Well not really 'a day'. In fact it doesn't specify which day. Just "A DAY". You will get a 'thought' when there is one worth getting. Maybe I should rename the site "Try to have a thought a day" YOU CAN HAVE 'MARKETING THOUGHT A DAY' RSS FEEDBLITZ EMAILED TO YOU BY VISITING WWW.MICHAELKIELYMARKETING.COM.AU AND SIGNING ON FOR THE SERVICE. (Not every day, thought. You won't ready them all.)
Monday, March 31, 2008
I just bought my first PC and I hate it
I am an Mac guy. Have been since 1985 when Apple had just launched Macintosh. I introduced Macs to a multinational ad agency network in 1985, a contract worth squillions. 23 years and 15-25 Macs later (personal and family machines), I was forced to buy a PC because of this special purpose software I have to use. Apple abandoned me by not having a solution that kept me in the fold. I think PCs are shitty, third rate machines that defy logic and can't do simple things. But I am now exposed to the Dark Side - Emperor Gates's plans to dominate the world. What is the point of building loyalty if you leave your customer hanging, short of an application?
Sunday, March 30, 2008
As the Globe Heats Up, Will The Consumer Go Cold?
Sitting in candle light during Earth Hour on Saturday I wondered: What options do we have for maintaining our lifestyles once the Carbon Cops have taken control? I see two potential scenarios, one of which could dramatically change the way you do business and live your life:
1. The Silver Bullet – No Change. “Clean Coal” technology is the only ace in the’s hand. If it works (it has ‘uncertainty’ written all over it) we will be able to continue burning coal for 500 years. Apart from paying more for power, nothing much would change. Plasma screens for everyone. The party goes on.
2. The Consumer Goes Cold – Disaster for Everyone. This scenario sees a major shift in consumer sentiment and a permanent change in habits. Fear and danger tighten purses. Products are no longer expected to be disposable. Instead of boasting about her new outfit, the young female consumer revels in recycled clothes and a more or less stable wardrobe. The skyrocketing price of energy robs consumers of spending power.
Can our culture of consumption change 180° in 25 years? Australians as a nation have encountered such a shift only once: World War 2*. Rationing, blackouts, empty shelves in shops... But there was no argument about the cause of the threat and the cure, and there was no consumer society. People in 1939 were not engaged in a feeding frenzy of historic proportions. No, society is likely to get gradually more restrictive with technology running to catch up.
This assumes, of course, that Cyclone Katrina’s angry cousin Katie doesn’t slam in through Sydney Heads, that the crops don’t fail and cause famine in China and that floods don’t cause Indonesia to disintegrate, sending the single largest movement of human beings in history fleeing south to our shores, as a flotilla of Tampas arrive looking for clean water and dry land. (The Pentagon, the Australian Defence Force, the Australian Federal Police, Professor Ross Garnaut, top brass in the US Military, and Senator Bill Heffernan have all raised this as a serious scenario in recent times.
The media doesn’t feature these scary thoughts. If consumers panic, they stop spending. Then marketers stop spending on advertising in the media.
We have time to change this scenario.
* While the Depression saw 30% unemployed, the wealthy and those who kept their jobs were better off because prices fell faster than wages.
1. The Silver Bullet – No Change. “Clean Coal” technology is the only ace in the’s hand. If it works (it has ‘uncertainty’ written all over it) we will be able to continue burning coal for 500 years. Apart from paying more for power, nothing much would change. Plasma screens for everyone. The party goes on.
2. The Consumer Goes Cold – Disaster for Everyone. This scenario sees a major shift in consumer sentiment and a permanent change in habits. Fear and danger tighten purses. Products are no longer expected to be disposable. Instead of boasting about her new outfit, the young female consumer revels in recycled clothes and a more or less stable wardrobe. The skyrocketing price of energy robs consumers of spending power.
Can our culture of consumption change 180° in 25 years? Australians as a nation have encountered such a shift only once: World War 2*. Rationing, blackouts, empty shelves in shops... But there was no argument about the cause of the threat and the cure, and there was no consumer society. People in 1939 were not engaged in a feeding frenzy of historic proportions. No, society is likely to get gradually more restrictive with technology running to catch up.
This assumes, of course, that Cyclone Katrina’s angry cousin Katie doesn’t slam in through Sydney Heads, that the crops don’t fail and cause famine in China and that floods don’t cause Indonesia to disintegrate, sending the single largest movement of human beings in history fleeing south to our shores, as a flotilla of Tampas arrive looking for clean water and dry land. (The Pentagon, the Australian Defence Force, the Australian Federal Police, Professor Ross Garnaut, top brass in the US Military, and Senator Bill Heffernan have all raised this as a serious scenario in recent times.
The media doesn’t feature these scary thoughts. If consumers panic, they stop spending. Then marketers stop spending on advertising in the media.
We have time to change this scenario.
* While the Depression saw 30% unemployed, the wealthy and those who kept their jobs were better off because prices fell faster than wages.
The end is nigh!
The Service makes you smile in Sydney. The price might make you cringe in Auckland ($1.75 a litre.). But the loyalty scheme will make no sense at all.
This is the inevitable end of points-type and coupon-style loyalty programs. American Airlines invented the frequent flyer program and all the others followed, until everyone had one. SO no one has an advantage. Everyone has higher costs. (Including the mug customer,)
This is the inevitable end of points-type and coupon-style loyalty programs. American Airlines invented the frequent flyer program and all the others followed, until everyone had one. SO no one has an advantage. Everyone has higher costs. (Including the mug customer,)
Friday, March 28, 2008
The bigger the bastard, the bigger the bastard.
Marketing student Alissa Tilla set us a cry from the heart: "Customer service is dead!" (Her email is below.) My response: Declare war.
ALISSA -
The bigger the bastard, the bigger the bastard.
MK
PS. It's the thing they don't teach you at marketing school: God is on the side of the biggest battalions. They can ignore the principles of customer-centricity and customer focus. Telstra, Qantas and McDonalds are so dominant in their markets, they can get away with anything. It is the eternal advantage of leadership. The lagging indicator is share. They gain sales from customers who hate them, who know they will dud them, and who would love to give them the finger. But inertia, fear and cynicism keeps them rusted on. To activate this hatred and turn it into share gains, challenger brands must do more than slash prices. They must build an activism, a lynch mob atmosphere, an "Aussie Home Loans" campaign (John Symonds is a genius) that is a crusade, like Branson's strategy. Belt the bastards so often you reforge their brand image, using their weakness (size and insensitivity) against them. You can speed the process by running a 'bad case study/anti-testimonial" campaign featuring heart-rending stories like Cancer Boy in "Thank You For Smoking", illustrating how brutal the big bastard is. In extreme cases, you could run some investigative probes into their operations, seeking weak spots. Always within the bounds of ethics, you can gain access to sensitive information via many avenues: eg. interview their staff for employment opportunities (many staff will reveal problems in interviews); set up a website to collect complaints from the big bastard's customers; keep an eye on corporate disclosure around issues like environmental claims, etc. Make sure your own nose is clean, though. In extremely extreme cases, a dedicated unit that trolls for bad news and disseminates it might be justified. Why not? Marketing is war. Consumers deserve more than they get. Big bastards deserve more than they get, too.
On 27/03/2008, at 9:57 PM, Alissa Tilla wrote:
Dear Michael,
I was reading a back issue of Marketing Magazine and saw your piece on bad customer service. I think customer service is dead! Recently I was served a raw chicken burger from McDonalds. The head office wiped their hands of the issue, claiming that the store needed to contact me; despite being a company owned store. One week later the manager called me; the voicemail message she left said that she was going home and would call me the following day. Another week on, and two phone calls later (from my end) I could not get in touch with this manager who was never at the store. When I finally spoke with her I was unhappy with her lack of empathy. The response from McDonalds has been underwhelming to say the least; impersonal, uncaring and not in a timely manner. To make matters worse, if I want a refund for my meal I suddenly have to deal with head office, writing a letter of demand. These organisations have become so procedural and clinical that they have lost any decency in their dealings with customers. These large organisations think they are invincible. Good on you for speaking out. It’s about time these organisations are put back in their place and remember what their main focus should be, serving the customer. In this case, I think Ronald would be very unhappy. Being a marketing student I am so aggravated by McDonald’s response. You need to continue to use your influence to make these issues public and start a revolution whereby the customer comes first!
I would love to hear back from you about what you think.
Kind Regards,
Alissa Tilla
ALISSA -
The bigger the bastard, the bigger the bastard.
MK
PS. It's the thing they don't teach you at marketing school: God is on the side of the biggest battalions. They can ignore the principles of customer-centricity and customer focus. Telstra, Qantas and McDonalds are so dominant in their markets, they can get away with anything. It is the eternal advantage of leadership. The lagging indicator is share. They gain sales from customers who hate them, who know they will dud them, and who would love to give them the finger. But inertia, fear and cynicism keeps them rusted on. To activate this hatred and turn it into share gains, challenger brands must do more than slash prices. They must build an activism, a lynch mob atmosphere, an "Aussie Home Loans" campaign (John Symonds is a genius) that is a crusade, like Branson's strategy. Belt the bastards so often you reforge their brand image, using their weakness (size and insensitivity) against them. You can speed the process by running a 'bad case study/anti-testimonial" campaign featuring heart-rending stories like Cancer Boy in "Thank You For Smoking", illustrating how brutal the big bastard is. In extreme cases, you could run some investigative probes into their operations, seeking weak spots. Always within the bounds of ethics, you can gain access to sensitive information via many avenues: eg. interview their staff for employment opportunities (many staff will reveal problems in interviews); set up a website to collect complaints from the big bastard's customers; keep an eye on corporate disclosure around issues like environmental claims, etc. Make sure your own nose is clean, though. In extremely extreme cases, a dedicated unit that trolls for bad news and disseminates it might be justified. Why not? Marketing is war. Consumers deserve more than they get. Big bastards deserve more than they get, too.
On 27/03/2008, at 9:57 PM, Alissa Tilla wrote:
Dear Michael,
I was reading a back issue of Marketing Magazine and saw your piece on bad customer service. I think customer service is dead! Recently I was served a raw chicken burger from McDonalds. The head office wiped their hands of the issue, claiming that the store needed to contact me; despite being a company owned store. One week later the manager called me; the voicemail message she left said that she was going home and would call me the following day. Another week on, and two phone calls later (from my end) I could not get in touch with this manager who was never at the store. When I finally spoke with her I was unhappy with her lack of empathy. The response from McDonalds has been underwhelming to say the least; impersonal, uncaring and not in a timely manner. To make matters worse, if I want a refund for my meal I suddenly have to deal with head office, writing a letter of demand. These organisations have become so procedural and clinical that they have lost any decency in their dealings with customers. These large organisations think they are invincible. Good on you for speaking out. It’s about time these organisations are put back in their place and remember what their main focus should be, serving the customer. In this case, I think Ronald would be very unhappy. Being a marketing student I am so aggravated by McDonald’s response. You need to continue to use your influence to make these issues public and start a revolution whereby the customer comes first!
I would love to hear back from you about what you think.
Kind Regards,
Alissa Tilla
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)