Marketing and Advertising Direction

Friday, June 17, 2016

That Which Cannot Continue

Herb Me

This week at my day job and on my social feeds, I've been struck by the following.

> The possibility, however remote, that something might actually change in the realm of gun control in this country following a massacre. It's certainly not how you'd bet, but there's actually some hope now that people who aren't allowed to fly also won't be allowed to buy weapons of mass murder. Baby steps.

> News from California that voters will have a referendum on the ballot that would make big money domination of political advertising difficult through a punitive tax on placements. And it's hard to see how a law like that wouldn't pass at the ballot box, honestly.

> News from Philadelphia of a vice-level tax on full calorie and diet sodas, with the revenue set to aid a wide range of programs, but most especially education.

Now, all of these points go against heavily moneyed interests to the cause of inertia. The NRA has steadfastly refused any movement on any number of laws, as they've more or less made the tactical decision to oppose any possibility of less coverage. They've been successful in getting more, not less, with state and local changes that have contributed, frankly, to a massive increase in sales. And a despair that anything can change.

In re California, the feeling in many political circles has been that money will rule, with only the tsunami of social media and outsider candidates causing a brief respite, albeit in ways that hardly seemed like progress. A punitive tax, while an obvious target for legal challenge, could be wildly popular, and California is a leading indicator on any number of trends.

Finally, the soda tax. It's not so much what it represents -- soda has been losing market share for decades now, as people look for more healthy choices -- but how it could open the floodgates to all manner of other punitive measures. Sin taxes have been in place for adult pleasures for decades, but if we extend to soda, fast food, junk food... well, it's not exactly the social change that some may dream of. But if we get healthier as a nation and planet, maybe the ends justify the means. More importantly, a great problem for the nation, in re obesity issues and rising rates of diabetes, might lessen.

Gun deaths, political ads and obesity. Terrible problems, seemingly unsolvable, now all in the cross hairs of possible change. Hope springs eternal, right?

* * * * *

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.

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Fun With Twitter Data

Probably Not Actually Failing

OK, I have odd ideas of fun. But still, have you seen the Nielsen review of the 2015-16 TV season's most tweeted moments? It's a pretty great view into what people are talking about, and when, and should be required reading for anyone in marketing and advertising.

The most telling point to me is how much live sports drives Twitter, and how NFL football drives live sports. The Super Bowl got nearly as many tweets as the rest of the top 10 events, with six of the top ten events also being, well, football. This also came with the game being something of a snore this year, though it's a compelling point to wonder if a competitive game makes for more or less Tweets. I know from my own experience that my Twitter use will increase when the game is out of hand, because the telecast just isn't occupying my attention as much.

We've also got to assume that as the world continues to move from laptop to mobile (and to a lesser extent, tablet), that these counts still have some way to go. Whether that's on Twitter or not is another matter, as social media networks seem to have a shelf life, and Twitter's growth has been slowing year over year. Still, I'd have to guess we're at least 2-3 years away from a peak usage, given the growth in non-U.S. traffic, and Twitter's increasing use of emoji and non-typed content, along with longer Tweets. (Note how much capacity for growth seems to occur from greater Twittering about, say, soccer.)

There's also the possibility that we're missing a major factor in this set of data, which is the lack of the NBA Finals. The data runs from August 31, 2015 to May 29, 2016, or a period of time that almost perfectly excludes the June finals. Especially with the interest shown in this year's teams and top players, and the controversy involving suspensions. If my theory holds true to non-competitive games provoking more usage, this year's NBA Finals in particular may be through the roof. Or whether the US Presidential campaign also turns into an event push for Twitter. (So far, that seems more like a Facebook experience, which also seems to be a demographic phenomenon.)

Where this becomes truly intriguing is how it monetizes from a marketing and advertising standpoint. Social media use could be seen as something along the lines of live + DVR traffic, with greater broadcast spends justified by the apparent use. Broadcasts without a Twitter tail could also be seen as a softer spend, with easier to negotiate levels. Or, at least, this is how I'd spin it if I were negotiating for a client. Whether it's a successful tactic or not is another matter.

* * * * *

Sunday, June 12, 2016

Guns: A Disaster-Proof Industry

Once More Without Feeling

I might lose some business from this, but so be it. Sometimes, you've got to be willing to walk away from money.

Besides, how likely is it that gun manufacturers or the National Rifle Association actually need marketing and advertising assistance, really?

Yesterday's news from Orlando, where an armed gunman was able to kill 50 people in a gay nightclub with a handgun and an assault rifle in the most deadly shooting in American history, is all over the news as I sat to write tonight's column. This kind of event happens so routinely in this nation now that we've got all of the reactions down cold -- demands for gun control that will never go into effect, demands for increased carry liberties in the naive hope that non-maniacs will somehow limit the death toll through exceptional marksmanship in chaos -- and a well-known cycle of thoughts and prayers, debate that goes nowhere, and soon enough, another tragedy. The idea that we'd be able, as a country, to do anything about this after 50 adults died in Orlando, when we weren't able to do anything after 26 were killed at Sandy Hook Elementary, 20 of them children, is ludicrous.

So, to bring this around to a marketing and advertising perspective... is there a single industry, ever, where disasters improve the bottom line of the industry and lobbying efforts of the companies who seem, well, at least tangentially responsible?

Gun sales have gone through the roof during the presidency of Barack Obama, who has, whether you think this is a coincidence or act of heroism from the NRA, seized no guns from no one. Sales spike after every massacre, because the belief among the true believers is always that this will be the one that sparks a legislative or executive order, but honestly, gun buyers should just relax and avoid the rush. We see people dead from these kinds of events all the time now. No reason to ever rush to the gun store.

It's also hard to imagine that this would be a defensible hobby or lifestyle choice if it were, well, novel. Imagine if guns were a new invention, and not mentioned in the Constitution, how successful they'd be as an industry. Vaping technology, frankly, seems more highly regulated. Despite the dramatic differences in death counts.

We also can, frankly, dispatch with any comparison to the relative regulation of automobiles (frequent testing, technology upgrades to prevent tragedies, strong administrative oversight through state department of motor vehicles and police enforcement) to guns (loopholes all over, objections to simple counts from the Center for Disease Control, "smart gun" tech blocked at an industry level, background checks more or less stalled in Congress despite strong majority approval, even from NRA members), That hasn't mattered up to now, so why would things be different with another few dozen dead? Better to focus on the motives of the killer, which will easily distract with fear of a religious or ethnic minority. Because the fact that the tools are always the same is somehow not relevant.

So, to sum up. Disasters increase your bottom line in the short term. No disaster ever increases your risk of long-term sales. The rate of disasters is ever-rising, and the answer for every disaster at the individual level is to buy your product. With social media fervent that makes your target (sorry) demographic always have a sense of urgency to buy.

What an incredible business, selling guns. With no end to the good times!

* * * * *

Friday, June 10, 2016

The Future Of The Inbox: Five Upcoming Changes

Flood Coming

Email marketing is one of my favorite things, because it's got incredible advantages over other formats of marketing and advertising. Instead of worrying about whether you've got share of mind due to the world of multiple screens, you've got the same direct marketing metrics that you've had for, well, decades. You also get a get out of jail free card from fraud and viewability statistics, and don't need to worry about DVR skipping, massively expensive creative costs, or rendering issues at different sizes, assuming you've managed concur responsive coding. It may be the only form of advertising and marketing, especially on the digital side, where the world has gotten better in the last five years.

But that doesn't mean that the field is immune from change, or won't have to deal with new challenges in the next few years. Here's where we see the field going.

1) Dayparting will become machine driven. If you only ever read transaction email from e-commerce outside of business hours (because you work in an open office and don't want to be unprofessional as to be reading your personal email on someone else's dime)... well, the transaction email provider, if possible, should only want to send that email to you in the evening. And if the situations were reversed, so should the dayparting.

Some marketers will hate this, because it will be another moment of automation over a professional service, and if that kind of thing happens enough, you're out of a job. But it's just too much of an engagement rise to be anything but ubiquitous later.

2) Responsive coding will go away, because email will project. Just this last week, email went holographic thanks to Microsoft, who debuted a virtual reality goggle set that allowed the reader to experience 3-D and video in email. But who wants to walk around with goggles, really? A far more shovel-ready product is the idea that mobile phablets will just be able to show email in screen sizes that aren't limited to the mobile screen size. This already exists in some robot phones in Japan.

3) Subject lines will become verbal. As audio-assist tech (aka, your smartphone being able to handle your voice) becomes better and better, the in-box will become a matter of conversation, more than reading, because your list will have the option to have Siri read your emails. As you might guess, this is going to hit broader e-commerce plays harder and faster.

4) Creative will match other channels from dynamic elements. If you've seen a banner and gotten a coupon code, a follow-up email will need to pull in that code... or you've given up the ghost of knowing the actual credit for which part of your marketing and advertising mix generated the actual business. It would also help to match optimal offer, and help to optimize around this point. (If you hate paying for shipping but don't trust or react well to percentage off copy, your follow up email needs to have the first offer. It's just that simple, and can only work as automated elements.

5) Metrics will evolve. Opens, clicks, bounce and unsub rate are all well and good, and fantastic compared to what other marketers have to work with... but a live eROI is far more potent, and currently way too hard to determine. Heat map tracking to determine how long your creative is being viewed and where would also be a great step forward, along with a sense of how much scrolling happens to get a sense of how deep you can go before it's just you talking to your compliance team.

The single best thing about email marketing is that it's always been data-driven; creative has always benefited from a Darwinian model of optimal work wins, rather than succumb to noise about branding elements. As we continue to move from appointment media to always-on, from controlled platform to catch as you can, the field will adapt. It always has.

* * * * *

Wednesday, June 8, 2016

The Virtue Of An Indirect Path

The Scenic Route

As a quasi-soft science, marketing and advertising attracts a fair number of people who come to the discipline later in their career. This isn't a field where you get a certificate to practice, or have to endure a residency or apprenticeship. It is something that many just learn by doing, with the caveat that bad marketing is frequently better than no marketing.

This means that there is, well, a lot of bad marketing out there, but also no shortage of different ideas. From a direct marketing standpoint, that's all to the good; the worst result in any test is no difference between creatives. The challenge is to fold the merits from these other backgrounds into the field.

Which is where I get to defend my own peculiar career path.

As a teenager, I was utterly convinced that I was going to be a journalist, and in particular, a sports writer. It was what I thought about all the time, from reading histories of various leagues to delving deep into statistical nerdery. Sports are how I got through math classes, because my brain well and truly hated most math classes, which might come as something of a shock to lots of people in my network. I developed the ability to prepare for the questions that I needed to ask, never lacked for the courage to ask said questions, and have a single-task focus that helped my subjects to open up, more often than not, and give me workable quotes.

So I went to a school (Syracuse) that was known for journalism, and focused on the field -- newspapers -- that held the most appeal to me. (The broadcast guys and girls were always a little too pretty for comfort, frankly.) As a hedge because there's something a little off-putting about old men asking young athletes questions about playing games, and because Syracuse insists that you try a lot of classes before you lock into your major, I developed an interest in political science, because that meant I could go from sports to politics later in life. That turned into a second major, because of good circumstances, and a desire to make my resume more impressive. I raced through school fast, doubled up on degrees, and then cast my resume to the winds, ready to work anywhere in America that needed a fresh sports writer.

Luckily, this didn't work. At all. Partly due to poor timing, partly due to poor networking, but mostly because starting salaries in journalism wouldn't have been high enough to pay for my student loans, let alone for the transportation that I'd need to do the job in the first place.

So instead of a direct path into that field, I did a lot of temp jobs. Used my speed typing and detail skills to work in law offices, which paid better than journalism and let me use public transportation, bicycles and feet. Stayed active in journalism by doing free-lance work for music magazines. Got the music bug and recorded my own stuff, then helped a friend start a trade conference, which finally led to a job in marketing for one of the event's sponsors... six years after getting my degree.

My first job in marketing taught me more than any job in the field that I've had before or since, and I owe that employer a ton... but they received terrific value as well. Political science meant that I was skilled at boiling down decisions to the legal minimums, and to hear the other side before making a case for either option. Journalism meant that I'd dig into details that others missed, and not just take things at face value. And my sports nerdery made me able to dig into numbers that other marketers would run away from, and invent my own derivatives from those, because that's kind of what sports nerds do.

Had I just gone to business school instead of journalism, maybe I have a similar or more lucrative career... but honestly, I don't think the choice would have prepared me better. By coming in through a different door, I bring other aspects to the table, and that perspective helps to create a personal brand.

Because at the end of the day, there's no single path to a career in marketing and advertising, and maybe not even a preferred one. You can learn the basics in a class or in the field, but since the nature of the work isn't set and forget, where you start is far from where you finish.

* * * * *

Monday, June 6, 2016

Muhammad Ali: The End Of Fear

Preach

A quick few words about the passing of one of the most important people of the past one hundred years. Not just for marketers and advertisers!

When I was a kid, not to put too fine a point on it... Muhammad Ali was widely loathed, especially in my social circle. I won't repeat the words used to describe him, but Uppity might have been the least charged among them, with all kinds of other indignities hurled his way.

The only thing that kept the haters at bay was the fact that (a) Ali kept winning, and (b) the only guys to beat him, even in his failing years, were also African-Americans. Rooting for the likes of George Foreman, Leon Spinks or Larry Holmes was all just rooting for anyone on the Not Ali ticket.

So, what was it that people hated about the guy?

It really wasn't his stand against the war in Vietnam. Working classes of every race hated that war early and often, since only their sons got chosen to serve, and the long-term "vision" of a curtailed political system was rarely a big deal. Nor was it the points for which Ali could be pilloried; his cruelty in the ring to outmatched opponents in his peak days, his occasional political missteps, his general tendency towards outrage, his defense of a sport that gave him riches, but also helped to rob him of his intellect.

Rather, this.

Before Ali, there were controversial black athletes. Sonny Liston, the man he beat to be champion the first time, was a figure of considerable distaste for White America. Besides, every pioneer tends to wind up with arrows on their back and stomach.

Ali took that controversy to an entirely different level, because he didn't believe in false humility about his opinion of his opponent's competence. So instead of keeping his head down and reciting cliches, he took public discourse into realms that were not seen before. By doing this, Ali gave the biggest possible green light to competent African-Americans of all stripes that always following someone else's rules, regardless of the merit of these rules, was for rubes.

Because of one guy, being himself, refusing to be afraid.

This, to me, is the legacy of Ali, and why he was important.

Without Ali, maybe we don't get Mandela, Prince, Obama, and so many others.

Greatness isn't just what you do. It's what you inspire.

And very few people have ever inspired more greatness than Muhammad Ali.

* * * * *

Friday, June 3, 2016

Tech Vs. Ethics

Let's Shake

One of my recurring concerns is how technology seems to be outpacing personal ethics. Mapping the human genome is amazing, but it could easily lead to the creation of eugenics-driven conformities. Genetic modifications of food could lead to massive benefit to humanity, or unforeseen miseries. Transplants and medical developments are amazing, but if decisions are driven purely by economics, abuse seems like it would be rife. In our lifetimes, we've seen tech end employment in any number of fields, and communications breakthroughs speed a "race to the bottom" in billables for previously lucrative trades. And so on.

There's no doubt that we live in amazing and challenging times. And where that relates to marketing and advertising comes around to something that rarely seems like an area of innovation, but still is: list segmentation. Specifically, redlining, and how the last mile of connectivity is going to make some amazing and troubling things possible.

First, a mild history lesson. Redlining was a racist practice in which minority borrowers were prevented from moving into communities through the denial of loans... but while it's obvious that decisions based on skin color are wrong, decisions based on income, assets and credit records happen all the time. And how that relates in the digital age is something that's eventually going to hit the public eye. But let's take it from the theoretical and make it easier to understand.

On a personal level, I've contributed to political campaigns before, and I've also recently been in the market for a new car. Both of these activities are in my online cookie record, and also have offline assets, through the use of a credit card and providing offline contact information. In both cases, I've been the subject of remarketing and retargeing campaigns, and had my info sold and rented for lead generation and dunning efforts. Absolutely ordinary stuff. I'm guessing you've had the same experience.

But let's dig deeper. For the car shopping, I arranged for test drives for my wife of a half dozen different models. If one of those car companies had been exceptionally aggressive in their pursuit of our business, they could have bought out all available advertising inventory, to the point where the only automotive ads were from one advertiser. It's a simple matter of overbidding in an real-time bidding environment. So far, the advertising environment has been too varied, and the adtech too much about scale to make this too obvious... but this kind of lockout work gets easier in a Google / Facebook centric ad environment, which has been where the market has been moving for the past few years, anyway.

Now, imagine how my advertising mix might look when it's personalized not just on my laptop, smartphone and tabled, but also on 30-second spots on broadcast and cable. (For the record, Adobe already claims to sell this capability.) Lockout gets easier here, and starts to end the idea of guaranteed reach and openings for competing brands. Only the big money brands would ever be willing and able to go the extra cost mile for their leads, and while this seems a little odd, it's not unprecedented, especially when you compare it to paid search listings.

So in this scenario, I'm only seeing ads for a single car brand, rather than the half dozen that were in my consideration set. And while that might seem a little Orwellian, but it's still just a purchase, and I can still make a different purchase based on follow-up emails or our own memory from the test drives. But I'm less likely to go that way, because advertising is effective. And so is the lack thereof.

Now, let's go beyond a purchase, and into something that might matter more for the republic. The tools for a political campaign are the same ones you'd use in e-commerce. There's also no reason why the organizations that agree with my views wouldn't want to control my ad mix. Perhaps I'd be less apt to donate my time and money in a setting where the only ads I ever see are for the opponent, and everything starts to seem like a fait accompli. Or I'm less likely to donate again, assuming that I haven't hit my limit yet, because there's no evidence that my candidate is making any ad spends at all with my money.

Perhaps all of this isn't as potent as it used to be, with social media taking over so much of our media mix, and personal technology seeming less prone to lockout. But again, ads in a dominant social media mix are even easier to fix.

I don't mean to cast this all in an ominous light. As a marketing and advertising pro, nothing makes my job easier than being able to tailor my creative and messaging to a highly relevant audience, and calling out benefits that matter more to an "expert" list has been my sweet spot as a pro for a very long time.

But just because the tools are powerful, doesn't mean they have to be used for, well, good. Or evil.

Amazing and challenging times, indeed.

* * * * *

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Five Ways To Lead... Without Title

Pay It Forward

In my current gig, I don't have direct reports. (Not a complaint; just where we are as a company.) No one has to do what I tell them, and most folks that I work with have much more experience in the field. And yet, I feel like I have a great deal of sway in my role, and can make a real impact in a wide range of factors.

At the risk of this sounding like a humble brag, how does this happen?

1) Positioning. By bringing in experience from outside of the field, I've been able to predict which campaigns are going to work, and which ones are going to tank... not through my ability to See The Future, but by being able to extrapolate from the relevant past.

2) Timing. If life in an office is somewhat analogous to a game of poker, then my contributions are more like the player who doesn't play that many hands, but does bet big when the cards are running in my favor. I choose my battles more, instead of having to contest every pot. It also makes for a far more effective outcome on the decisions that I feel more strongly about, since I'm collecting favors for future payoff.

3) Standing. I try to ground my opinions in precedent and optimal practice. The only way you get those points is to do the homework of looking through data for clues, and read a great deal of outside work to keep inspiring the new findings. (There may be a method to this whole "no direct reports" thing, in other words.)

4) Deflection. The numbers that I run could generate all kinds of self-aggrandizing points like what happens when the subject line is something I wrote, what the campaigns were generating before my hire date, and how other aspects of what we do drive more engagement and value. But that's not how I do my business, because it would be, well, unseemly. I'd rather teach my colleagues and clients my practices and techniques than be "magic"... because that sort of thing just isolates you, and makes it clear in the long term that you care more about your career than your employer. Take care of the latter, and the former will take care of itself.

5) Perspective. We cut our trending work all the way down to 24 yearly periods (i.e., every 15 days), and it's easy to try and make bigger deals out of outliers and possible trends, or to try to take the short cut with game-changing "big" moves. But that's not how the world works, or at least, how it's worked for the past three decades in the space, at the places where I've worked. Instead, you do better by building your case for optimal practices, brick by brick, flight by flight, case by case. Especially with anything that has elements of direct marketing, moonshot development moments are rare, and should be given exceptional scrutiny for mitigating circumstances.

That's because true growth isn't generally found in single shot moments of transcendent wisdom, but in the 90% of life that is just showing up. And having the right habits to help ensure that you aren't getting in the way of growth.

* * * * *

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

When Live Sports Fail

Not Excited

Tonight as I settled in to watch my sporting jones of choice -- NBA playoff basketball -- I was hoping for a close game. Instead, for the second straight game in the Western Conference Finals, in a matchup that I've been anticipating all year, I got a boring blowout, and in all likelihood, the end of all drama in that series. Which comes on the heels of earlier best of seven series that only lasted five and six games, and also didn't deliver much in the way of drama. True, the Eastern Conference has had a few Game Sevens, and also looks like it might provide more excitement now that the Finals has become surprisingly competitive, but I'm not going to mince words. The thing that I've been looking forward to the most looks like a dud. (Note to Oklahoma City Thunder fans: I don't have a problem with your club, and I'm sure you are over the moon right now with their performance. I just want games that aren't blowouts. If your laundry wasn't involved, you'd want the same.)

Of course, the NBA playoffs have been cherries and cream compared to the tragedy that happened at the middle jewel in horse racing's Triple Crown last weekend, where a horse had to be euthanized on the track in a preliminary race, and ye gads, I'm not sure how you go on after something that sad. Which also comes on the heels of an extremely dull Super Bowl, with a lack of scoring or fourth quarter interest, beyond the fevered prayers of people with various bets. Oh, and if you want to continue the tale of woe, the myriad miseries befalling Brazil these days are really not casting a positive light for the upcoming Olympics.

Let's roll this back into marketing and advertising now.

If sports were like other forms of entertainment media that was advertising or directly supported -- say, a run of anticipated TV shows, a string of tentpole / franchise movies, or concert festivals from big name recording artists -- that had a similar run of failure, there would be autopsies. Diminished upfront sessions. Tortured moratoriums into What's Wrong With X These Days, and how Kids These Days just had no eye for quality, or put up with substandard product because they knew no better. There would be savage teardowns of the talent, networks, media companies, hype machines, with much sniffing over how it's all going to Hell In A Handbasket (the official conveyance to Hell for lo these many years, which always seems odd to me, since travel by handbasket is never discussed in any other context)...

But sports? Bullet proof. If the Western Conference Finals in the NBA are a snooze and Thunder walk, well, wow, the Finals are must-see, either to determine if they are going to fall apart or continue their run. Horse racing will continue with the Belmont, since death at the track hasn't stopped racing for centuries, and aren't going to stop now. There will be a Super Bowl in February unless an asteroid ends all life on Earth, and an Olympics in four years no matter how badly the Rio Games go. Dull games, one can argue, are necessary, otherwise we'd not celebrate the exciting ones so much; if there were all exciting, none would be.

Which is why the cost drivers for sports placements and sponsorships are so alien to the rest of your media buying plan, and why so much of our media (hello, tightening political races! Surely the media companies' incredibly vested interest in a close race for maximum bidding for ad spots would never compromise the nature of coverage!) seems to be Nothing But Sports now.

It's bullet -- and boredom -- proof.

And probably rollback-proof, too.

* * * * *

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Giving In To Creepy

Stalk Me

It's been nearly 15 years since "Minority Report", a dystopian sci-fi movie (is there any other kind?) that showed what personalized ads might look like on a biometric and personalized level. Well, if there were no boundaries to personal privacy, frequency control, and advertising was tied into a police state, rather than something that was tied to efficiency. Of course, you might already think we're in that dystopia, depending on your mood, and how often you wear tin foil on your head. But I digress.

As someone who has worked in adtech for most of my adult life, I can't tell you how much head shaking meh that movie has generated. Every time that automated technology has taken a tentative step forward -- adding first person names to email, dynamic elements in banners for e-commerce retargeting, swapping out ads in real-time bidding for more relevant work, upping the ante on offers to reactivate lapsed leads, and so on, and so on -- someone has inevitably brought up "Minority Report." Because adtech workers are still also consumers, and acutely aware of marketing in their own lives.

But the weird part of personalized adtech is how much we give a pass to other aspects of technology that are, well, far creepier than a more relevant banner. Every time you use a transponder in your car rather than interact with a person in a highway toll booth -- and the latter option is becoming nearly impossible, even if you'd like to take more time out of your day to be in the tourists only line -- you are giving up your exact location to an outside agency. The smartphone in your pocket could honestly double as an electronic ankle bracelet for people on parole. Depending on the age of your car, that's more tracking, and frequently it activates to alert you about service.

We have the tech to ensure that cars can't start unless the user can prove they are not inebriated, and if that tech becomes cheap enough, maybe it will be mandatory. That technology is racing the arrival of automated driving, which, given the public safety issues, might eventually lead to actually driving as a prohibited offense. (On the plus side, now everyone who wants to drink can. And we've also got a dramatically better world for the handicapped.) Something similar can be said about the transfer from analog to digital in medical records. And if you'd like to think negatively about any of that, to a world where everyone has to obey the speed limit at all times, has their medical information or credit history used against them in a linked buyer's profile, or has their food intake controlled (too many cheeseburgers this week, you're cut off), you can. The tech isn't good or bad; it just is.

The difference, of course, it that seeing the benefits of invasive tech advertising requires you to, well, work in advertising. Cut down on my time and costs at toll booths, and I'll let you monitor me. Smartphones are so useful, people get panicky if they are deprived of them for even a few minutes. No one wants to be misdiagnosed, or for their doctor to lack information. But no one believes that advertising has a similar benefit, or that the system would break if they somehow got their content without it.

But here's the thing... advertising actually *does* make your world better. It enables the production of expensive and beloved content, from high-end journalism to exceptional television, and if you want to live in a world where citizen journalists and user generated content take your media consumption from "Better Call Saul" and the New York Times to YouTube "stars" and whoever wants to write for free for the Huffington Post...

well, I'm sorry, but I'm not with you on the swap.

Because that's what at risk if cord-cutting and ad blockers achieve critical mass. An expansive and expensive increase on the audiences that remain, with a dramatically worse user experience.

So... who else is willing to put up with a little creepy?

* * * * *

Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Ads on Sports Jerseys: The Seventy Stubbers

Let's Just Call Them The Stubs

This Monday, the Philadelphia 76ers became the first team in the four major U.S. team sports to sell an ad on a jersey. StubHub will pay $5 million a year for three seasons to get a 2-inch patch on the top left of the basketball team's game day duds, in what may be the first step to an inevitable rush to revenue.

Some background... Philadelphia, the team I've rooted for my whole life (can't say it's been a very good ride, though it's had its moments), hasn't been trying very hard to win games for years now. Under the leadership of a new management and ownership group that comes from the world of corporate takeovers and tear downs, they've played the youngest roster in the league, haven't signed any significant free agents, and traded assets in the here and now for the potential of picks in the somewhere else and later. They've also run into some bad luck, drafted some injury risks, and also invested in players in foreign leagues who might come over later.

They've been so blatant about not winning games (and, of course, paying the lowest possible salary that the league will allow) that the rest of the league has complained bitterly about them, because they can't sell tickets to see this team. When the team has shown signs of competence, they've doubled down on the strategy and traded even more players for picks. It's been controversial, and now that the team is finally ready to transition away to try to win games again... well, this.

Typically as a marketing and advertising consultant, I'd applaud a client for a willingness to innovate in an attempt to increase revenue streams. But a pro sports team isn't a traditional business. It's a participant in an artificial monopoly, where competition is limited to a set number of partners, who get to share in mutual revenue regardless of competence. No matter how badly the Sixers have played basketball in the past three years -- and last year's team barely avoided winning the fewest number of games in a regular season in the league's history -- they have gotten to stay in the league. Last night, they even won the draft lottery, and get to pick first in the upcoming next influx of talent. If this strategy comes to full fruition and lays the ground work for a championship team, it really could threaten the nature of how leagues operate.

Which brings us back to the jersey move. Given where the franchise is from a PR standpoint, this is the literal floor for what a jersey sale will bring in... but it will also possibly stigmatize the practice, and may make it even harder for the team to bring in free agents. The money is basically pocket change in something like the NBA, and won't do anything more than cover some missed ticket sales. And while it's easy to imagine that sports fans will just learn to accept the ads, the same way that they have for teams and sports in other countries, it's also possible that this does brand damage, and maybe even cultivate a backlash. (To wit: an NBA tank top isn't exactly the most flattering piece of apparel for non-athletic bodies. And it's hard to imagine the Sixers have sold many commemorative jerseys recently.)

Finally, on the off chance that this just seems like a sports fan wanting things to stay the same... well, sure, there's some of that. But not all change is good, and at some point, the camel's back of revenue from a fan base has to break... especially when it's placed in front of a younger fan base that spends much of its time blocking ads, questioning corporate interests, and wondering if, say, they need to have a full cable package (which subsidizes pro sports teams to a shocking degree), vote for new stadiums in local elections (increasingly unpopular), or go to live games at all (graying audiences, especially in baseball).

Because that's the problem with diluting your brand with sponsorships. Once you break it, it stays broken.

And maybe leads to two logos, or five...

* * * * *

Monday, May 16, 2016

Short Term Or Short Sighted

One of the things that I do at my day job is read white papers and take in Webinars on trends in my industry. And what you see, over and over, is the move from mass adtech moves, and spray and pray distribution, to custom work, dynamic generation for personal relevance, and a concierge level of service.

There's a simple reason to this: custom work is a service, instead of a commodity, and making money from commodities isn't fun or sexy or what venture capital likes to see from adtech start ups. Commodities are always subject to third-world offsourcing and your revenue model getting hacked, because, well, hey, commodity. As an old manager told me once, you don't want to be the guy putting sugar in packets; you want to be the guy putting some zero calorie sweetener in packets, because that's going to get you a margin premium. (I have no idea if he was right on the sugar, by the way, but the point is still valid.)

And all of this seems fine and inevitable and sensible, especially when you've got consumer segments that are lucrative and small... but this also runs straight into the wall that is scalability, while also taking some serious damage from the possibilities of cybercreep and privacy actions.

Having worked on the front lines at a number of places where the tech allowed us to do wildly targeted tactics, what I can tell you from personal experience is this... abusing the potentials does not pay off. What winds up happening is that a sizable percentage of the group gets spooked by your messaging, and quickly takes steps to make sure that you lose this kind of access. Also, to let others know about the practice.

But in the short term, it works, but only if you look at things from surface and immediate metrics. And you get to look proactive about driving better rates, especially if your goal is short-term success that will prove you should be around for the long run.

Unfortunately, what inevitable winds up happening is that you eventually get to a better metric: return on investment, or ROI. That's not always a great moment for marketers, especially if the new customer acquisition turns out to be, well, a very unprofitable kind of customer. To wit; if you have only ever conditioned them to buy on price, to expect a deal if they don't buy right away, to never pay for shipping or without a coupon code... well, how good does that boost in short-term rates look now?

The better way to run your business, in my opinion, is to get to the metrics that matter as soon as possible, and to get buy-in from your management on a more holistic and long-term approach.

With the obvious caveat that, well, you need good management to get to this better place.

But if you aren't working for good management in the first place, I have one piece of advice for you... hit the short-term goal.

And make sure you're looking for your next gig, and getting paid as soon as possible for this one.

Because bad management can end more than your marketing gig, if you catch my drift...

* * * * *

Friday, May 13, 2016

Love Your Outliers

Go Right, Young Marketer

Today in the column, I'm going to do something odd: direct you to a long-form piece that has nothing to do with marketing and advertising. So go read about "The Lazarus Effect" in the New York Times Magazine, then come on back. (Oh, and if you refuse to click, the story covers what cancer researchers use to refer to the phenomenon of a drug having an unexpectedly great outcome for a patient, which isn't predicted based on past performance in the sample group. That's where the phrase of "extraordinary responders" comes in. It turns out that part of the massive undertaking in curing cancer is that each person's fight has aspects of unique genetic coding, and we just don't know enough yet, but are learning more than we ever have before, partly through, well, studying the outliers. This isn't meant to give false hope for a cure, because the awful nature of cancer progression is that all of the great aspects of evolution are at work in reverse, but yeah, it's OK to be hopeful anyway.)

This week at my gig, a marketing program brought in a startlingly high response rate, about 2X more than predicted, for a very mature program. The amount was statistically significant, in a reporting system that's stable, and possibly explained due to creative and tactical choices. Needless to say, I'm thrilled by the performance, and staring it down to see if I can replicate it with other programs. But in and of itself, it's just one campaign, just one data point in an ever-growing sea of numbers, and might not be a breakthrough.

Now, the other side of the street. I also performed a post-mortem on a challenged campaign, where the client tried something very different from our usual practices, and wound up producing numbers that were substantially below our medians. A co-worker who is new to this sort of analysis called the result terrible, and while I don't disagree, I had to bring in my perspective... which is that no data is terrible, especially because we didn't know what metrics the client was anticipating. While the set of numbers we got in this instance looked like underperformance, we will only really know that later, once these metrics prove out as ordinary, or give us an outlier.

So if your marketing programs are delivering consistency and certainty and a narrow performance array, shake it up. Push your levers, either creative or tactical, more to the margins (in, of course, a test cell). Even if this means that you leave some money on the table from something that you'll later think "Well, of course that didn't work," it's still got crazy value, because it puts a number on the practice, and lets you counsel clients later away from trouble.

Because if you are in this for the long-term benefit of your client and career, you quickly learn that the outliers drive the learning... and that any marketer or advertiser that isn't learning isn't, well, likely to make a career of this.

* * * * *

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Why People Hate Marketers: Back To School Fuel

Like This, But With More Money

In my marketing and advertising feed today? Back to school sales, forecasts, and strategies.

No, seriously.

And I understand the rationale. Planning ahead is required in this line of work, as any number of August projects with icicles and Christmas trees in my past have shown. There's only so much in the way of Dads and Grads that you can pitch, especially since all of that stuff should have been in the pipe a month ago, and July 4 just doesn't hit that many consumer categories, or extends to that much spend. But the thing about back to school is that unlike those projects, they don't hit you straight in the teeth of something you might already be struggling with. Thinking about Christmas in the dog days of summer can actually be kind of pleasant.

To wit, it's mid-May, folks. There's still a month left in the current school year here in the mid-Atlantic region where I live. Weeks of rousting the kids out of bed to do something they don't want to do, weeks more of slogging through the interminable paperwork, weeks of trying to keep their eyes on the prize of grades and attendance when they already have eight months of pulling on that rope. They are beaten down. I am beaten down. The sun is finally coming out, and the days are getting longer, and the distractions are getting thicker than the lawns on a daily basis. Dances. Concerts. Proms. Bike rides and blockbuster movies and cousins visiting from places where the school year is already over, and all of it -- every single last distraction -- is more interesting to them, and me, than the day-in day-out of the last six weeks. Especially the last two weeks, when the schedules go all sidewise because we don't want to spend on air conditioning with our tax dollars.

It's the last mile of the current run, which is always, well, the one that takes the most discipline to complete. Oh, and admitting any of this out loud? Does you no good. Gives the kids the great hint that, well, no one really cares that much about their science fair project, how important the recital is, or anything more than the grades on the report card. Not even how they got them, really. There may be parents out there who are hitting on every cylinder at this point of the year, but I, personally, don't know any of those people. The rest of us need some time away from the grind -- you know, the good four to six traditional weeks of summer vacation -- to look forward to those eight hours a day where the little darlings, um, get far away from the house. Rather than the current eight hours a day when we're trying to make sure they are doing what they need to get through.

So, to my fellow marketing and ad pros? Do what you need to do to get your BTS work cleared. Don't lose any business, hurt your chances of getting out for the Memorial Day weekend, or not look proactive to your clients.

But when the media calls to ask you about how the year's looking, when the sales are going to start, and how the new hotness is getting in the stores before anyone has ever been before?

Don't take the call, or give them the quotes they need to write the piece.

Because the life you save may be your own...

* * * * *

Monday, May 9, 2016

GPS Sugar Beets: Tech Disruptions

Precision Food Inc

Here's something that I didn't know until recently... one of the hidden but potent benefits of global positioning systems involves doing a better job of feeding the planet. It turns out that the tech can be used for something called precision agriculture, where plants are optimally placed and watered, with exceptional control over the yield and livelihood of the crop. For items like sugar beets, which have exceptional fragility to go with delicate needs in terms of the mix of water, food and sunlight, the tech is wildly popular among farmers, because the return on investment is just a constant. All without any of the queasiness of genetically mutated organisms, scary chemicals, or anything else that would bring up moral issues.

Now, if you had seen ahead for this application of tech, you could have made some nice coin, either from starting a company that made the gear, or from providing venture capital at good rates to farmers that were looking to make the change, and so on. And that's how this all pivots back to marketing and advertising, which is what we discuss here.

No one, we can assume, makes mobile tech with the pure and unadulterated interest in impacting something as mundane as email... but, well, that's happened. In a big way. Responsive templates are now table stakes because you can't be sure what kind of platform and screen your lead will use to access your material. Subject lines are now subject to not just ISP filtering, but to truncation from smaller display screens. Geotargeting, once seen as creepy and ineffective because e-commerce plays for brick and mortar weren't going to match an office or home laptop to a shopping situation, is now increasingly necessary to close the last mile of a sale.

By the way? That pace of change is going to just keep growing. Smartphone use while commuting is going to go from text to voice, as laws and social prohibitions against distracted driving kick in hard. (Honestly, look for texting drivers to be treated like drunk drivers very, very soon.) Syncing email across devices and dayparts will be table stakes. Mobile sizes could easily change again, either through different sized screens (I still long for the error-free typing of a full qwerty keyboard and holstered phones, but I'm beyond the event horizon of prospects, I know), or through the inevitable introduction of holograms to more optimal screen sizes, or heads-up VR through appliances.

The point is this: change, even in something that seems mature, is inevitable. Thinking through such things, and keeping an eye out for trends that could impact your business, is just required.

After all, these sugar beets aren't going to grow themselves, Neither is your business.

* * * * *

Friday, May 6, 2016

Death Or Glory

Our once (and future?) logo

One of my first and most potent lessons in sales and marketing happened before I was, well, in the field. I cut my teeth as a DIY indie musician, leading a rock band for much of a decade, with a few hundred gigs in a bunch of areas. (Above, you'll see our logo. Bitchin', no?)

While the band was unsuccessful commercially, I learned great life lessons from the experience, and made some truly lasting relationships. It's also been a big part of my professional life as a consultant, because at its core, stage time is stage time, and it's fairly impossible to be too nervous in a corporate setting. The latter isn't going to boo, clear the room, or throw beer at you. Well, not often.

We're now coming up on a meaningful anniversary for the band, which has led to a spark of interest from some of the alumni... and there's the quality of what Seth Godin refers to as an idea virus here. I'm finding myself looking back through old track lists, mulling over what covers might work with those songs now, asking friends and players for ideas on staffing the holes in the lineup, daydreaming about T-shirt designs and so on, and so on.

All for a business that failed financially before, and will most assuredly fail again, at least in terms of time and money spent versus any income brought in. There's no hue and cry from our fan base because, well, there wasn't really a fan base to make that hue and cry. Even bands with fan bases are incredibly challenged in the current market environment, since digital distribution of music has been a simple case of devaluing the income potential for the musicians. If we do this again, it's strictly a hobby for the "benefit" of friends and family, even if we were to somehow attract outside attention.

Which makes it Art, perhaps, or something a little more onanistic. My thoughts so far are to play gigs rarely if at all, put new songs up on a web site for voluntary payments, and in a flight of fancy, replace or supplement all of the old T-shirts. If time is made for this, it will be to just do the stuff that's fun, and none of the stuff that isn't.

What's not fun as an indie musician? Grubbing for gigs, begging radio stations to play you, journalists to review and cover your events, and doing everything you can to drum up a crowd with sweat equity. And that all happens before the gear moving, fights with sound personnel and gate keepers, and so on. Even all these years later, with the fading of memory, I've got no inclination at all to spend time schmoozing gatekeepers, or finding someone to do that for us.

And yet... I can't completely separate the urge to create from the urge to find a market, because both urges are, well, creative. Asking me to make without marketing is like asking me to write and not record, or rehearse without performing; a near impossible separation of what has always seemed like a paired process.

Besides, imagine if we were, well, so much better or more successful at the enterprise now that we're older and filled with the knowledge that we aren't going to ever make a living from music.

It's, well, keeping me up just thinking about it.

Just like in the old days.

Play me out, Joe Strummer...

* * * * *

Wednesday, May 4, 2016

Trump Wins, And Attack Ads Lose

Attack Ad Proof?

Tonight in Indiana, the Republican presidential primary more or less ended, as Donald Trump's end game victory over Senator Ted Cruz led to a suspension of the Senator's campaign. While Trump won't acquire the delegates needed until the final states vote in less than a month to wrap things up, and Ohio governor John Kasich seems ready to soldier on in the hopes of an 11th hour reversal, it seems fairly academic now. A man who has never served in elective office is the presumptive nominee of one of the two major political parties for the American Presidency.

There will be a great deal of Monday morning quarterbacking as to how this all happened. There were plenty of factors. Too many candidates that were too similar early, which helped to splinter the non-Trump vote. A media that could never say no to a Trump appearance, leading to earned promotional benefits that dwarfed all other coverage. Trump's willingness to avoid canned stump speeches and predictability, ensuring more attention. A built-in competency at media manipulation, and an ability to bring in untapped voters to a larger tent, particularly in states with open primaries. A never-ending side show of outrage, controversy, late night humor fodder and red meat for the base, all of which meant that the story was rarely, if ever, anything but Trump. Add it all up, and it lead to a narrative of inevitability, and a political season that will dominate future textbooks.

But you read me for marketing and advertising, and what this campaign has proven, more than anything else to me, is the growing ineffectiveness of traditional political spots.

In state after state, the stop Trump PACs trotted out an absurd number of ads that never seemed to slow the candidate's momentum. While they might have contributed to the candidate's overall unfavorable ratings, or kept Trump from reaching majorities until later in the campaign, they rarely got to a point of real effectiveness. When rivals attacked Trump directly, the damage always seemed to come in reverse.

Consider the states where Trump actually suffered setbacks. Wisconsin, where an infrastructure of talk radio and a very active electorate gave Cruz his last meaningful win. Iowa, where caucuses played to Cruz's ground game advantage. Texas and Ohio, where Cruz and Kasich kept home field advantage. A number of smaller states, particularly in the rural West, where politics tends to be a personal and retail experience.

In none of these places was an air game of attack ads effective in stopping the real estate mogul. Even ads that seemed effective, like a spot where women read seemingly damming quotes from the candidate's own mouth, and made Trump himself wince on the podium, had no effect.

Why? Well, it's fairly simple, and also plainly terrifying to media networks: no one really watches television commercials any more. Especially outside of live DVR-proof events like sports or, well, debates. We're all ready to click off to something else, or eschew live television entirely.

So what actually works now? Social media, which Trump's campaign took to like a duck to water. Word of mouth, which is especially effective when a campaign activates someone who normally doesn't engage in politics. Again, a strength for Trump over his rivals. Email marketing that seems new, and different, and novel... and since Trump didn't push for donations, that, again, qualified.

Will it work in the long run? The betting professionals don't think so, and you generally have to respect those folks, because of their track record. But few thought Trump would get this far, and no one has put a lasting hurt on him yet.

What I do know, however, is this: if Trump is finally stopped, and it isn't done through broadcast media spots, but through another marketing channel?

We will see very different campaigns in the future. Ones that the broadcast networks, or broadcast advertising pros, won't like nearly so much.

* * * * *

Monday, May 2, 2016

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...

* * * * *

Why Should You Try M&AD?

From working at several high throughput online advertising and marketing companies with data visibility, we know optimal practices for a wide range of mediums and categories.

M&AD bridges that knowledge with a network of expert designers, coders and tech people that have earned trust over many years and projects. You get top-level service, fast, on an a la carte basis with minimal commitment -- and we'll teach you what we know along the way. (Why? Because we want you to stay with us for a long time, and tell your friends about us. Word of mouth is still our favorite form of marketing.)

So check out the site. Read an article or two. If it sounds like we are people that you want to work with, use the contact form, or call us. We'll give you a quote, with no obligation, hidden fees, or upfront costs. Capitalism will ensue.