Let's Get iHacky

Very, Very Different

Let's just get this out of the way quickly. I'm probably the wrong person to ask about the importance of personal privacy as it relates to personal electronic devices.

Why? Well, I've worked at companies that were successful, for a time, because they correctly predicted how little consumers actually cared about it, at least when it related to shopping behavior, and how they had the opportunity to trade parts of it in for discounts. I also grew up in a time and economic background before ubiquitous personal technology, which means that I've never completely cottoned to the idea that I should give a screen all of my secrets. Or that such things were actually all that valuable, or interesting, to anyone, really.

So when the point comes around to discuss, as everyone with a column seemingly must, where the world should sit in terms of Apple's continued battle to avoid hacking their own gear... well, um, I have a few questions. Independent of the powerless propagation of one of two opinions.

1) Hasn't this entire discussion for the past few days made Apple's products, well, must-own equipment for criminals?

They're going to bat for you, bad people. Patronize them accordingly! But you probably want to act fast about that, since...

2) Isn't the iPhone the single biggest target on the planet for hackers right about now?

All we've heard for the past week is how incredibly powerful and valuable a hack of this hardware would be. If you've got the skills or the contacts, you'd have to think this would be on the top of your to-do list now. After all, if you can hack a phone -- just one measly phone! -- all of the rest of them become incredibly vulnerable to any criminal mischief you can imagine, and you can sell your hack for bitcoins on the dark Web, which is where I presume all such spectacular fits of criminal behavior are patronized. Speaking of which...

3) How is it that we don't have people capable of this tremendous criminal mischief on the public payroll?

I have to say, I'm a little bit disappointed. Any number of television dramas and conspiracy theorists have assured me of the remarkable degree of State Power, from black helicopters to drone warfare to extradition and Edward Snowden's adventures and so on, and so on. And yet, here's a maniac's phone, the same phone that millions of other people have, and no one can crack it. It's very disappointing, really. Next, you'll be telling me the moon landing wasn't faked, there's no aliens in Area 51, and there aren't treasure maps on the back of historical documents. Is there nothing left to believe in?

As for the actual privacy issues here... well, what we've got is a crisis of invention. No one invented a perfect car trunk that could never be opened by anyone but the owner of the car, but if they had... well, there probably might have been law enforcement having an issue along the way. Particularly if this was a relatively new feature to trunks, since the iPhone didn't have the current level of encryption just 18 months ago.

I'm not a fan of rampant government access to my devices; no one is. But the idea that a company gets to profit when unintended criminal consequences occur... well, um, not usually. I'm also not quite sure why your special little phone gets to be different from your computer, your car, your home, your safety deposit box, and so on, and so on.

But then again, I'm the wrong person to ask about personal privacy...

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.

On Entering The Pipeline

Let's Get Shifty

A base rule of marketing and advertising: it works on you, even if you are aware of it, well, working on you. I'm as prone to going for 2 for 1 deals, limited time offers, brand marketing blandishments and all of the rest as, well, anyone of my demographic class. Especially if the purchase in question is a low consideration moment in a retail setting, everything in the marketers' bag of tricks works on me. Even if I stop to think about why I'm buying something, it doesn't really matter. Tactics matter.

Which leads me to the latest moment of strong self-awareness, where my wife and I have started the process towards buying a new car. Our eldest daughter is moving towards driving age, has shown an aptitude for it in drivers education courses, and is poorly served by available public and school transportation. So we're going to gift her the 20-year-old Ford that's been serving as our second car, and add a third set of wheels that will serve as the primary ride for my wife, and for when we're all together as a family. (Our other car is a 6-year-old Honda hybrid, which is on its last payment.)

We've got several months before our daughter turns 16. It's also not as if we'll need to add a vehicle on that day, given that minors aren't allowed to drive without a parent for a good chunk of time. The idea is to go for one of the new set of sedan/SUV "crossovers" that avoid the issues that minivans have, but also don't completely abandon fuel economy, storage capacity, or passenger comfort. Finally, we haven't been in the market for a new car in many years, and don't really know that much about how these cars handle. Customer reviews are pretty similar on a lot of these, so test drives matter. Which means, well, going to a lot of dealerships. Three so far, with more to follow.

What's striking about this experience is how similar the different conversations are. You walk around the showroom and enjoy, or not, the prompt attention of commissioned salespeople. You give them your situation, and given that you are just going to take up someone's time without a sale today, a basic apology for where you are in the process. You take the test drive, and try to be polite about your level of interest in the vehicle in question. You learn what you can, then drive back to the dealership, and end the process with a cursory meeting with some supervisor, who thinks about a hard sell approach, and then thinks better of it. Then you go home, in your not at all new car, and try to remember all of the reasons why you can't just get something new today, because man alive, that new car is so much nicer than your current ride.

What comes next, of course, is the follow-up marketing; the emails, phone calls and alerts of what's available *right now* that would be just perfect for our needs. There will also be the promises of future service, possible incentives and offers, and so on, and so on. All of which is entirely defensible and expected, especially given how much is on the line for the various individuals we've met in the process, since they need to move multiple units every month to, well, remain employed. That's all occurring in a world where the Internet destroys margins at the dealer level, and makes competition at a price point easier and easier to know. Oh, and it's also with the possibility of technology just ending this business at some point, since self-driving technology is probably a when, rather than an if.

I feel bad for these guys, honestly. Even in the best of times, competition has always been intense, and it can't be a lot of fun to work in a business where tech just makes your job harder every month. But I don't feel so much for them that I'll take a worse deal, or fail to make my due diligence, once we've figured out our preference for brand, model and trim.

Oh, and the fact that all of my television and digital ads now seem to be relevant to my new car search?

Sure, it's a little bit creepy. But it's also reminded me to expand my consideration set to a few more vehicles that might be better for our needs.

Speaking of another business where tech makes your job harder every month...

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.

Ads With A Hard R

My movie made how much?

A week ago as I write this, "Deadpool" opened to U.S. movie screens. Despite being a movie with a hard R rating that launched in the dead zone of February, it's brought in over $170 million in the US, and $300 million worldwide. With fan ratings and box office that more or less ensures repeat and word of mouth business, there's really no telling how much this could wind up bringing in. It also only cost about $58 million to make, which means it might be the best thing to ever happen to Fox. This is an absolute home run that's going to cover for a lot of strikeouts.

While the concept of the film is a little more talky and self-aware than most, it's still a superhero action movie; it does well in foreign markets, assuming its allowed to be shown despite content issues. My guess is that it will eventually make over $600 million at the box office, which is kind of astounding for a property that took forever to make, and owes its existence to "leaked" footage and fan community viral work. A sequel is inevitable, and if there was an over/under on how many of these eventually get made, I'd take the over at 3.5 in a heartbeat.

So why does it make me think about marketing and advertising?

Because of the reasons why it's doing well, and how they could, honestly, be ported to advertising with better martech.

A little more background first. Instead of following the usual tropes, Deadpool breaks the rules and doesn't feel like something that's been made before. It also manages to feel subversive through comedic mayhem and the fact that its hero is a cheerful psychopath, like, well, every video game avatar for decades. Rather than go for beyond tired gritty realism, Deadpool enjoys having powers, and refuses to admit to any responsibility for, well, anything.

Now, imagine you were an ad pro for a beer company. What kind of earned media and social play could you possibly get for your client if your ad was able to go to the lengths that Deadpool does in content matter?

Well, the Miller Light "Catfight" commercial dropped eight years ago, and hasn't really been done since. It also got millions of viral views, and did all of that before mobile tech exploded the amount of videos seen online.

How hard is it, really, for Samuel L. Jackson to use some of his signature profanity on different versions of those Capital One card ads, but just with adtech that makes sure the viewer is likely of age? Or salacious fast food spots to deliver, um, more branding impact?

It doesn't just have to go down the crass path, of course. I'm a father of young daughters, and if I could opt in for animated movie spots instead of horror trailers for the next five years, I'd be all over it. But the Deadpool tactic (hell, just being able to have a spend for the Red Band trailer of that movie would work) is where the growth will come.

You know how the rest of this goes, right? Adtech and martech that already exists on a retargeting level, that just needs to make the jump to the last mile. Cable and broadcast providers that have to sign off on the possibility of an outrage letter or six. And the money, as always, ready to come in and change the equation at a moment's notice.

Oh, and one last thing on this? There are already ads with profanity, and wildly successful ones. On podcasts, where hosts who do off the script reads seem to be bringing in major bank.

After all, if you can tune in content with this kind of rating, why can't the ads match what the audience has chosen to accept?

* * * * *

Feel free to comment, as well as like or share this column, connect with me on LinkedIn, or email me at davidlmountain at gmail dot com, or hit the RFP boxes at top right. RFPs are always free, and we hope to hear from you soon.