MAXImizing the MINI with Social Gaming

MINI Countryman

How do you double your sales in a geographic  market?  Make consumers hunt for your product. That's how Mini did it in Stockholm, Sweden at least.


Literally.


RUN, OSCAR, RUN
In 2010 MINI looked to mobile apps - specifically a scavenger type "mobile hunt game" called Mini Getaway Stockholm - to engage potential buyers and turn them into brand evangelists.  


The bait?  A MINI Countryman - open for the winning, free and clear.


The task?  Download a mobile app that allows you to track (like a hunter to his prey) a virtual MINI and your competitors.  Capture the MINI and flee from your "enemies."  If you can hold onto the MINI for the duration of the game, it is yours to keep.

BIG GAME HUNTING
The game delivered strong results for MINI:

• 11, 413 physically participated in the game during its one-week duration
• The average participant spent just over 5 hours engaged with the game
• People from over 90 countries followed the game online, via the companion website, minigetawaystockholm.com
• Sales increased by 108% in the first quarter following the campaign

BIGGER GAME HUNTING

The campaign was so successful that MINI is translating its efforts into Japanese.  MINI Getaway Tokyo  is set to launch on December 3, 2011.  

The rules, and stakes, of the game are the same, but Tokyo allows MINI to MAXImize the potential impact in a few key ways:

• The Tokyo gaming area is almost 32 times larger - covering 240 square miles
• At 35.6 million, Tokyo's population is approximately 44 times larger than the population of Stockholm, which clocks in around 809,072

MINI also points to it's creation of an Android App for Tokyo, as a game changer - yet the Dr. debates that point - Japan seems to be an iPhone dominated market, with only about 15% of smartphone users doing so on the Android platform.  

Still, MINI is doing fun, engaging things to nurture MINI brand evangelists.  This is a campaign to watch out for.

The Drama of TV Economics...

Although still early in the season, Fall 2011 is shaping up to be quite dramatic for Broadcast TV Networks.  The body count of cancelled shows has already reached 5, with notables like ABC's "Charlie's Angels"  and NBC's "The Playboy Club" being escorted to early exits.

While the Angels may have gone to heaven and the bunnies descended down the rabbit hole to accompany Alice in Wonderland - all is not doom and gloom on TV.  In fact, things are getting pretty hilarious.

After years on the decline, and losing the rating game to dramas, the NY Times reports that "sitcoms are making a comeback."  According to the report:

So far this season, sitcoms occupy seven of the top 10 spots among entertainment programs (not counting football) in the category of most financial importance to network executives — viewers ages 18 to 49.

Given that ratings have, traditionally, been what drives ad prices and ad buys most, the report goes on to assert:

The result will most likely be an even greater flourishing of sitcoms next season. Mr. [Kevin] Reilly [President of Fox Entertainment] said an increase of as much as 25 percent in comedy was possible.

Sitcoms might not be laughing all the way to the bank, though.  Ad Age reports that, despite hefty price tags for highly rated sitcoms like "Modern Family" and "Two and a Half Men," live programming still manages to command the highest prices.

NBC's Sunday Night Football won top slot, with the average 30 second spot costing $512,367.  American Idol scored a close second, with average spots ranging from $468,100 - $502,900.

The results continue to bolster the notion that the shows most in demand are those viewers tend to watch live, rather than play back days later with a DVR or via video-on-demand. When millions of viewers tune in live, marketers pay a premium.

It seems like the NY Times and Ad Age are presenting two different pictures of what Network TV programming will look like moving forward.  From a ratings base - comedies seem like a strong bet.  However, as networks and advertisers continue to struggle with how to account for the "time shifting" effect of DVR's, the lure of live TV might be too much to resist, as Advertisers have proven that they will pay extra for the privilege of engaging us in real time.

Where have all the creative minds vanished to?

i.Will.admit.  I'm not a fan of Will.i.am.  Other than knowing he was in a Superbowl spot for Pepsi in 2009...

I don't know very much about him.

So, when I saw an "article" he wrote for Ad Age earlier this week, I was surprised.  What was more surprising was that I was digging what he was saying.

Critical of today's marketers/artists/etc for "not investing in the dreamers," he gave cogent advice to businesses and marketers on how to be better, in this new, connected world:

to stay relevant, you or your business or your brand need to be part of the connection... you need to be part of the conversation... or start conversations... you need to invent, or amplify culture... brands need to listen to the community...  you need to turn a moment into momentum and momentum into a movement...

so I say, MAKE CONVERSATIONS NOT ADS... 

Where I come from, this is where I say, WORD.  I think I found at least one of the creative minds Will.i.am fears have vanished...

BrandDR to Marketers - Study Dads As If They Were Monkeys...

My last two posts dealt with target marketing.  Namely, using sex (male vs. female) or family role (moms) as dimensions by which to define targeted customers.

The conversation continued today in Ad Age, which declared:

"Increasingly Influential Dads Are in Marketers' Crosshairs"

What is interesting here is the qualifier; that is, not all dads find themselves pursued by marketers - just the "influential" ones.   So where is this influence, and how can it be useful to us as marketers?

Supermarkets vs. Superbowl

Even though times have changed and household roles have been transformed, the influence held by Moms vs. the influence held by Dads, seems to break along stereotypical gendered lines set in the 1950's. You guessed it - research cited by Ad Age suggests that Moms rule the supermarket, while Dads rule the sports field.

The Ipsos LMX family study completed earlier this year among 2,800 moms and dads, while it didn't confirm dads rule the shopping cart just yet, did find they're the major players when it comes to entertainment. Ipsos found dads spend 50% more time than moms with their kids online, were 50% more likely than moms to take the kids to movies, and were also more likely to take the kids to theater, sporting events or concerts.

Ok.  We get it.  This means that Dads have influence in choosing and buying technology products, online services, and making entertainment choices like the theater, sporting events and concerts.

So, how do brands respond to this knowledge?

Kellogg Co. directed a campaign for Frosted Flakes featuring ESPN sports anchor and dad Rece Davis with ads on ESPN and an ESPN.com microsite. Such Procter & Gamble Co. brands as Gain, Febreze and Swiffer this year have become prominent display advertisers on sections of Yahoo, such as sports, heavily frequented by men.

Huh?  It's like we haven't learned anything new.  Male targeted media has always been the place to talk with men.  And, if women still rule the supermarket - why market cleaning products to men?  (Note:  I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't market these products to men, because they are indeed shoppers of, and users of, these products, but as a "learning moment" from this research, the response by P&G just doesn't fit.)

The article suggests that the research method of a "self-report" or survey, led to an overstatement of Dads' role in household decision making.

But the reality is, while dads are more important household decision makers, they're still not as important as moms, said Gary Stibel, CEO of New England Consulting Group. By letting men self-report, the Yahoo survey overstated their role, he said. New England Consulting Group's own follow-up survey of 200 men and women indicated 70% of consumer-package-goods volume is still purchased by women, though he believes men's role is up "from the high 20s to the low 30s" in recent years.

Regardless of the final word on Men vs. Women; Moms vs. Dads - the real lesson here is about our reading of, and response to, research.

Surveys will always be vulnerable to "bias."  Leading questions may result in answers that don't accurately reflect the thoughts, feelings, or actions of the respondent.  Or, our natural desire to "whitewash" - to make things sound good and positive and to please the researcher - may cause our responses to be more "wishful thinking" than a reflection of reality.

Situations like these remind me of the importance of triangulation in research.  Why rely just on one method - which may have its limitations - when you can supplement that method with another method that may be complementary?  Here, I'd like to see observation or ethnographic research to uncover what household roles in decision making look like everyday.

This may amount to studying Dads as if they were monkeys - but sometimes you have to brave the jungle to understand the animals...

From Zero, to the Max - Dr. Pepper 10 Steps into the Cola War to Battle for the Male Demographic

Since the 1980's, a war has been brewing - almost literally - between Coke and Pepsi.  This is nothing new.  The younger, perhaps swifter "challenger" - Pepsi (born in 1898) - made great headway in terms of chipping away at Coke's (born in 1886) commanding lead in the market through the early 21st century by positioning Pepsi as a "better tasting" cola.

More recently, however, Pepsi has seen its' market share slip, forcing a "retooling" of its marketing.  One aspect of this retooling was bringing Pepsi Max to the US as a means of pulling in male cola drinkers who are self-conscious about drinking "diet" beverages.  

According to the NY Times, Pepsi Max was introduced in Europe in the early 1990's, and made its' US debut in 2007.  

A 2009 report by Mintel, the market research firm, said the soda’s sales had been “impressive,” even during the economic downturn, “likely by attracting price-sensitive energy drink users.”

The importance of "zero calorie, 'diet' alternative" beverages in the market is considerable, and supported by the most recent entry into the war for male drinkers - Dr. Pepper 10.

Pepsi Max and Coke Zero have been somewhat subdued in their targeting of men - relying largely on conventional male humor, and masculine phrasing to indicate the targeted group.

Pepsi Max: "I'm Good," Superbowl 2009

Coke Zero: "Two Men in a Restaurant," 2006

Dr. Pepper 10, on the other hand, is taking a much bolder approach (perhaps as a nod to its' "bold" flavor) introducing the new product under the tagline,  "It's Not For Women."

The appeal of this approach is obvious - generate buzz and word of mouth.

'Is this really for men or really for women?' is a way to start the conversation that can spread and get people engaged in the product... One topic people never tire of talking or arguing about is differences between men and women, particularly if women are excluded... That will always get someone's attention.

Dr. Pepper is, however, taking a bit of a risk.  It's Facebook page for the campaign - the Ten Man'ments - has 10.6 million "likes" and counting, but has been lit up with criticism.  Here's a typical "complaint:"

Given that Dr. Pepper's own research has shown that 40% of those trying the NEW Dr. Pepper 10 are women, and earlier Pepsi research citing similiar 40/60 split in terms of female/male drinkers of Pepsi Max, the brand risks alienating a significant portion of its market.

Accordingly, Pepsi claims it has chosen to downplay gender in its messaging.  Lauren Hobart, chief marketing officer of the sparkling brands division of PepsiCo explains:

while some of our past advertising was more overtly about being the diet cola for men, there’s still a lot of women drinking Pepsi Max, so it doesn’t make sense to be so specifically gender focused.

Pepsi's "new" commercial may be a testament to the brand shaking the shackles of gender and assuming the "taste" positioning that has served the brand well in the past.

Pepsi is erring on the side of caution.  It is a brand that seeks to be all things for all people.  Looking more closely at Dr. Pepper the bold move of ruffling feathers over gender may be more attuned with how they have built their brand - to almost be an elitist, some people get it, some people don't.

As far as gender appeals go, this one may resonate more strongly with key Dr. Pepper drinkers than the lukewarm gender appeals made by Coke Zero and Pepsi Max (in the past).  It is a little ironic, however, that the brand that played on affiliation & social needs by encouraging us to "be a Pepper too" is now taking an exclusionary stance by targeting men.

Maybe "Big Girls Don't Cry," But Brands do, for Mommy...

For decades, American brands have recognized a distinct consumer that not only holds purchasing power on their own, but also controls the purchasing power of others - the "Mom."

Marketers, and even politicians, have sought to make "mom" a brand of her own - first giving birth to "Soccer Moms," and then, "Hockey Moms," as distinct groups of consumers who share common demographic and psychographics.

According to Mike May, the Director of Communications at the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association, Soccer Moms are

most likely married, aged late 20s to early 40s, probably driving an SUV; she works, though it's questionable whether or not she has ever played soccer. Some are college graduates and some are not.

Hockey Moms "are basically the same people."  They may be a little tougher (thanks to the reputation of the sport) and a little more blue collar - but their focus on their family, placing family needs above their own, remains constant across both groups.

These moms have taken their power online, creating a phenomenon known as "mommy blogging."

While the numbers alone are staggering -  79% of all US moms with kids under 18 use social media and 4 million moms are blogging - the influence these blogs have on consumers is what is really making brands take notice.

According to NPD Group research,

Active social media moms [have, on average] bought a children’s product based on a social media recommendation... five times in the past year. Fifty-five percent of these moms said they made their purchase because of a recommendation from a personal review blog

It's not surprising then, that brands are falling over each other to woo and win over these influential Moms.  For instance,

popular mommy bloggers have been sent to the Olympics, courtesy of Procter & Gamble, and to the Oscars, courtesy of Kodak; and road-tripped to Disney World in a Chevy Traverse, courtesy of G. M. Canada...

The fascination with Moms as a target market is not limited to the US.  As domestic markets continue to dry up – thanks to the almost endless number of competitors and economic recession – marketers are finally looking to China as a consumer market, rather than just the world’s factory.  So now they are introducing us to Tiger Moms - Chinese mothers who hold the purse strings (supposedly in an iron fist) for her family.


In her book, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mom, Amy Chua describes the Chinese mom as part drill sergeant, part Sorority House pledge mistress, who's demands for perfection are voiced bluntly, without apology.  Mom is likely to say to her daughter - "Hey fatty - lose some weight." Or to a child who doesn't get straight A's - "You're lazy.  All your classmates are getting ahead of you."


Regardless of what we think of this parenting style, it provides great opportunity for brands to consolidate "Moms" into a coherent target group based upon shared attitudes and sensibilities.  Or does it??


Just like skeptics who question the usefulness of market segments such as Soccer Moms and Hockey Moms in the US - Chinese researchers are calling into question the relevance of "Tiger Moms" in today's China.


According to Allen Wang, CEO and Founder of Babytree.com, China's most popular parenting website, today's Chinese mom comes from a "post 80's" generation, that values freedom and things like "happiness, confidence, and the ability to do anything they want in their lives" for their children.  In essence, the Tiger Mom is a fiction of the past, while the Chinese Mom of 2011 looks (and acts, and thinks) a lot like her Western counterparts.

The case of Tiger Moms reminds us that targeting, while an appealing necessity, is in no way an easy task.   As we look for similarities among consumers we often find them, but similarities in one area do not guarantee similarities in others. Yet once we convince ourselves of these similarities, we take them for granted and suddenly find ourselves slipping into stereotyping.


Whether it is Soccer Moms, Hockey Moms, Tiger Moms, or any other demographic group, Michelle Miller, co-author of The Soccer Mom Myth, clearly isolates the problem:

You can put 12 women who fit the ‘soccer mom’ demographic together in a room and get wildly different opinions about a product or service.

This is why brands must stick to the basics - both quantitative and qualitative research - rather than get caught up in the buzz of new consumer groups and target markets.  Knowing your customer is key. Regardless of which demographic or psychographic is "hot" at the moment, that will never change.

afghaniSad

At a Center for Communication event on Social Media Marketing this week, Mark Ghuneim, CEO of Wiredset responded to a question about timing Tweets and other social media content posting with a tongue in cheek, "Don't post on a day when Apple is announcing something."

That was on Tuesday, October 4th, when Apple brought good news to our ears - the arrival of iPhone 4S, along with other product improvements and innovations.

The very next day, Wednesday, October 5th, Apple once again dominated news feeds with the sad news of Steve Jobs' passing.

Ever since, tributes to Jobs have been almost endless - reflective of the impact he has had on individuals, businesses, and our culture in general.  According to Facebook, for instance,

628 million active users changed their Facebook profile picture to a real Apple, the Apple logo, or a picture of Steve Jobs.

You may have seen a lot of "status" postings of "iSad" or this visual:

YouTube exploded with videos - some traditionally media driven, like the CNN tribute below; others more grassroots produced by brand fans and loyalists.

CNET's retrospective video on Jobs puts it perfectly, describing his uncanny ability to make Apple's highly sophisticated and innovative technology, "simple, magical, and fashionable" to us as users.

In the shadow of Jobs' passing, however, important stuff is going on around the world, that is getting little or no attention.

Today, October 7, 2011 is the TEN year anniversary of the War in Afghanistan - making it the "longest war" in America's history.  For the past 10 years about 100,000 US soldiers have had their "boots on the ground" in Afghanistan, and 1,780 of them have given their lives in the line of duty.

I am not hating on Steve Jobs, or diminishing the impact of his death.  It does, however, make me think about how lives are valued in our society today.  When what we care about is so dependent on what the media emphasizes and reports on, it is not surprising that Facebook, and social media is more abuzz with Jobs' passing, than the sacrifices of our soldiers in Afghanistan.

To illustrate - in my NY Times "Today's Headlines" email this morning (timestamped 3:05AM) there were 38 clickable links to content.  11 of these links, almost 30%, were to Steve Jobs, or Apple related content.  There were no links to content related to the 10th Anniversary of the War in Afghanistan.  Furthermore, a review of the NY Times' homepage, around 11:00 this morning, yielded no news about the Anniversary.

This makes me AfghaniSad.