The new approach was candid. Direct. Shorter and more decisive. On brand, but different. Risky but not really, because the previous effort left them with very little to lose.
We wrote the copy, massaged it through an inordinate number of intermediaries and shareholders, who conttributed, added, edited and approved. Essentially, they left the premise the same, and expressed their enthusiasm for the approach. Level with the mid-funnel, tell them things that came off as candid and strikingly different than what they had heard before, and give them a clear message.
It got all the way to the C-suite, at which point it was stopped by an executive... who decided that the messaging wasn't right. This was also a person who was responsible for the previous round of creative, so, well.
The status quo was defended. The intermediaries and shareholders didn't push back. They are no longer a client.
Something to stress here. It's not an absolute certainty that our approach was right. If you are absolutely sure you are right, you have no need of marketing. Test, don't guess.
There's an old saying in business: is this hill worth dying on?
Usually, the answer is no.
But if it's never yes?
You're going to lose the client.
One way or another...
