end of an affair?
I’m a devout CK One girl. It’s the only fragrance that I simply cannot do without. Sure, there’s been a fling here and a flirtation there, but my relationship with CK One has lasted many years. I made an exception for CK in2u (For Her) recently – although I quickly realized it comes nowhere close to my one true (unisex!) love.
I’m in advertising and so it’s often tough for me to be seduced by brands – I work on the strategies that underlie them after all. But CK One is one of those rare brands that I’m intertwined with somehow. I love much of the advertising as well. In a sense, the brand – like a strong brand should be – is a part of me. So when I see the “limited edition” bottles Calvin Klein puts out once in a while, it makes me a bit sad. And less loyal.
The CK One Summer and CK in2u Pop lines look awful. So much so, I honestly don’t care about how it smells. Why CK would dilute/taint their brand this way, I’ve no idea. These colors are unacceptably garish; give me the classic, clean, minimalist feel of CK any day. No CKitsch please!
If their strategy is to seasonally expand the consumer base (with younger folks?), then CK should consider whether it’s putting (older!) loyalists at risk of switching. Shouldn’t brand aficionados be tripping all over themselves to acquire a limited edition? Maybe they’re taking the brand from somewhat niche to totally pop…
Or maybe, just maybe, I need to find another with which to move on! Ah but I might have to stick it out with the One for a bit. I think I’m still in love. =)
brand: dubai
Caught the recently released Will Smith movie Hancock the other day. In a scene, one of the main characters refers to the top 5 cities of the world – London, Paris, New York, Hongkong, and Dubai. I mentioned the slightly surprising fact – that Dubai was so solidly on that list already – to a couple of people in the media biz.
They had similar responses: “It might well be product placement!” Now product placement I understand – like how the judges of American Idol slug down massive Coca Colas and not Pepsis or how Sarah Jessica Parker has a Mac and not a PC on Sex & the City. But city placement as well? Wow.
Apparently, there’s a media operation called ‘in-programming’ whereby moviemakers solicit those who would like a snatch of good publicity. Once the appropriate dollar amount is determined, a contract is signed, and the ‘product’ in question is woven seamlessly in to the plot. Unbelievable! (Even to an advertising person, somehow.)
anatomy of a controversy
Free some underwear from those irksome dangling tags to get a pretty good product: Hanes Tagless Underwear. Then come up with some well-conceived copy to sell it: Because the world gives you enough tags. Add a tri-series of neat artwork. So far, so good, right? Now, add a dash of sensationalism, let a mindless handful of viewers get a peek, and there it suddenly is: the perfect recipe for a disaster. McCann India is the ad agency in question and their campaign – now withdrawn – had 3 print ads. The first showed a man bearing the burden of a vivid bunch of “gay” things, the second had a guy pulling at a similar collage of stereotypically “black” things, and the third depicted an assortment of “Pakistani” stuff – each with the same words at the bottom. Hanes Tagless Underwear. Because the world gives you enough tags.
People have been calling the campaign “anti-gay” and “racist”. How is it either of those things? The fact that it was seen as biased is odd; it’s anything but! (The only thing that does bother me about the campaign is that people who aren’t really aware of the stereotypes in question will indeed become so after seeing it.) Yes, the executions are hard-hitting for the times, but I also think that the basic brand idea borders on brilliant! And that is what McCann’s defense should have been – instead of the spineless apology they actually mustered up.
singular
Much of course has been said on the topic of logos, but here are my two cents, nay phils.
There’s a logo for a ‘horseracing city’ in Dubai called Meydan. The logo is simple. It’s a sort of variegated blue background. On it, in a white and very legible font is: Meydan. A thoroughbred destination. That’s the English version. I saw a similar looking logo in Arabic the other day and knew instantaneously what it was for – even though I am thoroughly uninitiated when it comes to reading the script.
Compare this to tonnes of other logos around that try and do too much – fancy color schemes, an effort to communicate not just the company but it’s holding company as well, fonts that overwhelm, and taglines so verbose or rehashed that they repel. It’s often pretty unnecessary, largely ineffective and highly forgettable stuff…
So ditch the clutter and think Nike, Fedex, and Apple instead! I believe the message is simple.
hotel QE2
tattoo much!
Millward Brown recently did a worldwide study to measure brand loyalty. One of the questions they asked was: would you be ready to permanently tattoo a brand logo on to your arm?
Almost 20% said they would be willing. Of them, the most popular response was Harley Davidson. If you are thinking that’s because of Harley’s rough-n-toughness, then consider the brand that came in a close second: Disney. So, obviously, it’s less about brand-consonance with the concept of tattoos, and more about the brand itself. Not surprising then that Cocoa Cola came in third?
Now guess which brand was fourth…
It wasn’t Apple, no. Go here for the answer, but think about it for a moment first – just for the fun of it!
I’m sort of amazed by it all.
if only we talked…
Kudos to Airtel and the chaps at Rediffusion DY&R in India for the new direction in which they have taken the campaign.
It’s almost predictable, which is precisely why it is close to genius. Much like the Corona campaign: on-the-tip-of-your-tongue intuitive. The trick often lies in hitting on a concept so seamless that everyone – from consumer to creative to CEO – takes a look and wonders why they didn’t think of it first. Nice!
Airtel’s reliability index better be pretty good though, or users might have to take the brand with a pinch of salt! Good for beer, not so much for a mobile network – no matter how noble its advertising.
away with words
Condoleeza Rice at a press conference on Friday: “The United States doesn’t have permanent enemies; we’re too great a country for that.”
No-permanent-enemies is obviously semantic strategy to clarify that North Korea and Iran are indeed enemies until they comply with nuclear demands. It makes little diplomatic sense to refer to enemies – however temporary – as enemies out loud. Okay, so it’s a clumsily put statement, but at least it is honest.
Now the too-great-a-country bit. It brings to mind instantaneously the fact that truly great countries – if there are indeed such things – should have no enemies! Particularly in the unctuous way the US currently does. What were her speechwriters thinking when they churned that out?
V for viral
It’s neat how certain internet gimmicks have been wildly successful in transcending language barriers and publicising brands across the globe. Not always elegant perhaps but often powerful! You’ll see what I mean, if you enter your first and last name in the two boxes on top, and then hit the ‘visualiser’ bar on this link.
star bucks
I once had conflicted feelings about Starbucks, but am now an unabashed fan of the brand. See a few years ago, I tried hard to avoid Starbucks, and patronized several local coffee shops in Austin instead. I purposefully focused on the boring luxury of each Starbucks store and the small component of free trade coffee they sell. I was appropriately peeved when they bought out Peet’s, and yes, rolled my eyes regularly when the person ahead of me got a grande-non-fat-three-pump-vanilla-soy-latte-extra-hot-no-whip.
Then I moved to LA where there weren’t as many local-coffee-places-with-parking in my neighborhood. And so I became thoroughly happy with my 2-percent-grande-iced-latte-for-4-big-bucks again. Then Highland Perk opened up in Eaglerock. Yay, I could now act-local-think-global again!
That’s till I stumbled in on a groggy Sunday morning and absent-mindedly asked for a “grande percent latte” out of habit. The much-tattooed many-pierced coffeemaker replied, “Don’t know what grande is, nor what percent means. The latte I understand.” So I laughed a bit and he mumbled: “I don’t respond to Starbucks-speak.” Why is that, I asked. And he said, “Because they don’t really care about coffee, and if you go there, then neither do you.” I was annoyed because, as you know, the decapitalist (if you will) in me had been awaiting this bickering barista’s inclusion in my daily routine for a while…
Even so, I went on to amicably say I’m from Austin and how I miss its strong local coffee shop culture - sort of indicating that it’s not out of choice that I go to Starbucks. Bu he didn’t thaw a bit, no. So I left and took my dog to the park and sipped his latte. And it was good, but no better or cheaper than Starbucks – which is where I stopped off on the way back for a refill. I could say I did that only to avoid dealing with His Highandmightyness again, but really, it was then that I gave up hating on the Starbucks I love. Call me what you will. =)
Now I’m back in India where, despite the profusion of international brands that have hit, Starbucks has not yet arrived. But I’m currently visiting Dubai and it’s been around here for a while. As you can imagine, I’m one foot out of the door and in my sneakers so I can run.
PS: Starbucks also makes an effort to spark social change and I find that commendable. Whether or not the at-times-controversial effort is made solely in the interest of increasing their ’star’ and – consequently – ‘bucks’ factor is anyone’s guess. At least they make it.
