Heavy Rotation Hurting

They Aren't Kidding

(with apologies to one of the most influential skits ever, the great "Deep Hurting" riff from the Mad Scientists on "Mystery Science Theater 3000." See it here, if you haven't already.)

This weekend, I indulged my strongest sports addiction -- the NBA playoffs -- and was struck, as I am every year, by the relentless problem that is the marketing and advertising impact of broadcast media in real time, when combined with heavy time commitments.

It would be one thing if I were a fan of just, say, the Golden State Warriors. But I'm pretty much watching as many of these games as I can manage around the rest of my day, and seeing how I also maintain a sports blog, that's a lot of hoop... and a lot of the same commercials. Over. And over. And over.

Now, I understand that the demographics of pro hoop are a marketing gold mine. Affluent, diverse, national and international, tied across top tier channels and DVR-proof, with games that resolve in 2+ hours, with pretty consistent action and limited replay and injury breaks. It's one of an ever-decreasing number of places where you can be pretty sure your ads are being seen, in real time, with no skipping.

Which also means that, just like last year's too visible moments for daily fantasy league plays and direct to consumer pharmaceutical outlays in the NFL season, we're going to lose our minds over this. Tina Fey making payments with her Amex card, the head-scratching "Angry Birds" movie tie-in, testimonials to the DIY virtues of people who don't pay for satellite service, lather, rinse, repeat.

When I was a kid (pre-DVR and yes, per-VHS), watching re-runs was just something you did. From countless Bugs Bunny cartoons to prime-time shows, seeing something twice was just unavoidable, even if you complained about it, because, well, not much else to do. But now that commercials are a relatively rare phenomenon in the streaming age, repeats get your brand noticed, and I'd even argue, over-noticed. There are brands that I'm so aware of that I can't imagine feeling good about patronizing them, especially when my level of irritation with their ad campaigns is factored in. Even slightly modified ads with mildly different content would be something of a relief now. Especially as we've got another six weeks or so of the NBA playoffs to go.

So if you are in charge of one of these campaigns, I'm begging you... dial back the frequency. Mix in some other treatments. Reconsider your awkward game tie-ins with athletes interacting with your characters.

Because what you are doing is just painful in the extreme. And eventually leads to Adam Sandler's current career and reputation.

Deep Hurting. DEEP HURTING...

* * * * *

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.

More Games And Less NFL Draft, Please

Read Name, Lift Shirt, Repeat

Tonight, the NFL Draft started -- the first of a 3-day festival of Not Games that, in my lifetime, has somehow shed its original No One Really Watches This into untold hours of highly watched, well, content.

And while there is a certain Reality Show vibe to the proceedings that must appeal to people who are not me, especially when a highly touted player sees their standing slip, and stews about it on camera in a waiting room... you have to be way too into the proceedings to consider this exceptionally, well, entertaining. And I say this as a world-class football and sports nerd.

Still, well, the market has spoken, and with two networks covering it breathlessly, the goal of every other league is to replicate this success. But what I think the draft really shows isn't the broadcast potential for a long and delayed reading of names, but just how underserved the market is for professional football.

Thirty five years ago, the USFL generated ratings that were higher than MLB or NBA... despite being a brand-new league with no established rivalries, and relatively limited star power. Minor leagues with players that are not at the NFL level (aka, the Canadian Football League and the Arena Football variant) are stable and long-standing, which speaks to, well, profitability. There's even a women's league now, and immense interest at the college and high school level. If this was any other industry and any other market, more inventory from rival companies would flood the market. We are nowhere near satiety, as a nation, in our hunger for football.

But since the NFL is a protected monopoly, and the public buys into the idea that these other leagues -- particularly college -- has to exist, since they always have. As if the business of running a football team has much to do with the business of running a college. But what's really going on here is an unnaturally cautious business and an underserved market.

Imagine, if you will, two or three NFL tiers and separate leagues, with overlapping seasons. Not a minor league, and with teams that are not affiliated with each other, but with a clear tier situation (possibly by contract size) that passes champions up into higher tiers, and sends the worst teams down. Kind of like how most other nations (the English with soccer being the best example) handle wildly popular sports.

So instead of a draft, football fans would have, well, games to watch. Just about every week, with all of the games mattering, played under the same rules, in all kinds of cities, both "major" and minor.  With players that, eventually, even casual fans would have heard of, or maybe followed for a longer period of their lives. The average NFL career is only about four years, mostly because there are hundreds of younger and cheaper players trying to take the jobs of older players every year. Also, well, injuries.

We'd have fantasy leagues all year long. Much more in the way of gambling and live stadium action and commerce. An impetus to get colleges out of the business of football. A significant amount of jobs created, and a strong corrective market force to teams that try to move away for sweeter stadium deals. More live content with prime advertising opportunities, and programs with ratings that will likely outperform other live sporting events. A much more fluid situation that would lead to teams in non-U.S. markets. In other words, a correct market, with all of the good that our capitalistic hearts yearn for.

Instead, we've got artificial scarcity. Cities like St. Louis losing teams, with Oakland and San Diego likely to follow, with no idea if or when they'll ever be replaced. Advertising opportunities that only exist in one season. De facto subsidies of basic cable channels by the entire populace, instead of just the people that, well, want to watch football.

And people spending half a week of their lives to watch a very slow reading of a list of names.

So. Honestly. To anyone who is really into the draft, one simple question:

Wouldn't you rather be watching football?

And if the answer to that is yes, why aren't you asking the NFL to stop being such communists and expand?

* * * * *

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.

5 Ways That Offices Matter

Respect My Space

In the MidAtlantic region where I live and work, the change in seasons has come, as it usually does, with a surge in thunderstorm activity in the afternoon. My company is also in the process of upgrading our office space, so we can turn three locations into one, and become more integrated across teams. It's going to be a really great moment for the company, in ways that I'm not sure many of our people even realize, because many of my co-workers, frankly, haven't gone through this kind of thing before.

I've been at companies that have moved locations, and it's much like moving on a personal level. There's always a reason to go, and you always get enthused about it, because change is always better to take on the rise. Finally, and this is kind of an odd coincidence, the old building inevitably fails you in some way, usually just before you leave. (We'll be in our new location in a few more weeks.)

Anyway, long set-up complete. Today, the power went out after a thunderstorm, and everyone got to (well, had to) go home early. We've also had issues with the wifi, the AC (well, maybe that's just me, I seem to be under a vent), leaking windows that have gotten to a mold situation, security issues in the parking lot, and so on. So while I was driving home today and thinking about if I would do better to log in tonight to clear the last bit or just come in early the next day, it struck me... my office is, honestly, just in my bag, and has been for decades now. I've also worked out of my home for decades as a consultant, or on the road at various locations. So what are the common factors in the offices that have helped me work better, and those that held me back?

1) Enough space, and make sure there's a mix.

One of my start ups in Silicon Valley, another in Manhattan, and an old-school place in the greater Philadelphia region, put people way too close to each other as a deliberate act, either due to high real estate costs or mistaken ideas about collaboration. It can provoke an intense camaraderie and occasional big wins from unavoidable eavesdropping on telephone calls, but in the long run, it's just disastrous, especially around any excuse to get out of the torture chamber for meals. Too little space makes for people just wandering off to get work done, and a room that people just don't want to be in. Especially if some of these roles are more vocal than others.

2) Many commuting options.

If an office is in a commuting choke point, and there's only one way to get there, with no public transportation option, what you have is an office that's at routine risk for an unpleasant commute... and that's just deadly in the long run, because it just creates a reason for turnover that's persistent and invisible in the actual venue, and contributes to an overall negative tone.

If your office isn't blessed with walkability, public transit options or alternate highway support, what I *strongly* recommend is flex time to avoid traffic. When I worked in the Bay Area, doing a 10 to 7-ish shift meant that I'd get back a full hour of my day, every day... and since the commute was car only, that hour of traffic avoidance just meant that I didn't spend five hours a week thinking about finding a different gig.

3) Don't neglect, or overdose on, the start-up areas and touches.

If you work in a traditional office setting, you tend to look wistfully, or skeptically, at the clubhouse touches of start-up offices. These would be the Foosball tables, game consoles, lounge areas, and so on, and I've been at places where getting my work done was downright difficult due to the buzzing of hobby drone blimps and first person shooter games.

When these touches work, it's because they inspire teams to spend more time with each other outside of work, and to make bonds that limit turnover. (As an aside, if I have one piece of advice for any marketer that needs support from engineers... develop a Foosball game. Mine has done me no end of good over the years.) You can always curtail the fun and games to certain hours, or move on from the hire that has the best Halo skills, later.

4) Health makes wealth. 

When you set aside a quiet room for nursing mothers, a variety of snack and beverages options, flexibility in desks with standing points or beyond the law handicapped accessibility, push for a better health care plan, matching 401K, etc... well, yes, this all costs money, and limit choices that you might make in terms of bonuses, competitive compensation, increased staffing, and so on.

But you also create a situation where distractions to cover these needs just go away, and an undistracted work force makes for efficiencies and less turnover. You also create, and this is a big plus, a company where your people recruit and assist your hiring.

5) The biggest gain from a good office is in recruiting.

Especially if you've been suffering with a weak office, interviewing in a good one just puts stars in your eyes. It speaks to success, to stability, to a progressive and inspiring future, rather than one where you get caught in the weeds of commuting, parking, and so on.

Offices matter, even if you've got a distributed work force, and heavy road miles. If you are only making the decision at a bottom line basis, you probably aren't making your best decision.

* * * * *

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.