Porsche
Poulet Rouge
priceline.com
PTIA (Piedmont Triad International Airport)
Publix (2)

Ratto Bros., Inc.
Ram
REI
Republican Party
Ritz Crackers
Sara Lee (2)
Sears
shopsmart.org
Silverado (2)
Silvercar
Sony
Southwest Airlines (2)
Sprint
Squidoo
Starbucks (7)
State Farm
Steinway & Sons (6)
Stuart Weitzman
Super Bowl XLIX
Target
Taurus
The Center for Media Research
The Colbert Report
The Kessler Collection
The Masters
The Weather Channel
Thunderbird
Tiffin Motorhomes
Time Warner Cable (2)
TIMCO
Toyota (3)
Tractor Supply
Trader Joe’s
U.S. Airways (2)
USA Today
Vero Fashion Outlet
VW
Wachovia Bank
Walmart (2)
Wegman’s
Whole Foods Market (5)
Wikipedia
Winnebago
Wired
WordPress
Yahoo
Yamaha
yelp.com

0 Comments

sample blog:

This is a sample blog for writer Brian E. Faulkner. It presents stories about brands that do (or don't) communicate competitive advantage effectively. Stories have been gleaned from the business press, personal experience and occasional interviews. New articles are added from time to time, and every so often there will be a post of general interest -- about things like success, passion, social trends, etc.

Author

Brian Faulkner is a writer and strategic communication consultant who helps business clients explain their competitive advantage in compelling and enduring ways.

He also is a five-time Emmy award winning Public Television writer & narrator for a highly-rated and well-loved magazine series.

GooGLE Divides to Conquer.

Pricing Prestidigitation: One Nissan, Two Prices.

A Mercedes by Another Name.

Why Toyota's Camry Is Like The Velveteen Rabbit -- and Cadillac's CT6 Is Not.

MCdONALD'S & aPPLE uP tHEIR eXPERIENCE.

Brand Names Mentioned in THIS Blog To Date:

sample blog:

Author

Categories

Archives