From AdAge (original article)

NEW YORK (AdAge.com) — For some marketers, a new year means a new agency. If that’s your company’s annual resolution, you should know that line of thinking will lead to a bad reputation in adland.

Agency new-business executives and industry search consultants report a growing blacklist of sorts, composed of marketers that tend to put ad duties into play every year or two. Thanks to rapid turnover in the chief marketing officer seat (a CMO’s tenure averages 28 months, according to the most recent figures from executive search firm Spencer Stuart) and pressure to perform amid the troubled economy, long-lasting agency-marketer relationships are becoming more rare.

“I have a huge disagreement with people changing their agencies like they change their underwear,” said Jane Bedford, partner at the Bedford Group, a consultancy based in Atlanta. “Our clients tell us it takes them about three to six months for them to get fully engaged with their agencies. It’s very difficult for an agency to get up and running, and totally please the client, within the first year.”

And that’s coming from an exec who actually benefits when accounts go into review.

Take Chipotle: In January 2004, the burrito chain tapped Mother, New York, to be its first advertising agency. Six years later, that account has cycled through four different shops: After Mother came TDA Advertising & Design, Boulder, Colo.; Devito/Verdi, New York; Butler Shine Stern & Partners, San Francisco; and, its latest, hired this month, Compass Point Media, a division of Campbell Mithun in Minneapolis.

Thinking twice
The regularity with which Chipotle changes its agencies is more than most. But it’s hardly the only marketer with a penchant for flitting from shop to shop. Retailer Ikea and luxury automaker BMW are known for frequently reviewing their creative and media accounts, and Mitsubishi Motors North America moves its ad business around a fair amount as well.

Too many reviews could also mean that, over time, the very best shops will think twice before going after those accounts. “Agencies do a risk assessment when deciding whether to pitch an account, and there’s definitely a toxicity factor they look at. If [a client] does a lot of reviews, the client gets blacklisted,” Ms. Bedford said.

Even at a time when agencies are hungry for more revenue, such flip-flopping has consequences: Two different new-business executives said two accounts they wouldn’t touch with a 10-foot pole are 1-800-Flowers and Quiznos, as the businesses seem to be too volatile, regardless of their billings. The marketers did not respond to requests for comment.

Another consequence is cost: Constantly opening reviews can be incredibly costly and disruptive to both the marketer — for whom travel and other fees associated with agency reviews racks up — and the agencies, which shell out thousands of dollars in the hopes of crafting the perfect pitch that could win the business. If they do land it, there’s often an added cost of having to quickly ramp up freelance and full-time staff to work on the new account.

Michael Houston, chief marketing officer at Grey, New York, said the window for agencies to prove themselves has lowered dramatically.

“Results in our business are no longer evaluated on a semi-annual or quarterly basis, but on a monthly, weekly and sometimes daily basis,” Mr. Houston said. “Couple that with the level of dollars attached to the advertising line item on a client’s balance sheet, and we find clients forced to justify their marketing ROI in a way never seen before. In that process, agencies sometimes become the scapegoat, with the easy solution being to call an agency review.”

Consistency
What’s more, “serial reviewers” risk damaging their brand with inconsistent marketing messages.

“Clients shouldn’t be constantly jumping ship,” said Lisa Colantuono, managing partner at AAR Partners. As communication between consumer and client evolves, “they need to work together with their agencies. If that foundation is constantly changing, the marketer is hurting themselves in the long run in terms of building brand loyalty with the consumer.”

The Association of National Advertisers, the marketer’s trade group, doesn’t exactly see it this way. The ANA’s position is that conducting formal agency evaluations on a regular basis offers the best chance for fixing problems before frustration sets in. It believes that the companies that have two-way assessments at regular intervals have the most-productive relationships. “Having a formal agency evaluation process is always imperative but even more so at a time of heightened focus on marketing accountability,” Bob Liodice, president-CEO of the ANA, has said.

Said Grey’s Mr. Houston: “Desperation may be something new to many industries in the recession, but it’s something the agency business has known, embraced and perpetuated for decades. Agencies only have themselves to blame by playing right into the hands of these serial agency-review ‘players’ [and] making it too easy for the client to bully us.”

Endeavour Marketing and Media – A Murfreesboro, TN Advertising Agency

From AdAge (read original article)

NEW YORK (AdAge.com) — Even in recession, there’s an upside opportunity. And there might be billions of retail dollars up for grabs for smart marketers able to expand their footprint by taking advantage of cheaper leases.

The downturn that began in December 2007 has been disastrous for companies including Circuit City, Steve & Barry’s, Linens ‘N Things and S&A Restaurant Corp. (which owned Bennigan’s, Steak & Ale and Tavern restaurants), which have all filed for bankruptcy. Others, such as Sears Holdings, Foot Locker, Quizno’s and Ruby Tuesday, have shuttered locations. In total, retail sales declined 6% in 2009, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce.

But in the coming year, economists surveyed by Bloomberg expect Americans will open their wallets once again and increase spending by 2%, the first gain since 2007. While not a stellar prediction, it’s a start. And even though more retailers and restaurants will certainly close in the coming year, one retailer’s misfortune could be the fortune of another able to snap up prime locations.

“There’s going to be a lot of opportunity out there,” said Charles Wetzel, president-chief operating officer of Buxton, a market-planning firm. “[Companies] are not as aggressive as they might have been in years prior, but, having said that, they’re not being conservative either.”

Read Rest of Article

Can Facebook, Capitol Hill be friends? Lawmakers learn social networking.

Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Inside the headquarters of the National Republican Congressional Committee, 25-year-old Adam Conner — registered Facebook lobbyist, poster of multiple Obama attaboys and a guy whose Facebook photo is a grizzly bear wielding two chain saws — sits to teach a course. The subject: How to use Facebook better. His student: Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.).

“If we’re going to improve our presence on Facebook and really maximize it, what would you recommend as tangible steps?” Roskam asks, thumbing his BlackBerry.

“It looks like you’re very comfortable with your BlackBerry,” Conner replies earnestly. “Maybe commit to a status message a day? A photo a week? Dive deeper. You’ll be surprised at how things that seem routine to you as a congressman are so interesting and cool to constituents.”

Conner is Facebook’s evangelist in Washington, a social-networking pro summoned by elected officials and bureaucrats alike to teach them, free of charge, how to leverage Facebook — within strict government rules and security guidelines. The mere existence of Conner’s hand-holding lessons illustrates the cultural gulf between Washington and Silicon Valley, and spotlights the complex web of congressional rules that limit social networking among federal workers.

Read Rest of Article from The Washington Post

From Ann Handley (of MarketingProfs.com) for American Express Open Forum:

Dec 29, 2009 -

What do bacon, Bogota, yumberries and Foursquare have in common? They are all on the list of 100 Things to Watch in 2010 by the marketing communications company JWT.

Certain trends on the list suggest clear implications for businesses. JWT’s Ann Mack says that many items on it reflect broader shifts, like a growing action around health and wellness and environmental issues, to crazy-fast developments in the tech space.

There are also a number of trends tied to the so-called Great Recession (“trip bundling,” for example) and those that speak to various demographic, political and economic power shifts (“East Africa Wired,” and “TV for Tween Boys” among them). Interestingly for business, Mack says, the list “points to the way industries are redefining or reinventing themselves to survive or to fully leverage these power shifts.”

What trends might affect your small business in 2010? Here a subset you might find worth watching (as well as a few I found just plain interesting). The full list is in alphabetical order, below.

1. 3D at Home
3D is the new HD. Having successfully invaded the big screen, it’s on its way to the small screen: James Cameron, director of the new 3D film Avatar, will promote Panasonic’s 3D sets, out next year, which will compete with versions from Sony and Samsung.

See Rest of List

By Andrew Hampp for AdAge

LOS ANGELES (AdAge.com) — When Delta Airlines wanted to reach business travelers just in the New York area last spring, it decided to test the idea of microtargeting with place-based media. So it teamed up with out-of-home vertical SeeSaw Networks to create multiple 15-second spots customized to a wide array of venues across five different digital out-of-home vendors.

Cafes from Reach Media Group’s Danoo, ferry terminals from Affiniti Group Media, Pump Top TV’s gas stations in the New Jersey and Connecticut areas and health clubs on the Netpulse and When networks were all included in the plan, complementing similarly targeted ads in New York-based print and digital media.

Although business travelers in a single market like New York may ultimately amount to a relatively small audience, the campaign represented one of the biggest digital out-of-home outlays to date from a client at Digitas, Publicis’ digital media agency that recently branched out into the emerging outdoor medium.

Read Rest of Article

From AdAge’s “Book of Tens” Special Issue highlighting the best of the Decade

Click to view “Ideas of the Decade”

Murfreesboro Advertising

By Matthew Szymczyk for AdAge

As web-based augmented-reality applications have exploded, it’s more important than ever to remember AR is a technology based on utility and not gimmicks.

Unfortunately, as with most new and emerging technologies, it’s quickly becoming overhyped and abused. Usability and user experience have been thrown under in the stampede of agencies and brands saying “Hey, look — me too!” Even more disturbing is that most marketers are overlooking the most unique aspect of AR itself: that it’s a technology that can create innovative and sustained engagement between a brand and its target consumer through utility.

The real danger is that the general public is being exposed to AR through gimmicks, most of which are not following basic user experience and usability standards. I’m quite shocked at the number of brand-driven AR executions out there that require a person to download a browser plug-in or software. Is it 2004 again? 3D plug-ins and downloads for websites were all the rage back then but a funny thing happened — it became quite obvious the end user did not think it was cool enough to download software for the overall “experience.” Five years later, has so little changed?

Read Rest of Article

From the Washington Post

AOL tries to navigate the Web it helped you find

ON ITS OWN ONCE AGAIN

Pioneering Internet firm now focuses on content

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Before it was AOL, it was America Online, and before it was America Online it was Quantum Computer Services, and before that it was Control Video Corp., selling online services for the Atari. Remember the Atari? Pac-Man? In Internet time, that was basically 10,000 years ago.

Compared with the Googles and Yahoos of the world, AOL’s business of offering a gateway to online tools such as e-mail and instant messaging feels just as dated as Atari. Now, after a disastrous $164 billion merger with Time Warner nine years ago, AOL is being spun off Wednesday into its own company, and the new executives running the firm — the head honcho comes from Google — are once and for all breaking free from the we’ll-hold-your-hand model to get online, instead creating content that users can surf to on their own.

The new AOL publishes sites on gadgets, sports, politics and Tiger Woods’s sex life (via TMZ.com).

How AOL wound up at this point, an online trendsetter turned content publisher, is a story of innovative snipers that dates to the summer of 1996. It was a critical moment in the Dulles company’s history. With telephone firms offering on-ramps to the Internet so users could choose their own travels, AOL executives doubled down on their strategy of a go-through-us portal to send e-mail, chat with buddies and search for recipes.

But a digital war was brewing. In California, two young entrepreneurs were quietly working on a plan that would, in hindsight, help blow up AOL’s model. Why not take e-mail, then and still the most popular online task, out of portals such as AOL and put it on the Internet to be accessed anywhere via a Web browser? Venture capitalists bit, and on July 4 — Independence Day for the country and for e-mail — Hotmail launched.

“We didn’t find it that hard to out-innovate AOL,” Jack Smith, a co-founder of Hotmail, said recently. “With Hotmail, you didn’t have to install anything and you didn’t have to dial in to a particular service to get your e-mail. It made perfect sense to us.”

AOL’s role in mainstreaming many functions of the Internet is undisputed — instant messaging, chat boards, keyword searches, social networks and especially e-mail. The firm’s role in shaping e-mail use was even canonized in a Meg Ryan-Tom Hanks movie called “You’ve Got Mail,” a title that echoed what AOL users heard when e-mail arrived. But for AOL, being a first mover in a rapidly changing market proved just as dangerous in the new online world as it always was in the offline world.

Being first paints a target on your back, and if you aren’t careful, other innovators can out-think you. Entrepreneurs like Smith took what AOL had popularized and moved it out of AOL’s expensive walled garden, for which users had to install software and dial to from home for access, offering it through Web browsers for the very attractive price of free.

A world of free e-mail

When did AOL begin offering its e-mail free on the Internet? In 2006. By then, millions of AOL users had dumped their accounts, going through portals such as Yahoo and MSN, which bought Hotmail for $400 million, to get their free e-mail. The Internet largely left AOL e-mail behind. Users didn’t need AOL for e-mail — or instant messaging, or chat boards, or even to get online at all.

“AOL really showed that e-mail was something that people wanted and would integrate in their lives,” said Paul Levinson, an Internet historian and professor of media studies at Fordham University. “AOL lost its lead and became yesterday’s news because they didn’t see that what people wanted was not a particular place to go every day, but the ability to go from one place to another, with e-mail always available.”

‘They think it’s too hard’

Think of it this way: AOL was a department store, and people wanted to walk around the mall. Back in 1996, AOL executives were adamant that the mall was the appropriate strategy. Two months before Hotmail launched, The Post quoted AOL chief executive Steve Case as saying: “Only 11 percent of U.S. households are online. Why aren’t the other 89 percent? They think it’s too hard and too complicated, and they’re right.”

One of AOL’s earliest simplicity moves involved e-mail. CompuServe and Prodigy, its competitors, gave users e-mail addresses with a string of numbers. Your e-mail address on CompuServe would be, say, “75013,1167.” AOL executives let people use their names as their e-mail addresses. Users signed up by the millions.

“Using your name was really a big innovation,” said Fletcher Jones, a longtime AOL employee who oversees e-mail. “It became your online personality.”

But there was nothing stopping Jack Smith, and his partner, Sabeer Bhatia, from making that model even easier. Smith and Bhatia gave Internet users the option of accessing their online personality and correspondence — Smith’s e-mail address is still jack@hotmail.com — without dialing in through AOL.

While AOL spent $40 per user on marketing to win new signups, Hotmail added users for free in one of the Internet’s earliest viral advertising schemes. At the bottom of every Hotmail e-mail, it said, “Get your free e-mail at Hotmail.”

Adam Penenberg, a New York University professor and author of a new book on viral loops, wrote: “Simply by using the product every customer became an involuntary salesperson. This implied endorsement from a friend or peer made it more powerful — and more far-reaching — than traditional advertising.”

Hotmail never became a blockbuster business. But for AOL, the writing was now on the wall, and it said Yahoo, MSN, Google, Hotmail, Gmail, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo Messenger, Google Talk, Myspace and so many other quintessential brands the company played a role in inspiring — all free.

“As things became easier, more and more people took the training wheels off and realized they didn’t need to pay to access the kinds of services that AOL offered,” said Chuck Schilling, Nielsen Online’s research director for agency and media analytics. “As people became more savvy, that was the beginning of the end. AOL was no longer equated with the Web. It was not the Web.”

Endeavour Marketing and Media, A Murfreesboro, TN Advertising Agency

By Rita Chang for AdAge (click for original article)

SAN FRANCISCO (AdAge.com) — So is the Droid the iPhone killer? So far, no, but it’s off to a very respectable launch thanks to some smart seeding by Verizon.

Analysts estimate Verizon sold between 100,000 and 200,000 Droids in its opening weekend; the wireless carrier should sell a total of 765,000 Droids by year-end, according to Avian Securities’ forecast. At this pace, Droid, which was released in early November, would slightly trail the performance of the first Blackberry Storm, which sold a million units by the end of January after going on sale just before Thanksgiving last year. Remember, the Storm had few competitors last year, and this year Droid is contending with many more iPhone wannabes. Though the Droid did well, its debut racked up nowhere near the million iPhones sold in Apple’s opening weekend (which includes international sales; Droid is a U.S.-only launch).

Droid owes much of its success to its mega-advertising spending, estimated to be at least $85 million, the biggest launch ever by its carrier. But it also received good early buzz by getting its phone into the right hands, enough to earn accolades even from rivals. “Based on the chatter and all the people talking about the device, they did an excellent job, going far and broad with the seeding of the device,” said a PR executive who declined to be named because her client is a competitor to Motorola (which designed the Droid’s hardware).

Verizon won’t say how many demonstration phones it distributed to bloggers and influencers, but judging from the number of reviews online, it looked to be a sizable effort — a big seeding campaign can involve as many as 100 units. Verizon spokeswoman Brenda Raney, however, downplayed the idea that anything was outside normal practice. “The phone is in the hands of a variety of reviewers, but I can’t tell you that I went outside of the normal community any more for this phone than I did for others,” she said. The effort was led in-house, but Verizon declined to identify whether other outside PR or word-of-mouth shops were also employed in the launch.

Six ways Verizon seeded the Droid

NO EMBARGO
To cordon off any bad publicity before the device launch, handset makers and carriers often prohibit reviewers from publishing their musings until the product hits the stores or until the company has issued its own official announcement. But with Droid, Verizon didn’t hold reviewers to the customary embargo, possibly because it was “confident there wasn’t going to be negative reception” before launch, said Harry McCracken, editor of The Technologist, who reviewed the handset. Timing might have been a factor too; Verizon gave out the phones roughly a week ahead of the handset’s release, so there wasn’t much need for secrecy. The flurry of positive reviews, coupled with the phone’s fast and furious marketing, worked in Verizon’s favor.

TEASING THE BLOGGERS
To fan excitement among reviewers, Verizon did a teaser stunt that bloggers say is a first for the carrier. Shortly after Droid’s anti-iPhone teaser campaign aired, some bloggers received a Verizon greeting card displaying the phone’s emblematic red Terminator robot eye. When they opened the card, they were greeted by the phone’s now trademark robotic voice that utters “Droid.” The message inside reads: “Coming in November.” Days later, bloggers received yet another Verizon goodie, this time a remote-control “Star Wars” R2D2 robot, which arrived in a brown cardboard box that would have looked generic but for the red orb on the packaging. The gift’s accompanying card read: “11.09, Droiddoes.com,” which is the phone’s microsite where folks can sign up to get more information. “This was not standard operating procedure for Verizon by any stretch,” said Michael Oryl, editor of the blog Mobileburn.

It also teased with a photo-op showing Google CEO Eric Schmidt and Verizon Wireless CEO Lowell McAdam. In the photo, both appeared to be holding phones that had yet to hit the market, sparking mass speculation in the blogosphere. “That started to generate a bit of hype, and it was weird to see them together,” said Joshua Topolsky, chief editor of the gadget blog Engadget.

GETTING PERSONAL
Jon Rettinger, president of the TechnoBuffalo blog, noted that only four to five bloggers or reporters were on Verizon’s conference call to introduce the Droid. Previous calls packed in upwards of 20 to 30 people, he said. The unusually intimate venue allowed participants to ask in-depth questions of the engineers from Google and Motorola, which both had a hand in developing and making the device. The company likely wanted to make sure reviewers get everything right as the phone offered innovative functions such as voice-recognition search. Steve Bray, a tech editor at a local TV station in Indiana, said for the first time, Verizon’s PR rep went out of her way to point out that he was getting an exclusive as the only broadcaster in the state who would get the phone. Mr. Bray ended up doing an iPhone-Droid comparison.

ENGINEERS FIRMLY IN THE MIX
In many cases, carriers don’t host demo events for a new handset — a PR exec whose client is a handset maker said, generally, only one in four handsets is event-worthy. But not only did Verizon stage Droid demo events, it made sure hard-core engineers were around to field the tough questions. Whereas these demo events are staffed primarily by PR people, Mr. Oryl noted that there were “actual engineers who know the guts of the product.” Google folks were also on hand, which is a rarity, as “you don’t see Google people too often.” For the Blackberry Storm2, which went on sale exclusively at Verizon just days before the Droid, the carrier simply shipped the demo units, with no event to back the launch.

BULKIER PRESS KIT
For the Droid, Verizon went to town and beefed up its press kit. Compared to other Verizon handsets, “the push with the Droid was far more active … the press kit was more elaborate and in-depth,” Mr. Rettinger said. Whereas other handsets came with photocopied sheets highlighting the phone’s features, Droid’s kit arrived with more polish, with slick glossies and packed in a lot more color, according to Mr. Rettinger. There was inevitably more explaining to do, since the Droid runs on Android 2.0, an operating system the world has never used.

A NEW ATTITUDE
By all accounts, with the Droid Verizon was courting coverage. Generally, handset makers and carriers are wary of leaks, concerned of bloggers taking control of the press coverage as they get wind of the phone, or worse, bloggers actually getting their hands on a prototype before the phone has been bullet-proofed and cleared of any bugs. But reviewers noted that the carrier was markedly proud, excited and freewheeling with Droid. “You could sense their excitement — even when we leaked the pictures of the phone, you could tell they were enjoying the coverage,” said Boy Genius, who runs the eponymous Boy Genius Report blog and declined to disclose his name.

Endeavour Marketing and Media, A Full-Service Murfreesboro Advertising Agency

LONDON (AdAge.com) — Some 300 attendees gathered at the Saatchi Gallery last week for Ad Age sibling Creativity’s technology conference, Creativity and Technology, were treated to musings on bleeding-edge digital communication from Europe’s top talent in advertising, technology and design. Speakers ranged from agency creatives and technologists to writers such as Adam Greenfield, author of “Everyware” and head of design direction at Nokia.

Here are a eight takeaways from the conference if you missed it.

Curation is key
In a world of too many choices, both online and off, use your expertise to give consumers a small set of options in order to manage expectations. Choice is not always healthy, said Marko Balabanovic, head of innovation at Last Minute Labs, the exploration arm of travel site LastMinute.com. For the travel category, disappointment is inevitable in a digital, searchable world with too many choices — every selection could result in a consumer asking, “Could I have made a better decision?” But, if you don’t have overwhelming choice, you can’t regret making the wrong one. Read Rest of Article