Brand: The early adopter backlash

Wharton marketing professors David Reibstein and John Zhang have been exploring how early adopters react when a product goes mass-market. When is there a backlash? When do early adopters switch to new products and when do they stick with the brand?

It's an interesting question but I was surprised to see that they use Porsche as an example. They say that Porsche sports car sales fell after it entered the SUV mass market with the Cayenne. But Porsche sports cars owners aren't what I think of as early adopters. They are brand loyalists for a luxury, niche product. But let's stick with these guys for a moment and think about how a niche brand like Porsche can go mainstream without losing its mystique.

Zhang talks about the trade-off between leverage and potential backlash. Niche products that go mass market can either leverage their existing brand which risks the loyalty and support of their followers or launch a new brand which will be much more expensive but which preserves the purity of the first brand. Not an easy choice but Zhang says he generally favors leverage over backlash.

Now back to the question I thought they were going to discuss: How does a brand grow into a mass market product without alienating those who were the first to discover and embrace it? How do brands make sure that they avoid the death spiral that comes if their appeal to the mainstream is generated by its early adoption by the cool people who are going to drop it as soon the mainstream catches on? (The fate of many fashion products.)

How about Facebook as an example? The New York Times asks whether, at five, Facebook is growing up too fast. Its growth is incredible. It has doubled in size since last year by adding another100 million people so, perhaps, Facebook doesn't need to worry very much about its early adopters. Yet, every time that Facebook makes a change to its product, its community-minded early adopters are up in arms. There are more than two and a half million dissenters in the group: "Millions against Facebook's New Layout and Terms of Service." Earlier protests forced the company to back down on some of its other initiatives.

A couple of ways that Facebook is trying to manage this early adopter challenge. First, it knows where it's trying to go. Its mission "to be used by everyone in the world to share information seamlessly" helps it look to the future and see past current obstacles. Second, while it gives its users a voice, it doesn't necessarily act on what they say if it doesn't help them move towards that mission. Says Chris Cox, Director of Products: "It's not a democracy. We are here to build an Internet medium for communicating and we think we have enough perspective to do that and be caretakers of that vision."

It's a fine line. Best case, early adopters (eventually) embrace changes and even find value in the brand being more mass market. But often, early adopters will abandon the brand and go in search of the next cool thing to discover. The question then is: Can the brand hold on to the mass market or will it start to lose them as well?

Six of the Best: List of Lists edition

Here's my summary of interesting things I read (or saw) this last week.

1) 10 Reasons Why We Love Making Lists: NPR
Perhaps Facebook will cure of us of our obsession with lists as it unleashes wave after wave of Top 10 this' and 5 Favorite thats? This NPR piece gives us a top 10 list of why we love lists including: "# 7. The word "list" can be tracked back to William Shakespeare, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. In Hamlet, the Bard refers to "a list of landlesse resolutes."

2) How to Survive an Economic Depression: EconomicSurvivalDepression.com
If you're truly desperate about the economic meltdown, here's you handy guide about what to do to survive. A list of 100 things that disappear in a panic. Be first in line for #1 Generators or #53 Duct Tape so you can defend yourself against the suckers who start late.

3) Dealing with Recessionary Times: tompeters!
If you're a bit less agitated and believe you can survive the recession by toughing it out, here's a list from Tom Peters. Includes: "work longer," "work harder" and, a bit further down, three times: "You sweat the details as you never have before."

4) Fug Madness 2009, Sweet Sixteen continued: Madonna Bracket: Go Fug Yourself
Or, if you want to ignore the recession completely, you can engage in voting for in this year's Fug Madness. Can Bai Ling repeat as champion? Or will an upstart like Katy Perry triumph?

5) Year’s Oddest Title Prize Goes to Dairy Carton Book: New York Times (via Fritinancy)
The winner, in a tight contest, was: "“The 2009-2014 World Outlook for 60-Milligram Containers of Fromage Frais.” Just beating out "Curbside Consultation of the Colon." Past winners of this competition include: "Versailles: The View From Sweden,” and “Weeds in a Changing World.”

6) The Sixth Sense: Patti Maes at Ted
Blow your mind time. Don't be lulled into a sense of false "been there, done that" security at the beginning of this presentation. This is where we're going.



That's it! See you next week for more stories from the world of brand strategy.

Saver's remorse: Another reason to start spending

Watch out those of you who are ignoring our President's pleas and (voluntarily) cutting back on spending. You may feel pretty good about yourself right now but there's such a thing as saver's remorse to worry about.

John Tierney, in a The New York Times article called: "Oversaving, a Burden for Our Times" says saver's remorse is the regret about not buying things, the mirror opposite of buyer's remorse. Says Dr.Kivetz from Columbia University who has been researching this area: "People feel guilty about hedonism right afterwards, but as time passes the guilt dissipates. At some point there's a reversal, and what builds up is this wistful feeling of missing out on life's pleasures."

Some people so habitually prepare for the future rather than enjoy the present that they have earned a label: "Hyperopic" (the opposite of myopic). The good news is that this is a manageable condition and we marketers can help. Kivetz has shown that people will change their shopping behavior with a little prompting. When he asked shoppers to imagine how they would feel about their purchases in the distant future rather than the following week, they ended up spending more money and bought more indulgences like jewelry. (Without this prompting, they bought practical stuff like socks.) He had managed to shift the shoppers mindset and got them thinking more about saver's remorse than buyer's remorse.

In another experiment, and tapping into the fact that hyperopically-minded people often recognize that they have a problem, Kivetz explored ways to help them "precommit to indulgence." What he found is that if offered the choice between cash and "hedonic luxuries" like wine or vacations, the majority chose the luxuries even when cash was the better deal. One of the participants is quoted as saying: "If I took the cash , it would end up going into the rent." Whereas the offer of luxuries was forced pampering.

Has there been any marketing recently that's tapped into these behaviors? Is such an approach possible at the moment or do we need to wait a bit before we start imagining a brighter, more indulgent future?

48 hour rain guarantee

Photo: me

Operating a car wash can't be easy in a recession. As people think about ways to cut back on expenses, going to the car wash one less time per year/ month/ week is likely to be on the list. Probably higher than cutting back on the morning visit to the coffee shop.

Some car wash businesses are getting creative. One of the ones near us has started offering rain guarantees. Makes sense. It could stop some people from procrastinating and, even if it does rain and, even if they do come back for a do-over, it doesn't cost too much to honor the guarantee. (However, I took this picture yesterday when it was already raining. Does that mean that I could have driven round and round, wash after wash?) It's a bit more surprising to see the same offer from CleanTown USA in Pittsburgh (rain forecast: 6 out of 7 days starting this weekend).

Meanwhile, the Metro Car Wash in Tucson, AZ (which also offers a rain guarantee but where there's no rain in the forecast) is offering a $5.99 Economy Car Wash, illustrating the deal with a depression-era photograph showing unemployed people standing in line for food. Not too subtle but, on the other hand, not much more than a Venti latte.

Six of the Best: Mad about bonuses edition

Here's my summary of interesting things I read (or saw) this last week. Could I let this week pass by without talking about the AIG bonuses? I couldn't:

1) Inside AIG-FP, Feeling the Public's Wrath: Washington Post
Call me a reckless contrarian if you like but I'm not jumping on board the AIG bonus fury train. For those ready to take a look "inside the piñata," this article from the Washington Post is worth a read. From a marketing perspective, this is also a story about the power of names. What's sent everyone completely over the edge is that they think that AIG executives have been paid performance "bonuses" despite the economy-wrecking performance of the company. Whereas the reality is that these executives were given "retention contracts" to try and keep them working at the company through a time when it was likely that many of them would leave.

2) Doodling Is Good For Your Noodle: Live Science (via a clear eye)
Quickly switching gears: Are you a boring-meeting doodler? Good news! Research says that doodling actually helps your memory. If you weren't doodling, you would probably be daydreaming and that would be worse.

3) How to lose your job in 140 characters or less: the brandbuilder
In the week where I finally capitulated and started twittering (martinjbishop), it was interesting to read this post about theconnor who should have kept his feelings about joining Cisco to himself rather than tweeting them to the world. Losing one's job over inappropriate blogging is known as being dooced after Heather Armstrong's Dooce blog. Will losing a job over inappropriate tweeting become known as being connored?

4) SuperNews! Twouble with Twitters: current (via BrandflakesforBreakfast)
the unspoken truth of the twitterverse!"


5) Takeaways from the Economist Marketing Forum #ecsf09: Marketing with Meaning
And what was it that broke down my no-twittering resolve? The Economist Marketing Forum. Here, Bob Gilbreath provides his summary of the event inspired, as was mine, by the collective wisdom of the conference tweets.

6) Friendship Isn't Dead. The Strengthening of Loose Ties: Logic + Emotion
Meanwhile, in Austin, SXSW 2009 was underway with many power-twitterers in attendance and even one who made a bigger splash by not being there. David Armano takes up a theme of managing friendships in a world where it's easier to stay in touch, a theme I explored a couple of weeks ago as well. I like the reference to "ambient intimacy" to describe those on the outer edges of friendship.

That's it! See you next week for more stories from the world of brand strategy.

Economist Marketing Forum (Day Two) Top 10 round-up

Highlights from Day 2 of the conference using the Tweets made by myself and others. To review the Twittering activity during the forum, go here on Twitter Search. (Search: #ecsf09):

1) russhmeyer: "'We' is the pronoun for the internet, not 'me'".-A.Rasiej, TechPresident.com

The first session of the day was about building the Obama brand. Andrew Rasiej believes that, over and above all the political dynamics, Obama won because he and his team understood the rules of the game for the Internet, especially that its language is about "we" not "me." Yes, we can.

2) jweinberger: #ecsf09 Barr: Obama won because: right people, right product, right time, flawless execution

A different perspective on why he won came from H. Buford Barr of the Leavey School of Business at Santa Clara University. He believes that it was more of a textbook campaign: A good strategy, well-executed. "Now I've got something to prove the textbook is right."

3) russhmeyer: boutique hotels=magazines...interesting source for marketing inspiration. - C Conley

Chip Conley is founder and CEO of Joie de Vivre Hospitality, California's largest boutique hotel company. As he said: His original target market was: "Chip's friends who used to sleep on my couch." But, once he got started, he found his inspiration from magazines. His first hotel: Phoenix Hotel was inspired, for example, by Rolling Stone. Others have been inspired by Simple, The Economist and Sports Illustrated.

4) martinjbishop:The employee track up the Maslow pyramid: From Job to Career to Calling

Conley is a devout follower of Maslow and the hierarchy of needs, using it as the organizing principle for the positioning of his hotels and also as a way to think about employee engagement. His goal is to get employees to think of work as more as a calling and less as a job or even a career. Customer experience can also be translated to this scale: "meets expectations" to "meets desires" to "meets unrecognized needs" (Conley's book where he explains this in more detail: Peak http://tinyurl.com/2uxyrd)

5) martinjbishop: Who knows how the consumer will react? Why are they buying puppy treats at a time like this? http://www.pupperoni.com/

The next panel explored the relationship between CEOs and CMOs. In his introductory remarks, William Pearce of Del Monte threw in this unexpected fact. Demand for puppy treats has gone through the roof since the recession started. Why? Who knows?

6) martinjbishop: Zappos has taken some of the things at the bottom of the Maslow pyramid and made them differentiating (e.g. warehousing)

Tony Hsieh, CEO of Zappos, declared himself a fan of Chip Conley and also uses Maslow principles in managing the company. What's interesting is that he's taken things that are normally considered costs-that-must-be-controlled and made them into points of differentiation. For example, Zappos runs its warehouses 24/7 which is not efficient but gives them an edge in customer service.

7) martinjbishop: The Zappos offer to pay people to leave after training is designed to get rid of people who are only there for the paycheck

Hsieh also talked about his famous policy of giving people the chance to quit for money after the training period. He wants people who are there for more than the paycheck. There's also some nice cognitive dissonance going on for those that stay. They have to rationalize the fact that they didn't take the money.

8) martinjbishop: The only way you win an argument against a person with a higher title is to "have a fact" (Kumar/Frito Lay)

Jay Kumar of Frito-Lay made the point that when two people are disagreeing with each other, the winner will generally be the one with the bigger title unless the lower-titled person has some compelling facts at hand. That, he pointed out, is why CMOs need to invest in getting facts if they are be persuasive in the boardroom.

9) TrevorWade: Virgin america goes to great lengths to connect with customers, stories are as remarkable as FedEx

The last speaker at the Forum was Porter Gale of Virgin America. Like Zappos, Virgin America is very plugged into what its customers are thinking and saying in real time. Porter shared a couple of stories where they had actually been at the gate of an incoming flight to talk to and help out customers who had complained about problems en route. Even as I tweeted about Virgin America at the conference, they started following me. Sort of GDR tactics made good.

10) johngerzema: My Economist presentation is posted here http://bit.ly/cnflH (expand)The slideshare has the links, but better graphics by dowloading.

John Gerzema, who spoke on Day 1 about avoiding the looming crisis in brand value, made his presentation available on this link. Well worth a read.

The Economist Marketing Forum Day Two speakers

Here are the speakers and agenda for today. You can follow the event via Twitter here. (martinjbishop on Twitter Search: #ecsf09):

1) Building the Obama brand: The selling of Barack Obama
Jim Margolis: Senior Partner, GMMB
H. Barford Barr: Lecturer in Marketing, Leavey School of Business, Santa Clara University
Andrew Rasiej: Founder, techpresident.com

2) Stand out from the brand crowd
Chip Conley: Founder and CEO, Joie de Vivre Hospitality

3) Ties that must bind: Why CEOs rely on CMOs more than ever
William Pierce: Senior VP and CMO, Del Monte Foods
Jay Kumar: CMO, Frito Lay
Tony Hsieh: CEO, Zappos.com

4) Case study: Building a brand from scratch
Porter Gale: VP Marketing, Virgin America

Economist Marketing Forum (Day One) Top 10 round-up

Drawing: George Bush by me. Proving that even the best teacher (in this case KAL from The Economist) can't help those beyond help.

This conference was the first time I've used Twitter and my tweets (as martinjbishop) can be found via #escf09 on Twitter Search. So, apart from KAL trying to teach us all how to draw George Bush, what, as I look back through the tweets (mine and others), were the top 10 highlights of the day?

1) Don't just go after high-return customers. Just like stocks they may be the high risk ones. You need a balanced portfolio. (Ward Hanson: Policy Forum Director, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research)

The first session of the day was: "The economic landscape: How to spot an upturn." I thought this was a very interesting idea. Hanson made the point that, just as you wouldn't (or shouldn't) put all your eggs in a basket of high risk stocks, so should you avoid only going after high-risk customers. I think that AmEx's recent $300 incentive to encourage some card holders to leave is its effort to rebalance its portfolio.

2) The government is borrowing on the public's behalf (while we all pay off our debt) (Michael Lehmann: Emeritus Professor of Economics, University of San Francisco)

Also in the first session, Professor Lehmann made a compelling case for why the government must borrow and spend money. His argument: The public isn't doing it and the banks aren't doing it so, if the government doesn't do it, the economy will grind to a complete halt. But will the governement ever be able to turn off the tap?

3) russhmeyer: The good news and bad news of marketing right now is nobody has any money...levels the playing field. May the best idea win, then.

Marketing and advertising dollars have been a barrier to competition. But, these days, budgets are being cut and media is fragmented. As Russ Meyer suggests, this opens up the field and the best ideas may now prevail.

4) jweinberger: CMO of @tripadvisor talks about social media failure (their own site) and success (facebook)

The second session of the day explored the theme of how to market in a downturn. That task is a little easier for Christine Petersen, CMO of TripAdvisor because she never had much of a budget, even when times were good. Here Jeff Weinberger tweets that she has had more success developing social media applications for Facebook than she did trying to create things on her own site.

5) mktgwithmeaning: denny's received 1000s of thank u calls for free promo, one guy sent a $300 check "to thank u for what u did for America"

Mark Chmeil from Denny's was the architect of the recent Grand Slam giveaway, one of, if not the, marketing success of the year so far. Bob Gilbreath tweeted that the Grand Slam giveaway became much more than the simple trial device originally intended. It tapped into the strong feelings in the country as we bear the brunt of the recession.

6) The birth of Elf Yourself: One of 20 web sites launched with a total budget of $400,000. It was the one that took off.

Classic innovation technique adopted by Bob Thacker from Office Max. With a limited budget, Office Max launched 20 different web sites with no idea which one would be a hit. Turns out it was Elf Yourself that became the blockbuster.

7) danielriveong: Beam CMO: "our metric is getting into out consumer's heart", measuring "talkability". Very curious how's that's defined, budgeted

Rory Finlay is Senior VP and CMO of Beam's Global Spirits & Wine and he was part of a session talking about metrics and how to optimize marketing dollars. As Daniel noted in this tweet, Rory is trying to get a handle on "talkability" as a metric. As Rory went on to say, he's not quite got what he wants yet. He would like to measure the "quality" of conversation about his brand, not just the quantity.

8) WadeTr: Hermes is giving out paper bags to takes your purchases out of the store: guilded to guilt age (gerzema)

John Gerzema's book: Brand Bubble looks at what he called (all the way back half way through last year) the "looming crisis in brand value." Well the storm has hit and now we're seeing the impact. Trevor Wade's tweet captures John's idea that we have now entered a "guilt age" where conspicuos consumption has had to go undercover.

9) johngerzema: Econconf:Live your brand. UPS Marketing Chief Christine Owens started as a driver; mandatory for all executives

After his turn at the podium, John was also Twitter-active commenting on the fact that Christine Owens from UPS started her career as a driver. It reminded me that my first day on-the-job at Nestlé was to get up at 5am to go to a store in Seattle and reset the dog food section. Nothing like some real experience to cure you of ivory tower syndrome.

10) As we pursue efficiency via packaging reductions etc: "We are the accidental environmentalists." (Hagan/Clorox)

In a session on sustainability and corporate responsibility, Katherine Hagan: Marketing Director, Environmental Sustainability for Clorox made the point that going green only works if there's a business case that can be made as well. Clorox doesn't depend on altruism to get its green initiatives implemented. It relies on the bottom line.

All in all, a great first day. Back for more tomorrow.

The Economist Marketing Forum on Twitter

I'm attending The Economist Marketing Forum in San Francisco. And Twittering like crazy! You can follow my comments as well as others attending here. (martinjbishop on Twitter Search: #ecsf09) Speakers and agenda:

#1 The economic landscape: How to spot an upturn
Ward Hanson: Policy Forum Director, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research
Michael Lehmann: Emeritus Professor of Economics, University of San Francisco
Martin Giles: Senior Business Correspondent, The Economist

#2 Brand management: Successful marketing in an economic downturn
Pam Kaufman: Chief Marketing Officer, Nickelodeon
Christine Petersen: Chief Marketing Officer, TripAdvisor
Sylvia Reynolds: Chief Marketing Officer, Wells Fargo

#3 Consumer behavior: New attitudes, new approaches
Mark Chmiel: Executive Vice-President and Chief Marketing and Innovation Officer, Denny's
Bob Thacker: Senior Vice-President, Marketing and Advertising, OfficeMax

#4 Payback: How to optimize marketing dollars
Rory Finlay: Senior VP and CMO, Beam's Global Spirits & Wine
Angela Courtin: Senior VP, Entertainment and Content, MySpace
Maureen Lally: VP Americas Marketing, Trane

#5 Avoiding the looming crisis in brand value
John Gerzema: Chief Insights Officer, Young & Rubicam Group, author of The Brand Bubble

#6 Communicating to a global audience
Kevin 'KAL' Kallaugher: The Economist's political cartoonist on Kaltoons

#7 Responsibility unbound: Expanding the role of the corporation
Katherine Hagan: Marketing Director,Environmental Sustainability, Clorox
Matthew Heim: President, Nine Sigma
Christine Owens: Senior VP of Communications and Brand Management, UPS

#8 Emerging markets case study: The rewards of brand-building in developing economies
Glenn R Weckerlin: Global Director, Brand and Product Line Management, Chevron
Rajesh Subramaniam: Senior VP of International Marketing, FedEx
Russ Meyer: CSO, Landor

Economist Conference base camp

I'm attending the Seventh Annual Economist Marketing Forum for the next couple of days (Landor is the founding sponsor). This year's theme is: "Managing for the present, preparing for the future," focusing on the marketing challenge of dealing with today while keeping an eye on opportunities for tomorrow. As described on the forum's home page:

"Chief marketing officers have been hit with a double whammy in the current financial turbulence: the slowing economy is forcing most of them to become cost-cutters just at the time they are being asked by their CEOs to take more responsibility for building brands and increasing revenue. At the same time, media consumption habits are changing significantly, leading CMOs to struggle with how to build brands in the digital age. They need to use their marketing dollars more effectively, decide on the proper mix of online and offline spending, and learn to reach and engage customers in new ways that underline two-way dialogues rather than simply pushing out one-way marketing messages."

Some interesting speakers lined up including Mark Chmiel from Denny's who was the architect of the free Grand Slam giveaway which I thought was the best Superbowl ad/promotion this year and Zappo's Tony Hsieh, everyone's favorite socially-media-active CEO.

Why are so few companies the hotbeds of innovation that everyone thinks they should be?

Andrew Campbell, from the Ashridge Strategic Management Centre in London, asks an important question: Why is it, given that we've known for years that the key ingredients of innovation and creativity management are collaboration, encouraging diverse perspectives, nurturing ideas etc, that so few companies adopt these practices?

His answer: "What we don't understand is that innovation and creativity are value-destroying activities unless they are carefully contained. There are many more bad ideas than good ones and many more people who are passionate about ill-conceived business models than about those that will succeed. Give all that creativity a free hand, and you will get poorer--fast."

Agree? Does creativity typically destroy value and, if so, what is realistic expectation for creative processes to thrive in profit-driven corporations?

Source: The letters section of the March Harvard Business Review (subscription required)

Six of the Best: Under no illusions edition

Here's my summary of interesting things I read (or saw) this last week. Starting off with Joaquin's latest stunt and some other illusions:

1) Joaquin Phoenix leaps into crowd at hip-hop show: Yahoo! News (AP)
"Hey Andy Joaquin are you goofing on Elvis? Hey, baby. Are we losing touch?" (REM: Man on the Moon) At this point, we better hope that it's an act. Except that he was a good actor.

2) Sweet Memories Of A Snack Food Financial Scheme: NPR
A 3rd grade criminal mastermind describes how he used the promise of a large cake at the end of the school year to scam his classmates out of their Rice Krispie bars.

3) Seven tactile illusions: Mind Hacks
Mind Hacks found a New Scientist collection of seven illusions including the "Aristotle" illusion. Cross your fingers and touch your nose. Two noses!

4) The pint size recession: Freakonomics
A risky move by Häagen-Dazs. It's decided to downsize its 16oz cartons to 14oz, going from a real pint to something less to "offset increasing costs." Ben & Jerry jumped on this with an announcement that: "Now more than ever, you deserve your full pint of ice cream.”

5) A funny, or not so funny, metaphor: a clear eye
Tom Asacker suggests that this movie trailer is a perfect metaphor for corporate culture lock-in, by which he means the inability of companies to change direction even in the face of clear market threats.



6) Cramer v. Stewart: The Atlantic
This week's installment of the Stewart vs. CNBC battle saw Jim Cramer bravely (stupidly?) go on the Daily Show. I said last week that it's a fascinating battle to watch but I think my interest has peaked. I agree with Megan McArdle who finds fault on both sides.

Here's Part 1:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Unedited Interview Pt. 1

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

See you next week for more stories from the world of brand strategy.

Don't make too much hay while the recession rages

Photo: The_WB (Flickr)

Not everyone is having a lousy year. McDonalds is doing well. So is Wal-Mart.

Abu Mallick posting on the JWT Anxiety Index blog asks an interesting question: "If bad times equal good times, what happens when the good times return?" How will those companies like McDonalds that are doing well now fare when things get better?

Maybe this recession will change lifestyle habits permanently: "thus fostering a permanent love for affordable brands among mainstream consumers" or perhaps the current love of affordable things is just a: "short-term coping strategy." Brands that are doing well because of the recession have to be careful not to become too closely associated with it. Otherwise, when the good times eventually roll, they'll be abandoned.

"Thank God we don't have to go there anymore," is the consumer thought they need to avoid.

Sense or Nonsense? Northstar's Vertical Plus line

Photo of Northstar: me

OK. This could be my English cultural background kicking in. (Rule #1: Stand in line and wait your turn.) Or perhaps it's me jumping in on the conspicuous consumption backlash. Or both.

But I don't like Northstar ski resort's Vertical Plus "Members Only" service or, as I prefer to call it, "Letting people with more money cut to the front of the line and rub everyone else's noses in it."

The advantage to the resort is clear. It's a revenue opportunity (and a good example of tiered pricing). The advantage to those who buy it is also clear. They get to cut the line. But for the rest of us, the 95% who are also on the slopes, we have to suck it up as our wait time is increased by the Vertical Plus crowd happily pushing us out of the way.

It's different from the business class/economy class tiering on airplanes and even different from the fact that Premier level passengers get to board first. Neither of these perks so directly impacts the quality of service that the economy, no status passengers get. The closest parallel is the new Clear service that lets people jump ahead in airport security clearance. (I don't like that either.)

So, help me here. Is this one where I should be told: "Look, Martin, you're in America now and this is American, so get over it" or am I right? Does it make sense for a ski resort to inconvenience the vast majority of its clientele for the extra revenue coming from a well-heeled minority?

Sources: Both from Grant McCracken
1) The anthropology of contemporary culture: Grant's comments on a new book: Watching the English
2) Eat the Rich: Conspicuous consumption

Happy 50th, Barbie

Photo: fledsbo (Flickr)

Born 50 years ago today at the American International Toy Fair in New York, Barbie is the most famous and successful fashion doll in the world. According to this article in Vision, 90 percent of American girls between the ages of 3 and 10 own at least one Barbie doll. Which is pretty incredible.

With fame and success comes criticism. In her case, Barbie has been criticized over the years as a bad role model for young girls. Just this last week, a West Virginia lawmaker proposed a bill to ban sales of the doll. Why? Well, apart from the publicity, according to this article, Delegate Jeff Eldridge thinks that: "Such toys influence girls to place too much importance on physical beauty, at the expense of their intellectual and emotional development." (I found this story via Dave Barry's blog who linked to it under the headline: "West Virginia, having solved all of its other problems, goes after the lone remaining threat to society.")

And her demise has been predicted for ages as well. "Is her star fading?" ask this Reuters report. It quotes Jerry Oppenheimer, author of an even-handed-sounding book on Mattel called 'Toy Monster,' as saying: "It's very clear that the taste of little girls who play with dolls has changed. They have come into the 21st century, where they play on their own laptops, and have their own cell phones. Dolls will be a part of their lives ... and Barbie will be part of that, but it will be a small window."

Yet, despite critics and naysayers, Barbie has made it to this 50th milestone. Said a fan at a recent celebration event: "She's still so popular with collectors and young girls alike. She's still got another 50 years in her."

Whether fan or not, as a marketer you have to admire the achievement and the contributions over the years from Ruth Handler (who had the original idea) to all those that have worked on the brand ever since. Congrats!

Six of the Best: Hearts and Minds edition

Here's my summary of interesting things I read (or saw) this last week. Starting off with a couple of political battles for hearts and minds that I thought noteworthy:

1) Limbaugh vs. Steele: U.S. News & World Report
It takes a brave, perhaps crazy, man to take on Rush Limbaugh but that's what new RNC head, Michael Steele decided to do. In a CNN interview, Steele called Limbaugh's talk show "incendiary" and "ugly." Guess what? That provoked a response and eventually Steele backed down and apologized. As the Republican Party regroups and starts to redefine itself, this was a battle between someone thinking about expanding the base vs. someone who caters to a hard core of that base. Perhaps relates to different ways companies are trying to deal with the recession?

2) CNBC/Fox vs. Stewart/Colbert:
On Thursday, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert took on CNBC and Fox as the battle to define and evaluate Obama's economic policy heats up. First, Jon Stewart took on CNBC (and commentators on other networks). In his view, they are trying to sell the idea that: "the stock market is the only rational objective indicator of a commander-in-chief's performance." Then Stephen Colbert included this commentary on Glenn Beck's War Room:

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

Glenn Beck's War Room

Colbert Report Full Episodes
Political Humor

Rap Battle
Joke of the Day

Followed by this parody: The Doom Bunker. Without taking sides, it's interesting to see how the different sides are jostling for position.

3) Recession for Men: Adrian Beiting (via Thought Gadgets)
Meanwhile, the recession provides inspiration for this spoof:

Recession for Men from Adrian Beiting on Vimeo.

4) Timing Poor: Dim Bulb
Jonathan Salem Baskin explores the pros and cons of launching a black card which has a $495/year fee, and is targeted at about 1% of U.S. residents at a time like this. I think that, whatever the business merits, choosing to advertise in mainstream media is a mistake.

5) Shoot the recession: Slate
No. Not through the head. Slate is inviting its readers to submit photographs that represent the economic crisis. "Grim economic times produce indelible images" like this one from the story:
The Flickr page with this and the other photos is here.

6) Materialism And Death Anxiety Lead To Brand Loyalty: Science Daily (via murketing)
Well now I seem to be headed down this gloomy path I may as well continue. "Materialistic people tend to form strong connections to particular product brands when their level of anxiety about death is high, according to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research," reports Science Daily. Some kind of opportunity there perhaps?

That's it. See you next week for more stories from the world of brand strategy.

Jack Bauer: Not your typical green recruit

Photo: tyger_lyllie (Flickr)

24 has gone carbon neutral. So, in between between car chases and terrorist tortures, Jack Bauer now finds time to make PSA announcements like this one. Says Jack/Kieffer: "Global warming is a crime for which we are all guilty."

This, to me, is an example of a good idea gone bad. An idea that might have made sense had it come from the corporation but which makes no sense when it comes from the show.

Just think of the show's audience. Not one that's generally sympathetic to the whole global warming thing to begin with and even less happy about having their show hijacked by this kind of issue. Here are just a few comment snippets left by 24 fans below an article in E! Online about 24's carbon-neutral story: "I am turning off 24 because Global Warming is contrary to everything 24 is supposed to be about" and " I'm very sorry to see that the "24" cast and crew are among the successfully deceived by the global warming fraud" and "Are you kidding me? What is Jack now going to be against water boarding? OH geez, DON'T YOU KNOW WHO YOUR AUDIENCE IS? Who cares that 24 is chasing after a myth?"

The problem that Fox had and failed to solve for is that there's no Fox corporate site for these kind of stories so press announcements have to either come from individual shows like 24 or from News Corporation, the parent company. Except that News Corporation itself only carries press releases about business and investor-related issues so it doesn't really fit there.

Were there a Fox corporate site, the angle that could have worked would have been along the lines of: 1) Fox is committed to doing its part to reduce global warming 2) To prove this commitment we've take our worst offender (24) and made it carbon neutral 3) This shows that anything is possible and we encourage other TV shows as well as the general public to do the same 4) Except 24 fans--you can do whatever you want.

Instead of which, fans are mad and Bauer's perimeters have been compromised.

Facebook Friends II: Quantity and Quality

Yesterday, I was talking about Facebook friend types. Today it's about the numbers.

The Economist has an interesting story about the size of social networks. It takes a look at whether the fact that it's so easy to add Facebook friends and stay in touch with them has impacted what's known in Anthropology as the Dunbar number. That number (around 150) is the limit on effective and stable social networks based on our brain's cognitive processing power. Any more than 150 and we start to lose our ability to "remember who is allied with, hostile to, or lusts after whom, and act accordingly."

Well the Economist asked Facebook to run the numbers and it reported back that the average number of Facebook friends/person is around 120, supporting the Dunbar number. However, some people (those that would fall into the addict category from yesterday's post) had 500 or more.

But, digging a little deeper, Facebook also found that: "the average man—one with 120 friends—generally responds to the postings of only seven of those friends by leaving comments on the posting individual’s photos, status messages or “wall." An average woman is slightly more sociable, responding to ten." What this shows is that there's friends and then there's FRIENDS, the small, core network of people where there's real interaction.

As the article concludes, outside of the core, people are: "not so much “networking” as they are “broadcasting their lives to an outer tier of acquaintances who aren’t necessarily inside the Dunbar circle,” says Lee Rainie, the director of the Pew Internet & American Life Project, a polling organisation. Humans may be advertising themselves more efficiently. But they still have the same small circles of intimacy as ever."

How annoying are you, Facebook friend?

Photo: Jason Tester (Flickr)

Peter Hartlaub, the San Francisco Chronicle's Pop Culture Critic, just joined Facebook. He's a little late to the party but he's made up for it by coming out with a list of nine friend stereotypes and given each an "Annoyance Factor" score. His original list has now been supplemented by reader suggestions. Some of the friend types that resonated with me (but which, of course, don't apply to me or any of my friends) are:

The TMI: The friend who wants to share every piece of information about "his seemingly pointless life: John Doe is tired of working ... John Doe is going to the grocery store to get some kiwis ... John Doe just cleaned the bathroom. On to the kitchen!" Annoyance Factor : 100

The Friend Addict: "This is the Facebook equivalent of one of those crazy ladies who gets declared a public nuisance because she has too many cats in her home. Even though this Facebooker only knows 47 people, he/she managed to accumulate 786 friends - mostly by going through other people's profiles and friending perfect strangers." Annoyance Factor: 28

The Compulsive Gifter: "Every day, they find yet a new way to send cyber-tchotchkes to all their friends. Look on the bright side, though - at least you don't have to dust the Grateful Dead Bears or Hatching Eggs."

The Tweeter: "who has her twitter updates tied to her Facebook status. Her friends face an incessant barrage of cryptic microblogs. The 140-character tweet limit is the only thing that keeps her annoyance factor below 50."

The I Work Out More Than You: ""Stephie just got back from yoga" "Stephie just got back from running" "Stephie just got back from salsa" "Stephie just got back from salsa and yoga and is tired" "Stephie just got back doing salsa, yoga and running." Annoyance factor 100, unfriend."

The Always Tired and Busy: "According to their constant status updates, this friend is constantly tired and/or busy. But so is pretty much everyone. Annoyance factor: 100"

As marketers, is there anything else can we do with this insight over and above reading it for entertainment?

Six of the Best Supplemental: One more thing about Sneakers

I shouldn't let the reference to Martin Bishop's starring role in the movie, Sneakers pass by without mentioning what, for a few seconds, I thought was the best piece of marketing I had ever seen. In that movie, Robert Redford played a computer hacker who used Martin Bishop as an alias. (It's always surprised me, since then, how many people remember that.)

Anyway, I went to the movies just before Sneakers came out and was watching the previews. Then, to my amazement, I saw this screen-filling close-up of a credit card with the name "Martin Bishop" in gigantic size written on it. "Wow," I thought. "That's incredible." "How do they do that?" I was imagining (once again, just for a few seconds) that everyone in the audience was seeing their own name.