Tag Archives: Apple

Fools in Glass Houses: The Golden Rule of Comparative Advertising

Sometimes I see an ad that makes me laugh out loud, this from American bank, First Bank certainly did, but probably not for the reasons they’d hoped. I laughed because the idea of any bank taking the piss out Google for their application of technology is downright hilarious. Doing so in the course of telling us that First Bank are releasing their banking app (this is 2014) shows a remarkable lack of self-awareness. But it did prompt me to reflect on the wisdom of a particular form of marketing – Comparative Advertising – AKA gaining attention by taking a swipe at others.

Rules of Engagement

The market for the hearts and minds of consumers could hardly be described as genteel, but in general, investing in advertising that directly compares you to others is reasonably rare. There are various reasons for this: it’s pretty risky to spend your own money in a way that raises awareness of your competitors; people can be put off by the seeming arrogance of the act itself; but mainly there are very few circumstances where a direct comparison is a good idea. There are some who identify opportunities where you can make direct pricing or feature comparisons, but even these are risky. To my mind there’s pretty much one single golden rule of comparative advertising – kick them when they’re down.

The Popularity Contest

Sadly, life is unfair. And business, like life, is a popularity contest. So if you’re engaging in comparative advertising pick a target less popular than you. Sure that’s not very nice, but as humans we have our prejudices and as long as you’re picking a target who is less popular than you, you’ll do ok. Please note that I’m not advocating anything that’s based on race, colour, sex, sexual preference,religion, creed or any other such factor. Quite rightly people get upset about such things. However businesses and professions are still a pretty soft target. So there’s opportunities aplenty if you follow the golden rule.

Example 1 – TransferWise

A great example of this is fintech company, TransferWise, their feisty ads play on the fact we hate banks, so a good kicking is ok:

TransferWise FYCK Advert

This ad works on many levels: we hate banks; we hate banks because we suspect they’re ripping us off; actually they are ripping us off; I get to be clever and thrifty AND stick it to the banks. Awesome.

Example 2 – Apple

Another great example, albeit a bit less feisty but still playing the popularity angle, is Apple’s long running, I’m a Mac/I’m a PC campaign:

Im-a-mac

This is a bit of an oddity given that essentially it’s a grown up version of teasing the nerd – it’s the sort of thing we should dislike if we consider ourselves good people. Except that even though more people use Microsoft than Apple, we do so not very willingly, so people don’t really like Microsoft. So instead it comes across as the cool little guy taking on the uncool big guy. Easy to like.

Sorry guys

So where does that leave banks and other perennially unpopular companies? You could to find a comparative examples of others still less popular than you – car salesmen; tax collectors; advertising people. The truth is that there are many companies who probably could take a swipe at Google and Glassholes, it’s just not right for a bank. Instead try something radical… Like providing a great product and service that makes people’s lives better.

Advertising is dead; long live advertising

Whilst watching TV last night I saw something pretty special, it was this ad from Southern Comfort. Now I’m a little slow off the mark here – the ad was released last year, but after just one viewing I was hooked. This extremely simple ad displays what advertising does best – in the course of delivering a commercial message it is simultaneously insightful, humorous, soothing, self-fulfilling and above all, highly charismatic. The direction of the ad is a spot on; the deliberate lack of pace, the lingering shots, the rich colour palette, the brilliant casting… it hit the mark on all counts. This is what advertising does when it really does its job. It’s also the reason why advertising (and yes, even TV advertising) will remain a vital tool for marketers for a long time to come.

Continue reading Advertising is dead; long live advertising

In defence of skeuomorphic design

(Author’s note: I am not a designer, and don’t pretend to be. However I am a believer in customer focus, so the opinions expressed here reflect this fact.)

Scott Forstall has been pushed out of Apple, and the wagons have circled behind him.

That’s pretty rough for the man responsible for iOS – the operating system beloved of (nearly all) Apple acolytes. However with the passing of Steve Jobs, Forstall always was on borrowed time. His management style and ambition to build a power base were probably the main reasons behind his departure, but there’s one group of people who will celebrate his departure with unrestrained joy – design purists. Scott Forstall was (gasp) a devotee of skeuomorphic design; on screen use wooden and leather textures, elaborately turning pages, files that get “shredded”, all Forstall. He wasn’t the only one to carry a torch for these real world touches though, Jobs was as well. Hence as long as Jobs was in power, Forstall’s approach held sway. However with Jony Ive assuming responsibility for the design of iOS we can expect a different approach. The question is whether this is such a good idea, my belief from a customer perspective is that it isn’t.

Continue reading In defence of skeuomorphic design

iPhone 5 – Smart, fast, elegant, well-made… and obsolete

So the waves of hype have crashed upon the shores of California and carried with them a new iPhone – number 5 as it turns out. As the hype recedes it’s been interesting to see what they have left behind. First impressions of pictures online show a smaller slimmer and lighter phone, which we’re told is lighter and more powerful as well. Smaller, slimmer, lighter, faster… sounds like lyrics from a Daft Punk song. In any case, for a phone that’s a pretty compelling sales pitch, but will it work for the 5? Along with the release there’s been some interesting aspects of the Apple narrative that are worth addressing, this narrative seems to be summed up in a general feeling from a portion of Apple’s fanbase of disappointment, a sort of “Really? Is that it?” It’s worth taking a look at this in more detail.

Continue reading iPhone 5 – Smart, fast, elegant, well-made… and obsolete

Is Sergey Brin the new Steve Jobs?

This post may focus on hardware, but the implications for anyone designing a product are pretty abundant. If you can design a product with appeal that overcomes reason, you’ll always do better than one with better features:

Remember when we all used to salivate at the thought of the next Apple convention? What did Steve have up his sleeve? What amazing piece of kit would he reveal that would have us all ignoring Apple’s rather large price premium and just slap down our cash to have a slice of that amazing Apple cool? Year after year, product after product they seemed to do it – iPod (multiple versions); iPhone (fewer versions); Macbook Air; iPad… the list was amazing and made even Mac-sceptics like me feel the urge to just get me one.

What Apple Did Well

There wasn’t much secret to it, in true Apple style it was simple, they just made fantastic products that worked in perfect harmony with each other backed up by a beautiful OS. The trick is that it’s really hard to do well. Google (with Android) for all of its dominance was far too fragmented to match Apple in that compelling human way. Its OEMs were far too focused on that bane of the OEM – features. Bigger screen this, faster processor that, brighter, more colourful etc etc etc. People bought these things certainly, but deep down really they just wanted an Apple because their devices worked better.

But something has changed… at least that’s how it seems for me. Less than a year or so on from the untimely loss of Steve Jobs, Apple has continued to release fabulous products – Jobs made certain there was a few years worth in the pipeline – but something is different. As I see it, they’ve taken to marketing them in a really misguided way. Apple has now fallen into the features trap, it seemed to start with the “New iPad” with fab new screen but not much else to speak of, and has continued with the recent launch of the new Macbook with Retina Display. Don’t get me wrong, both are excellent devices; powerful, beautiful and functional. Fanboys and tech geeks adore them and there’s no shortage of evidence of sales, but it’s a dangerous road that Apple has taken themselves down.

The Features Folly

Why should this be a problem? When you play the features game you get yourself into a margin-destroying arms race, and whilst Apple is king right now, this advantage can be very quickly chipped away by hungry and capable competitors like Samsung who have already taken top place in Mobile sales, have blitzed iPhone in terms of performance, and can’t be far away in terms of desirability. Likewise HTC are doing a reasonable job of a come back with the HTC One. Previously Apple traded on its desirability and the “lifestyle” aspects of the brand to retain dominance, but now Apple has decided to play the feature game, how long will this residual goodwill last (especially when brands like HTC roll out campaigns like this for the HTC One). I’m not saying that Apple won’t see a spike in awareness and sales whenever they release a new product, this is natural. But the longer they play the feature game, the shorter those periods will last. The inevitable grind of the product cycle demands this; the market for smartphones has now caught up with Apple, it’s only a matter of time before the same happens in other categories.

The Benefits of… umm… Benefits

Which brings us back to the subject… what is the opposite of the feature game? In marketing terms it’s the “Benefit” game… and we’ve just had a Jobs-like demonstration of this from Google with their Glass. In one self-deprecating swoop, Sergey Brin and his tech guys and assorted extreme sports buddies at Google have just laid siege to Apple. Sure their Nexus tablet may not knock the iPad off, but with Glass, Google have done what iPad did, created a market, showed everyone in a real and highly compelling way the benefits of Glass (and mind-bending Hangouts are just one potential of the device) and induced the I WANT ONE factor at a level not seen since people twigged to the iPad. True it’s not everyday you get to demo a product like Glass, but the principles are the same – show people how their lives can be better using the product rather than getting all fetishist about the product itself.
This won’t happen overnight. Jobs did remarkable work and has build a generations-worth of product goodwill, so Apple may hold out for a long time to come, but if Google have really figured out what made Apple so desirable, then it’s just a matter of time before things get really interesting.