Blog - A BLOG ABOUT COMMUNICATING COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE

Car Insurance Seen in a Whole New LIght.

7/27/2015

For some time now, I've been aware of -- and impressed by -- Liberty Mutual's Whole New Light TV campaign. Every time I see one of their spots, which feature everyday folks musing by a shoreline with the Statue of Liberty in the background, I pay attention. The ads work because of their simplicity, because of story, because of the “real” talent they’ve chosen and because each spot presents a common insurance frustration that viewers can identify with immediately:

“You’re driving along, having a perfectly nice day, when out of nowhere a pickup truck slams into your brand new car. One second it wasn’t there, and the next second – BOOM! – you had your first accident. Now you have to make your first claim. So you talk to your insurance company, and – BOOM! – you’re blindsided for a second time: They won’t give you enough money to replace your brand new car.

(pregnant pause)

Don’t those people know you’re already shaken up?”

I love the reference to “those people”. We all know who they are.

The story goes on: Liberty Mutual not only replaces the new car but also includes the value of depreciation. Another spot in the series offers to replace a policyholder’s older car with one a whole model year newer.

“You should feel good about your choice of insurance,” Liberty Mutual’s Web site informs us. “That’s why our new campaign aims to shine a light on this otherwise confusing category.”

Amen to that! Insurance, whether auto, health, homeowner or life, all too often seems like a costly crap shoot, despite the assuring words used to sell us our policies. So it’s refreshing to see a straight-talking sales pitch based on credible slice-of-life situations – without yammering on so much about price (the up to $423 you can save to switch is slipped in toward the end of the spot -- frosting on the cake compared to the main benefit).

If I hadn’t experienced such consistently good customer service from my State Farm agent over the years, which is a personal rather than corporate competitive appeal, I’d be tempted to give Liberty Mutual a shot at my business because of their common sense advertising – but would be less likely to change companies for a 15% price difference, even if offered up by a cute green gecko.

Pure and simple, Liberty Mutual has done a superb job of communicating their competitive advantage. Their tagline is so strong that price may not even matter: car insurance seen in a whole new light.

TakeAway: Create an authentic and credible competitive advantage. Then, present it in terms that people can rally around; they will be more likely to want to buy your product or service.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

Why Airline Travel Should Be More Like Ben & Jerry's.

6/11/2015

- Images © by

Brian E. Faulkner -

Tags: NetJets, Yahoo News, IATA, Ben & Jerry's, American Airlines, United Airlines, FlyersRights.org, Delta, Southwest, Jet Blue, Spirit Airlines

I hate flying. Not the soaring, free kind of flying that dreams are made of. I’m talking about public conveyance, the cramped kind of flying: commercial airline travel, where you’re imprisoned in a long aluminum tube with your fellow inmates for an insane number of hours. Which isn’t really flying at all but more a kind of suffering you have to endure to get from one place to another without spending days or weeks doing it.

"Flying commercial” brings up all sorts of mind pictures, most not all that appealing:

* waiting in lines
    - ticket agent lines
    - security lines
    - gate agent lines
    - boarding lines
    - baggage line
    - lines to get in other lines
* overbooking
* carry-on hassles
* cramped aisles
* cramped carry-on space
* cramped seats
* the seatmate crap shoot
* quarrels over seat backs
* make believe food
* bad air
* restrooms that are anything but restful
* weather delays
* crew delays
* tarmac delays
* late arrivals
* missing connections
* sleeping in the terminal

And that’s assuming the technical part of flying goes perfectly – all the doors get closed, the wings are securely fastened and somebody checks to see if there’s gas in the tank.

If I had a NetJets budget, I wouldn’t be concerned about such things. But I don’t. And most of us don’t.   Which made me perk up and take notice of this headline on Yahoo News:

           Airlines struggle to please the modern passenger.

According to the article, here are some of concerns expressed during this year’s meeting of the International Air Transport Association (IATA), a trade group for airline execs – keeping in mind that these weren’t complaints from passengers but observations and comments by the execs themselves:

More passenger info is needed, especially on mobile devices. One suggestion was to “offer passengers a behind-the-scenes view of their suitcase as it moves through the airport machinery,” although methinks that could create more concern than certainty.
Give people a “nice, reliable experience at a normal price,” one exec said. Another added: “Make my life easy,” which sounds great except that airlines appear to staff for ordinary flying conditions in a world filled with extraordinary events, the least of which these days is the weather.
“Don’t give me a vanilla experience”, one panelist told the IATA gathering. But is that so bad? Because when I buy a pint of Ben & Jerry’s vanilla ice cream, my expectations are met every single time.
Another exec spoke of “managing” expectations, which seems like an especially worthy goal – as in no surprises! Just over half of meeting participants thought the airlines weren’t “doing a good job meeting passenger demands.”

What are passengers demanding? Here’s how a reader named Mike put it in the comments section:

“The only issue is how stupidly uncomfortable the experience is. You’re stuck in a tiny seat from which you can’t get up most of the time."

“THE DAMN SEATS ARE TOO SMALL,” agreed Mr. B (dramatizing his frustration by writing in all caps), “and the answer isn’t smaller carry-ons,” even as the IATA proposes new industry-wide standards for carry-on bags.   The small places in which we now are asked to stow our carry-ons seem to be getting more restricted while people are becoming more frustrated (sometimes even rude) as they seek a spot to stow their briefcase or backpack, often rows away from their seat, causing that much more confusion when it comes time to get off the plane.   And as dissatisfaction increases, seat room and restroom room appear to be shrinking.

It seems absurd, but perhaps not altogether illogical,that “the two most profitable airlines — American Airlines and United Airlines — have abysmal customer service satisfaction scores,” according to a recent Forbes article, quoting Kendall Creighton, spokesperson for FlyersRights.org , which advocates for air travelers.   “An airline’s customer satisfaction levels appear to be inversely related to profits,” she says. “The higher the profits, the worse the scores. The more modest the profits, the higher the customer satisfaction.”   And now the government is proposing new emissions standards for aircraft, which would put additional pressure on price and profit.

According to the Forbes article, Jet Blue has the highest passenger satisfaction scores and the lowest profit margin. Spirit Airlines, whose ironic tagline is Less Money. More Go, had the highest margin and lowest customer satisfaction, while “Delta and Southwest have managed to strike a balance between profits and happy passengers.”

I have a suggestion: In the interest of communicating clear competitive advantage, each airline could post a simple graphic at critical passenger touch points, from ticketing through to the baggage carousel. The graphic would consist of ten stacked rectangles, one each for the top 10 measures of airline customer satisfaction. Each rectangle’s color would change as customer satisfaction ebbs and flows, from angry red for poor performance through shades of yellow to leafy green for superior performance. Data could be gleaned from in-flight customer surveys taken every day, on paper, through passenger devices or even later online.   The information should include date of service, flight number / seat number and accumulate over time.

I challenge each of these airlines, in fact the entire airline industry, to put their heads together and create what might be called the Airline Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI), a numerical way of communicating the same info the colored rectangles do.   Perhaps the IATA will choose to lead the way. Such measures surely will be more effective in raising airline industry expectations – and performance -- than making “standardized” carry-on bags even smaller!

TakeAway: If your business, brand or product satisfies – even delights – customers, let the world know about it.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

Pricing Prestidigitation: One Nissan, Two Prices.

6/5/2015

- 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

What Price Luxury? The Limitless Appeal of Veblen Goods.

5/14/2015

- Image © by Brian E. Faulkner -

Tags: Steinway & Sons, Veblen goods, Apple Watch, Pam Danziger, HENRYs, Mercedes-Benz CLA, BMW 2-series, '55 Ford, '57 Chevy, Ford Victoria, Chevy Bel Air

It’s said that one man’s luxury is another man’s necessity.

I recall some years ago hearing of a serious music student who slept underneath a huge Steinway & Sons concert grand that barely fit into his Manhattan apartment, which otherwise was adorned with furnishings constructed from painted cinder blocks and cheap shelving.  The 9-foot piano was not a luxury. It was a necessity, a critical key to furthering his career as a concert pianist.

“Luxury” gets sliced and diced any number of ways depending on how you view it. There are luxury homes, luxury cars, luxury wines and luxury vacations, some of which cost millions and others only hundreds. You might be able to afford a luxury cruise (short of commissioning your own yacht) but hard-pressed to spend more than your annual salary for a mid-sized Steinway to encourage your average 12-year-old to stick with her piano lessons – although during my time selling pianos, I have seen parents stretch to make that kind of purchase for their talented, truly dedicated offspring. I would classify these folks as need-based buyers. At the same time, I’ve also seen want-based buyers purchase expensive instruments to set in their living rooms. Though they didn’t play a note, the piano matched their furniture and the brand name on its fallboard spoke eloquently of their luxurious lifestyle.

The notion of luxury gets tangled up somewhere between need and want.  Some things are luxurious because we can’t afford them but want them, while other things are luxurious because we want them and can afford them.

Around the cusp of the 20th century, an American economist named Thorstein Veblen observed in Theory of the Leisure Class that the demand for certain commodities was proportional to their high price. In other words, if you really want some uber-expensive indulgence, you’ll gladly pay the price because it enhances your status in a conspicuous sort of way. At that level of net worth, of course, money isn't much of a problem, although these days a million doesn't go as far as it used to ... $100-million if you live in Manhattan.

Thus, Veblen goods.

At the other end of the luxury spectrum is what marketing consultant Pam Danziger has dubbed the HENRYs, the High-Earner-Not-Rich-Yet “mass segment of the affluent consumer market” with annual incomes of $100,000 to $250,000. Which means they’re doing better than nearly 80% of Americans.   It’s these folks that Tim Cook & Company appears to be targeting with their Apple Watch and clever luxury launch. It will be interesting to see if Apple’s new entry into the watch marketing space can straddle the fence between need and want (especially among Millennials) while creating demand up and down the luxury ladder and dipping down into the middle class.

High end automakers like BMW and Mercedes-Benz have become adept in recent years at driving desire for their luxury brands down through the HENRYs to the middle class (Danziger’s middle class appears to top out at $99,999). Mercedes now offers the price-seductive CLA pegged right at the average outlay for a new car in the U.S. ($31,000), and BMW’s sporty new 2-series can be had for just a bit more.

Of course, today’s average new car is ludicrously luxurious compared to those of 60 years ago, which weren’t so well equipped – or efficient or safe.   Back in 1955, a sparkling new Ford or Chevy cost under $2000 and probably didn’t have air conditioning or maybe even an automatic. But in those days the average American worker only took home $5,000. Today’s average salary is more than ten times that, although it’s interesting to note that the average new car costs less relative to income (36% of the average salary now vs. 55% sixty years ago).

- Image © by Brian E. Faulkner -

But, irony of ironies, some well-kept original or recently restored automotive icons from way back then, such as Ford Victorias and Chevy Bel Airs (primarily the two-door or four-door hardtop models), now are back in demand in a big way, and the better ones can easily top $31,000. There’s a ’55 goldenrod yellow and raven black (bumble bee) Ford Victoria for sale nearby that I would love to have. But I still can’t afford it.

So thanks a lot, Thorstein Veblen!

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

Airport Choice Revisited: Convenience & Experience vs. Price.

5/6/2015

The article noted that “Unless they’re on business trips, many travelers from the Piedmont Triad are chasing airline discounts to Charlotte or Raleigh for their vacations and other trips.”

Dunno about you, but if I were planning a vacation – especially with family in tow – I’d opt for the closest, least crowded airport and invest the few extra bucks per ticket in a more relaxed, hassle-free airport experience.   That is, if I can get to my destination from there without changing planes too many times (even though I’ve noticed on occasion that it costs less to fly to my destination through Charlotte from PTI than to drive to Charlotte and depart from there. Go figure.)

The newspaper article focused on the price advantage of the two more distant airports vs. PTI, which serves the greater Winston-Salem, Greensboro, High Point area. It reported an average round trip fare of $10.66 less at Charlotte Douglas International Airport vs. PTI’s average fare, and a price difference between Raleigh-Durham International Airport and PTI of $53.02.   Of course, individual ticket prices may swing higher or lower. The article failed to point out how small the price difference actually is between PTI and the other two airports, especially considering the comfort and convenience of flying from PTI vs. driving to Raleigh-Durham or Charlotte. Each alternative is about an hour-and-a-half away (vs. half that or less for PTI), and you’d best add at least another hour to that or risk missing your flight.

There is a way to lower an airport’s average fare, notes PTI Executive Director Kevin Baker in the article: attract more budget airlines.

“We’re always talking to every low-cost carrier out there to try and lure them to come to our airport,” he told Journal reporter Richard M. Barron, although “there’s only so much we can do.”

Maybe so. But what about talking up the experiential advantages of his airport more effectively?   I would toss their current tagline (Fly Easy, Fly PTI) in favor of a variant with a bit more strategic muscle:

- Image © by Brian E. Faulkner -

In August of last year I suggested in this space that our local airport, Piedmont Triad International (PTI: airport code GSO) just might offer the world’s most satisfying airport experience. (http://tinyurl.com/ktd3wrz) It’s easy to get to, easy to go through and easy to leave when your flight returns.

While you’re there, it’s a pleasant, uncrowded, unhurried place; parking is plentiful and close by and rental cars can be had right next to the terminal. There’s even an electric car charging station. And free WiFi.

Given that kind of experience, I’d expect to pay a little more.

However, an article in the Winston-Salem Journal recently reported that people are willing to travel to two other, much larger airports to save a few buck on fares:

This tagline invites prospective flyers to compare PTI with its more distant alternatives in light of the good dose of extra travel time and hassle that people experience in exchange for the few bucks they save on the average Charlotte or Raleigh-Durham ticket.

“It’s EASIER to FLY PTI!”

Thinking Beyond Price:

It’s all too easy to sell your product or service on price – no matter what it is. However, there may be other, more strategic product benefits lurking on the sidelines that prospective customers will rise to even more than a lower price.

Let’s say you’re that airline passenger trying to decide whether to fly from the handy airport nearby or commute nearly two hours to a bigger one. What’s your choice? Convenience? Experience? Or price?

PTI marketing could ask:

Are you prepared to drive all the way to Charlotte to save $10.66 on your next airline ticket? With our easy-access, close-in parking, short lines and comfy terminal, it’s easier to fly PTI from anywhere in or around the Triad. Sure, you’ll spend an average of ten bucks more on your fare, but you’ll enjoy the experience a whole lot more … and get home faster, too.

I’d spend the ten bucks at PTI in a heartbeat if my other choice is to drive all the way to Raleigh, especially if I have to battle morning or evening drive time traffic on I-40 plus pay for gas each way.

Would I spend $100 more for my ticket? I’d sure think about it, although some would not. I’d also like to think that there’s enough people like me to make a difference for PTI. Because for us, an investment in avoiding the inevitability of parking hassles, long lines and general airport uncertainty is an easy choice, whether flying for business or pleasure.

TakeAway: Sometimes a higher price can be the better deal.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

Don't Mess With Your Brand Story.

4/29/2015

Image © by Brian E. Faulkner

Tags: Microsoft, NPR, George Zimmer, Men’s Wearhouse, Joseph Abboud, Jos. A. Bank, Ford Motor Company, GM, Cadillac, Buick, Ford, Lincoln, Apple, Coca-Cola, New Coke
Every brand, company, product or service has a story – just like people. People’s stories are a combination of image and reputation, which can be anything from well focused to wildly irresponsible.   Some businesses may be well-positioned (in a controlled, strategic sense) while others cast their reputation to the wind, allowing the marketplace to define who they are and what they represent.   Call it default positioning.   The example that most often comes to my mind is Microsoft, which hasn’t done a great positioning job. There are many “Microsofts” out there, depending on who's doing the talking.

Heard an interview with George Zimmer on NPR this morning. His topic was paying people more, even at the expense of company profits. But what grabbed my attention was his distinctive gravelly voice, the one he used on television when he was boss of The Men’s Wearhouse – you know the one:

“You’re going to like the way you look. “I guarantee it!”

Every spot had a story, and as leader-spokesperson, Zimmer was deeply imbedded in the Men’s Wearhouse image -- along with that famous tagline. I can’t help but notice that the Men’s Wearhouse strategic positioning has become less distinctive since Zimmer was forced out, supposedly because of management disagreements. Something’s missing from their advertising, and it’s not just Zimmer. Despite the few recent Men’s Wearhouse spots featuring signature suit designer Joseph Abboud, their marketing seems focused more on price, like their long-time competitor, Jos. A. Bank, which Men’s Wearhouse purchased early in 2014 after a turbulent takeover battle.

The takeaway here is that a strong brand story should not be discarded so readily, although I’m sure the Men’s Warehouse board thought long and hard about the strategic consequences of dumping Zimmer. I find it discouraging, however, that they’ve fallen back on price advertising after such success with set-apart positioning, although it must be working or they wouldn’t do it. But I’ll bet their margins aren’t as good as when Zimmer was hawking the wares, because price was hardly mentioned in his spots and, as I recall, Wall Street liked the stock.

I have several friends and acquaintances, each with a business in the same retail category. Two of them ride a high-price wave supported by a brand story that's more than 150 years old. They don’t have to sell on price and, as a result, get high margins. Another friend sells the same type of high-end merchandise at market prices, although different brands. His business story has been established for well over 50 years; customers seek him out because of his quality reputation. Still others I know in that same business always seem to be wrestling with price. They don’t command the margins they could because their business stories are indistinct. They don’t have a Marketable Truth© to stand on.

Both Ford Motor Company and GM currently are wrestling with their image stories. GM is in the latter stages of rebooting its Cadillac brand to compete with the best German luxury performance sedans; they've had enough success that Cadillac is no longer seen as exclusively for oldsters seeking a luxury nameplate and plush ride.   Buick, another GM brand that used to have a fuddy-duddy image, is experiencing a surprising sales renaissance driven by rising demand in China, where the brand has become a status symbol. Different time, different story.

Ford also is into a bit of image retooling of late. Lincoln (finally!) is thinking about abandoning its confusing alphabet soup model designations in favor of real names like Continental and possibly even Zephyr.   All while Ford grapples with a negative quality blip brought about in recent years by a dashboard communication and entertainment system that has proven troublesome and hard to use – so much so that auto enthusiast Web sites are recommending that people wait ‘til a redesigned system comes out on the 2016 models later this year to purchase their new Fords and Lincolns.

When I think of brand image, however, I think most often about Apple. They were an upstart at first, but gradually built a business, operating system and reputation that out-shined the king of personal computers at that time, the venerable IBM. Will gutsy moves into new product categories like luxury watches and even automobiles sour Apple’s reputation? Not likely, because they’ve told and retold their brand story so well – and so long – that they’re as close to invincible as any business or brand out there.

Even so, in this day of social-driven media, there are new voices everywhere, and some percentage is quick to broadcast bad news. One exemplary misstep marketers are quick to recall is the New Coke debacle of 1985, when Coca-Cola almost lost its way -- and that was before the Internet became so widely available. This very day, April 29, 2015, online rumblings are afoot about a second brand of listeria-laden ice cream and a major beer maker’s label that seems to make light of rape.

Reputation or image -- call it what you will -- can bite you in the backside any minute … but also can help lead you to greatness. All the more reason to consider whether your brand, business, product or service is solidly positioned in today’s uber-competitive, uber-critical world.

TakeAway: Shape your strategic position carefully. And guard your brand story for dear life.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner         Marketable Truth © by Brian E. Faulkner

MCdONALD'S & aPPLE uP tHEIR eXPERIENCE.

3/31/2015

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

Price! Price! Price!

2/16/2015

Tags: Greentoe.com, Priceline, Consumer Reports, Nikon, Canon, Olympus, J. C. Penney, B&H, B&H Photo, online discount cameras, smartshop.org

Have you ever thought about the difference between price selling and selling price?

Price selling is discounting. It’s lazy marketing. And having sale after sale after sale not only takes a bite out of profit but could be a long-term trap (just ask J.C. Penney).

Selling price is price-as-product.

An intriguing example of price-as-product popped up on my screen this morning: Greentoe.com.   Their ad snagged me because I’ve been fishing around online for cameras and lenses. So I clicked through to their site, where they immediately offered “the lowest prices available” on brands like Nikon, Canon, Olympus, etc.

“People like you are saving big on photo gear,” claimed the big green headline (the shade of money). “Set your price and save up to 20%. Brand new products. No grey market. Authorized retailers. USA warranty included.”

Does the advent of Greentoe.com mean I’ll no longer have to contend with my local Best Buy’s lackluster camera department? (http://tinyurl.com/nywuxcx) Does it mean I won’t have to risk ordering my next camera from one of those slippery big city camera discounters?

Maybe …

“Greentoe.com is the first and only website that allows you to name your own price for products in five categories: photography, appliances, musical instruments, baby items, and home theater,” reports shopsmart.org, an online Consumer Reports “best deals” resource.   They’re doing for consumer products what priceline.com has done for air travel and booking hotel rooms. And it has the same sort of intrigue. Will they accept my bid?   Will it be soooo much lower than the price somebody else paid?

Greentoe’s process is simple:

(1) Submit an offer, on “thousands of products” (and give them your payment info).

(2) “Hundreds of retailers” then are notified of your offer (a green, orange or yellow gauge helps you determine how likely they are to accept – similar to Priceline).

(3) The first retailer to accept gets the sale; the transaction is between buyer and seller.

If you know precisely what item you want, Greentoe.com may be your cup of tea – that is, if their retail partners have what you’re looking for. The site’s selection of musical instruments and pro audio equipment is far from comprehensive, but it’s not meant to be. They know that brick-and-mortar stores always have aged merchandise or overstocks they need to sell, so greentoe.com matches them up with customers who live hundreds or thousands of miles away.   Same for TVs, appliances and other products.

Their customers don’t have to be lucky or do the legwork, the company states in its well written and informative blog, they “just have to have a little luck to find that deal.” Greentoe provides the luck.

There is something else. Once you’ve punched in your payment card numbers, there’s no turning back, so if you’re at all queasy about things like that – or don’t make purchase decisions easily (like me), it might be best to buy elsewhere.

Heretofore, the place I most likely would have picked to buy a camera is New York’s B&H Photo-Video, especially if I needed help choosing the right one. B&H has it all: vast selection, attentive service, technical expertise, free advice and competitive prices. And, if you live anywhere nearby or are visiting Manhattan, you get to handle the goods before making a purchase decision. Walking into their 70,000 square foot their store is like entering a dream world of professional photo, video and audio goodies.

You can buy cheaper than B&H, but probably not as well.

To be sure, there are other excellent purveyors of professional photo, video and audio products – online and off, and some may have as compelling a presentation as B&H, but the positioning of that big store at 34th & 9th has always fascinated me.   They’re not only the largest independent (non-chain) photo-video retailer in America, they also communicate their competitive advantages clearly and set price accordingly -- unlike all too many businesses that only play the price card.   B&H.com appears to command a slight price premium over some other online camera sources, and if so, they more than earn their margins with their compelling added-value.

Greentoe.com’s selling proposition also is compelling, however, so I will keep them in mind when it comes time to buy whatever camera I decide on. Who knows? My bid price just might outweigh the loyalty I feel to B&H for sending me all those informative catalogs over the years. But then again, during the time in my life when I sold audio equipment, it always rankled me when I helped educate a prospect only to see him buy from some discounter instead of me.

It’s so easy to discount, which is the unfortunate first impulse of many businesses. In most situations, price selling is mind-numbing, profit crushing and unnecessary – unless, like Greentoe.com, price is your product.

TakeAway: Does your business or brand have competitive advantages that will attract more qualified customers and allow you to command better margins? Or are you content to sell principally on price?

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

A Powerful Brand Can Help Increase Your Sales.

1/30/2015

Tags: GM, General Motors, Starbucks, Steinway, Nike, BMW
Some years ago, an auto dealer client approached my small marketing communication company with a challenging problem: how to sell more GM parts to other GM dealers. The dealers were falling behind on repairing their customers’ cars because they couldn’t get parts from GM quickly enough. Our client discovered that by stocking fast moving parts in depth and shipping them overnight at a slight price premium, they could beat General Motors to the punch, help dealers get their customers’ cars out the door faster and make more efficient use of their service bays.

“You’re not selling parts to these dealers so much as you’re selling time,” we suggested. And recommended creating a brand focused primarily on time rather than the parts themselves.

The brand logo was designed to look like a packing crate stencil. And it worked. It wasn’t long before the GM zone manager told my client, “I see your Quik-Ship stickers wherever I go!” Their powerful brand with its built-in competitive story helped them earn millions and millions of incremental dollars over the years, which is precisely what a powerful brand should do.

Brand As Promise:

A brand is more than a catchy phrase or attractive logo.
It may include both of these, of course, but at heart a brand is a promise. A promise you make to your customers.
Starbucks promises a predictable mix of coffee concoctions and social context. They're so well known that they no longer even include "Starbucks" in their logo.

Brand As Song:

A brand is like a song. And the marketer’s job is to create a brand with a melody the customer wants to hear -- like when some tune sticks in your mind and won’t let go.

The right “brand-song” helps your business, product or service stand out against other brands. Steinway is a great example.

Brand As Persona:

A properly positioned brand embodies the qualities and values people think of when they see or hear about your brand.

It’s a lot like thinking about someone you like – or even how you see yourself. A personality comes to mind, perhaps not in so many words, but (hopefully) as a good feeling. Which is why Nike's famous "swoop" works so well.

Brand As Filter:

Your brand should attract qualified prospects and filter out the rest. If I have $20,000 to spend on a new car, I won’t be showing up at the BMW store. Their brand, which promises a blend of German engineering and exhilarating performance at a relatively high price, excludes me but attracts people who want -- and can afford -- the Ultimate Driving Machine.

Brand As Story:

A successful brand tells a unique competitive story. It carves out a “blue ocean” of fresh strategic mindspace, uncontested by others and unique to you. It speaks with a clear, definitive voice, whether your business is your brand or whether you make / market / sell branded products or services. It connects you to your customers, clients, patients, students, etc. in a personal way ... and helps make your business sing.

TakeAway: Does your brand sing a song people want to hear?

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner Photos © by Brian E. Faulkner

Tags: GM, Starbucks, Steinway, Nike, BMW

"Quality" Razor Doesn't QUite Cut It.

1/28/2015

I’m a sucker for quality. A finely polished product surface will get me every time. I love the satisfying sound a car door makes when it closes properly (and the window operators don’t rattle like they did on some older American cars). Not to mention underwear T-shirts that don’t shrink with their first wash (even using cold water and a low dryer setting). And razor blades that glide smoothly over your face while effortlessly removing that morning’s growth.

So I was pretty excited to hear about Harry’s Razors. They’ve been around going on two years and have popped up recently online. Read their well-crafted ad copy and you’d think you’ve found shaving Nirvana:

Like most of you, we’ve long had to choose between over-priced,
over-marketed razors that disrespect your intelligence,
and low quality, cheap razors that disrespect your face.
We knew there had to be a better way,
so we created Harry’s as a return to the essential:
a great shave at a fair price.

I wanted one - right away. Problem is I no longer shave, thanks to a 5-year-old beard I trim once a week – if that. But during my many decades of shaving, I mostly used the cheap blue grocery store blades that lasted about three days before they reared up and tried to bite my face off.

So the Harry’s ad caught my eye. It had a quality look and made quality promises:

We spent over a year meticulously crafting our first Harry’s line.
Our blades are made by German engineers with decades of experience honing high-grade steel.
Our handles were designed to blend timeless simplicity and modern ergonomics.
Our shaving cream comes from the same chemists who make creams for high-end brands.
The result: a set of modern shaving products made with respect for the tradition of a good, clean shave.

Since I was not going to try them myself, I consulted razorpedia.com for Harry’s Razor reviews.

Some men liked them and credited Harry’s for eliminating razor burn. Others did not like the product for reasons that ranged from “dull after three days” to rust on the blades, slippery handles and poor value compared to products available at retail – not to mention Harry’s shave cream, which nobody seemed to like.

I, too, was disappointed – that so many of the reviewers were disappointed. Because I like Harry’s sell. It's creative, credible and makes you want to try the product. But as one reviewer opined, the company seems “more concerned with marketing brand association and identification than with how their razor works.”

Harry’s differentiation is threefold: (1) a great shave, (2) a fair price, and (3) direct sales. Unfortunately, razorpedia reviewers suggest that the product needs refinement and isn’t always the best value. That leaves direct selling as the lead dog pulling this sled, which likely will be enough to establish a market beachhead for Harry’s while they improve the product.

I hope so.   Because I want to see these entrepreneurs succeed.

As for me, I’m still on the lookout for an underwear T that won’t shrink with that first wash! Don’t you just hate how they ride up on your tummy?

TakeAway: Don’t make a quality claim unless your product absolutely, positively lives up to it.

Content © by Brian E. Faulkner

sample blog:

This is a sample blog for writer Brian E. Faulkner. It presents stories about brands that do a good job communicating competitive advantage. Stories are gleaned from the business press, personal experience and occasional interviews. Updates are made 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.

Image © by Brian E. Faulkner

Categories

Archives

January 2019
November 2016
February 2016
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2012
October 2011
March 2011