Jun 26, 2011 | Branding, Customers, Innovation, Marketing, Sales, Social Media, Strategy
The future of produce marketing in Australia is fraught with difficulties that many who just buy their produce in the supermarket will never think about.
The dominance of the chain supermarkets, lack of innovation, fragile investment outlook, environmental concerns, regulatory inconsistency and political blather in place of certainty coming from any philosophic foundation, an ageing workforce, trade barriers, the list goes on.
The report below was commissioned in an effort to put some framework around the marketing of produce in Australia, and to take lessons from what was happening elsewhere, and whilst it is a relative scratch at the surface, it highlights the challenges. Download it, and let me know what you think, what have I missed, where it could be improved. Its free to download, but I would appreciate you letting me know by commenting.
Embracing Innovative Marketing & Promotional Methods
May 29, 2011 | Branding, Personal Rant
Why does the government set out to create conflict? Is it to distract attention? The current “debate” on cigarette packaging is a silly nonsense, a politically inspired furphy.
Obviously it is in the community’s interest to reduce smoking rates, smoking kills, and obviously the cigarette companies will protect their investment in a legal product, immoral as that may seem to some.
Philosophically, I am alarmed at the proposal to retrospectively trash the investment in brands made over a long time by sellers of the noxious weed, it has been legal to promote their products by any means allowed by the moving legislative goalposts , just very difficult for the last few years. Why is it different to the announcement by the NSW Premier that retrospectively he will reduce the feed in rate for solar panels? Both are an injustice, no matter how ill advised the original circumstances.
In the event that this legislation passes, we deserve to pay huge amounts of damages to the fag companies as compensation for their trashed brand equity. In an environment where business needs a rule of law as a basis for long term decision making, retrospectivity, no matter how superficially attractive, should be a no-no.
Why don’t they just double excise, and announce that in 12 months, it will be doubled again. That would do more to reduce smoking rates than plain packs, not open the IP compensation box, and it would be easy. It would also drag in a bit of short term revenue to pay the hospital bills of those few smokers left.
Perhaps it is because they do not want to be nasty to all those smoking voters, they would rather open the community to huge compensation payouts. Silly, silly people.
May 10, 2011 | Branding, Change, Marketing, Social Media
Branding and brand marketing has always been about finding customers for a product, a “build it and they will come” approach. But life, and the world has changed from just 20 years ago.
I remember the day I saw my first fax, an astonishing tool, but I have not used one in 10 years. At that time I worked for a large company, and the “Boss” got anxious if he could not walk down the corridor and talk at (deliberate grammatical error there) anyone he wanted to, at any time, without the risk of anyone either contradicting him, or not doing as they were told.
Now.. That boss is as relevant as a dinosaur, the world of marketing is all about the individual, “find a customer, and build what they want!” It is products for customers, and the tools of the last 20 years have made the middlemen of previous generations, that command and control boss I had, the advertising agencies, promotional consultants, creepy blokes from universities who you just knew could never have sold a box of matches to a freezing man, irrelevant. The difference is the e-tools that have emerged over the last 20 years, transparency, and the flexibility and opportunity they bring is brings is king, although most institutions hate it, as they survive by hiding things.
When everyone can be a publisher of news, books, photos, ideas, the barrier to entry of needing a printing press is gone, all it takes is $600 for a computer and connection, and if you are really skint, go to the local public library and publish for free.
Morgan Spurlock has made his point in several independent films very differently, he now does it again, by selling naming rights to his TED talk, as he says, probably the only time it will happen. Worth a look.
Apr 16, 2011 | Branding, Customers, Marketing
Most marketers will tell you what their brand stand for, premium quality, reliable performance, consistent taste, great service, and so on. Sounds a bit like a bunch of cliches doesn’t it?
However, it is just as valid to define your brand by what it is against, and often it seems the “againsts” are somewhat implied, allowing some latitude in interpretation.
The Green party in Australia is against native forest logging, Nike is against lounge lizards, Apple is against sameness, and closer to home, the SME Riverina Grove‘s brand is against average tasting mass produced “Italian” style packaged foods.
Think about it next time a branding discussion emerges, weather it be in a formal strategy session, or probably better, around the coffee machine.
Mar 23, 2011 | Branding, Communication, Marketing, Social Media, Strategy
How does a branded product withstand the power of a retailer duopoly that controls 65% of Australia’s supermarkets?
That question has exercised the minds of proprietary FMCG brand owners for over 30 years, since the first house-branded “No Frills” products appeared on the now almost defunct Franklins shelves. It has become a really serious question over the last couple of years as the big two retailers more actively set about building a brand of themselves as more than a place to shop, but also a range of products to buy, following the patterns set in the UK by Tesco and Sainsbury, and it hotted up a month ago with the beginning of the “milk war”.
The Nielsen Global Private Label report puts Australia’s private label penetration at 14%, not really accurate if you happen to own a milk brand. Milk had a sales channel split between supermarket and route sales about 60/40, with Housebrands holding a share around 50% in supermarkets, but nothing in route, until a month ago. Overnight, the “milk war” has dragged sales from route into supermarkets, (I do not have the numbers) and the house-brand sales must be now 85-90% plus, again, I do not have the numbers, just a set of eyes. “Dairy Farmers”, “Farmers Union” “Paul’s” all venerable brands in the milk market have had their value decimated almost overnight.
Now it seems we have Fosters pulling their beer brands from the shelves of Coles and Woolworths owned liquor outlets as a defense against the risk of having their brand equity, built over long periods, with huge investments, being trashed by under cost sales by retailers. It may lose them lots of sales in these outlets, but the 50% of the market still controlled by independent retailers will be cheering, it offers them a competitive advantage over the chains to have brands like “VB” on shelf when Woolies and Coles owned Dan Murphy and First Choice do not.
Suppliers of produce to supermarkets have faced the dilemma for many years. The retailers simply will not allow proprietary branded products on their shelves, if you want distribution of your oranges, potatoes, or lychees, it is as unbranded produce, or increasingly branded with the supermarket brand. In these categories, housebrand share is 100%, so I wonder where the innovation will come from in this drive to the bottom of the price equation, and will consumers in the long run be better off?.
Back to the core question, to which I wish I had a simple, glib answer, but I don’t. However, I think the answer is tangled up in the way we manage the changes emerging from the digital revolution we are undergoing.
- Mass media is dead, the cost cannot in the long term be recovered if hard won brand equity can be destroyed overnight by a retailer who wakes up with a good idea. In the future, mass media will not be used to build brands, with the exception of a few huge multinational brands. Apart from the cost/risk equation, the “mass audience” has fragmented anyway, and is increasingly hard to find. Time to sell your shares in TV networks.
- Social media now has a framework for communication, like it or not, that framework has two major dimensions, called “Facebook” and “Twitter”. As we figure out how to use them, these two related frameworks, and the others offering similar but more specifically targetted access to individuals, will drive the way brands engage with their adherents, attract new ones, reward their loyalty, and build equity that is remote from the ravages of duopoly bricks and mortar retailers.
- Marketers have to get to grips with this stuff, mostly it is beyond the young brand manager who does not understand, and should not have the power anyway to make brand related decisions. The case for the CEO to be the “Chief Brand Officer” in any business is getting stronger daily.
Building a brand just got a whole lot harder. Dollars to spend now bears no relationship to success, nor does longevity, (facebook had its 5th birthday day before yesterday), so just hanging around is not an option. Instead, markets have to do the hard yards to really deliver value, huge value, to customers, and keep “value-innovating” as if their lives depend on it, as it surely does.
Mar 22, 2011 | Branding
What sort of goose named the US operation against Libya as “Operation Odyssey Dawn”? OK, they might have had PR trouble calling it “Operation kill Gadhafi ” or “Operation Sandman mash”, but Odyssey Dawn??? Who are they kidding?
The US military has guidelines that emerged from some dodgy operational names during Vietnam which did little to endear them, but get a grip guys, and use one of the names the Pommies, (Ellamy) or Frogs, (Harmattan, which refers to the hot desert wind), their allies in this party, are using!!
Wars, or police actions, or whatever this ends up being called are now played out in the public arena, so the rules of marketing, as distasteful as that may be, apply, and the last thing you want is to have people like me making fun of your stupid brand names.
