Extreme Branding Gone Awry

January 20, 2019 by


Extreme BrandA soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.ing is alive and well.

Nike jumped into the deep end of civil rights with Kaepernick’s Anthem kneeling. Now Gillette has followed suit with a not so subtle attack on ‘masculine toxicity.’

I get it! Gillette, like Nike, wants to make sure their global mega brand is relevant to the younger males who appear to be more sensitive to social purpose.

Nike played on their enduring, ‘Just Do It,’ campaign. Gillette is using their long time, ‘The Best a Man Can Get’ platform.

One can look at this from a business view and say bravo. Gillette’s viral buzz is on fire; brand re-awareness is rocketing and should continue so through the hyped SuperBowl season.

Nike’s sales were reportedly up after their campaign launched and although their effort turned off some loyal users, it has apparently worked for younger audiences. Time will tell. As one young friend said, ‘At least they had the courage to use their money to help make things better.”

I asked the same young person what they thought of the new Gillette campaign and he said,“Stupid. I don’t need some shaving company lecturing me on how I should be.”

Oops!

Of course this was just one person’s view, but it doesn’t take more than a Google minute to see that he was not alone. One report showed twice as many dislikes as likes.

Scanning through the comments, unlike Nike, which tended to be about social conscience for all, Gillette’s approach hits a more personal note.

Nike did not lecture the viewer on his or her role in civil liberty issues. They were celebrating Kaepernick’s individual right to ‘Just Do It.’ You can argue with the way he protested but at the same time you cannot argue with everyone’s rights to justice.

Gillette on the other hand may have made a bad mistake.

Did they take the right stand? Who are they talking to?

No question, the #MeToo movement has put a spotlight on sexual harassment, and yes, bullying has come to the fore today in really nasty ways including suicides and school shootings.

But, and this is a big ‘but’, not all males are bullies or sexual predators as this campaign seems to imply. These aren’t rampant diseases that every male indulges in. Maybe more was tolerated in the 50’s and 60’s as in the footage they showed, but not today.

In fact, data shows that females are just as likely to bully. Social media can be decidedly mean. A black eye is not good but it can heal. Being socially ostracized can hurt for a long time.

And BTW, on a purely personal note the phrase ‘boys will be boys’ is something I have heard just as often in my life from females and mothers. And why did the producer shoot men as though they were standing against a wall like in all the thousands of firing squad movies we’ve seen?

Gillette took a #MeToo movement against those males that sexually harassed to a platform indicting every male’s behavior and their duty to the next generation of males to boot!

Do males really need a shaving brand to lecture them on the bad behavior of a few and their supposed collective toxicity? I think not and unfortunately their attempt at what I call Extreme Branding will backfire for some time to come. After all switching shaving brands is not a big decision and Gillette is by no means unique. It is somewhat harder to move away from Nike products.

Hopefully they are going to evolve this campaign back to the original basis of the ‘The Best a Man’ campaign by celebrating the admirable aspects of manhood as opposed to taking on a gratuitous grandstanding attack on it.

Perhaps P&G should have taken note of Bud Light’s highly successful, ‘Dilly, Dilly!’ campaign where taking a stand ‘for the many and not the few’ actually works.

Or more so, look at their own excellent history of taking aging brands and reintroducing them to the young. I helped P&G do so in the successful re-launching both Old Spice and Head and Shoulders brands.

P&G’s Dawn Detergent’s, saving at-risk wildlife campaign is one of the more brilliant pieces of Extreme Branding I have seen. Their platform of strength and mildness was taken to an even higher level when they moved it into the ugly tragedy of oil spoils.

So what are the lessons here?

Extreme branding can certainly re-activate the presence and potential relevance of a brand to new generations but it can also backfire in profound ways.

Some tips:

1. Pick your poison carefully. It is fine for the brand to have an Extreme Branding platform but this is not about a strategy looking for a noisy cause. It is about authentic and relevant beliefs.

2.Don’t overstate your brand’s role.A brand can certainly educate, inform and at times be very persuasive on social issues. Chances are that many more eyeballs are going to see the Gillette advertising than may read the #MeToo news. So be sure you know what the role of the brand’s message is out there and make sure you are turning a lot more on than off, or you will be hurting the very cause you are trying to help.

3.Be Smart.Extreme Branding is a long-term strategy. Treat it as such and fight the battle to win overtime. Don’t just pop your head up, yell a little and then sit back down. Where Gillette goes next can well determine their fate in my mind at least.

What say you?

 

Filed Under: Business Book Author Branding, Business Growth Branding, career building, Extreme Branding, Global Branding, marketing, New Product Branding, social media, Uncategorized, Woke advertising

Huge Mistake Branding Agencies Make

October 27, 2017 by


A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.

You need to grow revenues. Your brand works hard for you, but it needs some help. It’s tired and just not as competitive as it should be.

Time for a branding agency to step in.

You talk to your peers and search away. A short list of worthy contenders dukes it out, and you make your pick. Harry & Mary & Mo climb on board and like all good agency teams, immediately set about to learn what is going on with your brand and your customers, consumers, partners and all those stakeholders that touch it.

They review your historical data; conduct interviews, surveys and keyword searches. It is stimulating and revealing.

Well, maybe not all that revealing. Much you already know. In fact, you and colleagues probably told them most of what they played back to you regarding the brand picture today.

Yes, they did present an interesting insight from their learning, and by golly, some of the brand work from that insight is really cool.

Stop there. From this point on you are wasting your time and money.

Here’s why.

Almost all interview and discovery work is based on today. What people think of the brand today – strengths, weaknesses, gaps, and opportunities versus others and so on.

That is all very well but if the context for the exploration is not in the future and what the role of the brand will be in that future then it’s just an exercise in design with little chance of being relevant in a year or three and with slim chance of competing for growth.

One way or another I have seen thousands of brand development proposals and results/recommendation presentations. Many are indeed creative. But most give little credence to where your business needs or wants to go and how the brand will help make that happen.

You cannot possibly build a successful brand strategy unless you understand how the company will grow, what brand target will make that happen and what role the brand will need to have in driving that target to achieve the growth.

A trendy watchmaker was shown how to make their brand even trendier, but the work forgot to understand how the brand was going to survive the impending onslaught of like competitors. A cursory look at their growth path revealed it wasn’t so much the cool design factor that would grow their business but their foothold in a female gift-giving market that could propel them through the next five years no matter what the competition did. This strategic shift dictated the entire brand approach. Still trendy but focused on gift giving wonderment.

A major wholesaler in the food business was continuing to move their tenured brand along the expected path of selection, reliability, and supply when a planning session revealed the enormous opportunity to service the food safety part of their business. So much so that the entire company decided to focus all sales and marketing efforts there over the next five years. As such, the brand would morph into a bold leader in food safety. Big, deliberate move that they would not have taken with their brand unless they looked down the road.

A world-class snack maker had allowed their brand to assume a rather quiet role in a wide portfolio of products and distribution channels. All fine and dandy and a brand refresh was well fresh. However again a squint along the growth path revealed a huge reward in sales and profits if the brand aggressively focused on one channel only, not all. The focus informed the new brand work and is helping push sales and EBITDA to record levels.

The world famous motorbike brand entered the digital world with much chaos. Some thirty-two ‘official’ websites emerged with differing tones, messages, audiences, and offers. Strong brands can survive this chaos but over time competitors with fewer distractions take advantage. Not one person responsible for the brand at any of their agencies bothered to sit with the company leaders and ask the difficult but critically important question of where the company needed to be in sales or profit in the next three to five years. As a consequence brand work continued but confusion reigned, and two major competitors began stealing share through direct digital relationships. A new agency did ask the right questions. They found a way to reduce the number of sites to one and greatly strengthen the brand’s focus and customer outreach.

The list goes on, and the story is typically the same.

Building brands for today is an exercise in competitive disadvantage. Building a brand for rocket growth is courageous certainly, but as oft said, if you don’t know where you are going you will never get there.

We live and die in rocket growth and helping brands focus on their trajectory not on their logo. Font gazing saps your future. Call us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Brand on Life Support

July 29, 2017 by


A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.There is a brand, an important brand, that has approval ratings way down in the teens (even lower than cockroaches and traffic jams according to a US World study) … and maybe beyond hope.

Most Americans, sadly agree that the US Congress is floundering. And more so today. Dysfunctional, petty and seemingly incapable of achieving much of anything. There is a reason that ‘drain the swamp’ was a particularly popular campaign message in the recent Presidential election.

Even the victorious party that just swept into power cannot get a new health-care plan agreed … and after supposedly working on it for over seven years. Little hope for tax reform or the other so called campaign promises.

Certainly, ‘Congress’ is not a brand in the conventional sense. Tough to buy off the shelf or from a car dealership. But anytime you ask people for their support and more so their funds then you are judged no differently. Would you rather give your money to your senator or buy a new TV, or more to the point, pay your bills?

But what is most alarming is that young Americans who want careers where they ‘can make a difference in the world’ are not choosing politics. Even political science students, according to studies conducted by Rutgers and Harvard, favored ‘community service’ two-to-one over ‘politics’ as the means to achieve their goals. Similar sentiments were found among high school students also researched.

When smart, young folk are looking at career choices and see that what was once an honorable, admired profession is now more about finger-pointing than policy making, they look to other ways to help the world. Interestingly entrepreneurship, which would in the past be seen as the antithesis of political action, is to many seen as a better way to help.

Some polls do show favorability scores for one’s own elected Congress person, but even that is falling. Many see that when their successful candidate goes off to Washington they are caught up in a broken system where no one seems to be able to move the ball forward.

So what to do?

We all know that money is at play. The cost to compete and win as a Member of Congress is out of reach of many. ‘Influence’ money pops up all over Washington. Privacy is also a problem. Few want to face the brutal scrutiny of the Internet and media if all they end up with is a bad book deal.

Yes, you don’t have to be a Senator or Representative to play ‘inside the beltway’ game, but the smelly bad stuff trickles down hill. It has a way of collecting at all levels and gunking up everyone’s good intentions.

So again what to do?

To be brutally honest I am not sure. It will obviously have to be a bipartisan coming together of some kind. Some incentive to work across the aisle. And it probably has a lot to do with finding and nurturing a new crop of capable leaders.

This is comprehensive ‘system’ reform, and we all know how long anything tied to the word ‘reform’ can take!

Is there something in our brand bag of tricks? Well, let’s see.

Thinking of Congress as a brand you could begin to offer up a new face, literally.

We will always give smart, young people a chance. Let’s identify and begin publicly rewarding and supporting the new faces of Congress who are making a positive and not just ‘politically driven’ difference. This is not and should not be partisan. This is all about strong, determined Senators, Congress men and women working for real change and not party or special interest favor.

So what about the money, I keep talking about?

Well, those rewarded should be funded by the growing class of wealthy private donors who pledge to give based on demonstrated honest, authentic change and not ideological mania.

Call it the Gabebufzuk Project (for Gates, Bezos, Buffet, and Zuckerberg). The wealthiest Americans will, by law set aside each year ten million dollars for the one person or team in Congress that makes the most difference for the American people and have it ratified by an online, national vote.

Overly simplistic. Pollyannaish maybe but at least it is a public attempt to right an arguably swamp-stuck ship. At this rate, if the perceptions and processes of Congress do not change it will become a brand of even older, more tired folk with less support and consequence. What then?

What say you?

 

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Business Book Author Branding, Business Growth Branding, Global Branding, Political Brandi9ng, social media, Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,

How Brands Survive Bricks to Clicks

June 26, 2017 by


A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.There is nothing sadder, I think than seeing an empty space in a shopping center, once filled by a vibrant, bustling retailer.

E-commerce is no longer a new growth segment. It is now shaping the future of retailing. Aided and abetted of course by savvy consumers who shop the retail options they want, without moving more than their finger.

Yes, we get it. This is not news. And ‘brick’ retailers are already finding ways to marry ‘bricks with clicks’… personalized offers, store pick-up/return, etc.

But now Amazon is reported to be acquiring premier food retailer Whole Foods. Bricks and clicks galore!

There are all sorts of predictions and scenarios on what this will mean to traditional brick retailers. Especially as it relates to the future of large format retailers? Do we really need to battle our way to and through the local Costco, Target or Wal-Mart? Why can’t we buy online and have them battle their way to us? Uber of everything?

And more to the point (as it always is) why do we, consumers, have to pay for that large space (as we always will). Give us what we want in an affordable, convenient way, and we’ll take it every time. And that probably means that we won’t be paying for the real estate taxes, utilities, and wages that the local, debt-ridden municipalities will seek from your ‘big box’ facilities.

What does this all mean to traditional brand retailers?

So you are a brand that has spent years, if not decades, building its reputation and support through the shopping experience.

You may be like a local hardware store that thrived for years near me with its jam-packed shelves and friendly staff. Customers walked in with some piece from a broken old faucet and walked out with the right part and emboldened with the knowledge of how to fix it. You survived a Home Depot opening near by and a move to a bigger space. But you couldn’t compete on price and still pay the costs to keep your doors open. You are now a large empty space in a strip mall.

What do you need to do to survive this rather miserable scenario?

Hey, brighten up. You own the one thing that no new brand or new online store can ever have. You have been successful in brick and mortar shopping for a long time. Chances are you have built a familiar and trusted brand relationship with your local community. There is absolutely no reason why your brand reputation will not transfer to the digital world and be even more successful.

It is really as simple as understanding your brand story.

Take that hardware store above. I cannot get anywhere near the same help or solutions from Home Depot or any website as I once did from that store. Even if I had somehow I wouldn’t feel as confident or supported.

So set up a ‘knowledge’ site with video integration where I can connect, show you my broken faucet. You’ll help. If I need a part you’ll deliver it from a supply warehouse (maybe have a local charity deliver and be part of your Millennial’s ’cause related, purpose-driven community’) or you’ll send a plumber with a new faucet, etc. Whatever. The idea is that you transfer your knowledge brand story to an online retail opportunity. Site costs are still a lot cheaper than the mounting store costs.

Knowledge is the new ‘secret sauce’ in digital retailing. It is also the great equalizer. With more and changing options for every shopping item in the world, knowledge is invaluable, profitable and competitively sustainable.

Yes, I know there is a ‘depends’ comment here. How can you replicate the smell of fresh bakery online or new car leather or ogle a paper thin TV or try on the new fashion, etc.? All good issues but also creatively solvable with technology and understanding your brand message.

We believe that with rare exception ‘brick’ retail brands can survive and indeed thrive in the new digital age. It’s all about brand story, not bricks.

We at Rocket Branding love this stuff. Call us, and we’ll help find your online brand story and profitable future.

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Business Growth Branding, Global Branding, New Product Branding, social media, Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,

Hope or Fear. Where Brands Thrive or Die.

June 8, 2017 by


A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.Wall Street believes ‘greed’ and ‘fear’ drive financial markets. These two emotional states have also driven brand growth for decades. But something is changing, and one could argue that ‘greed’ is now best stated as ‘hope’, at least for branding purposes. Disregard this change at your peril.

Let’s break it down.

‘Fear’ is easy to understand. Consider brands for insurance, medicine, and security. Not the kind of products we think of first thing in the morning, or at all, if we can help it. We buy them when we fear the consequences of not doing so.

Insurance brands like Geico, Progressive, and Aflac, try to break through this lethargy with entertaining characters – lizards, ducks (and of course the omnipresent Flo) with ‘no-fuss-less-money’ approaches. They try to overcome disinterest without the heavy hand of fear. Then there is Allstate’s Mayhem campaign that hits you over the head with it. Literally.

Drug and medical brands also depend on the ‘fear and consequence’ mindset. Let’s not delve into irritable bowel syndrome and such, but you see how playing on fear works to drive these brands.

‘Greed’ on the other hand is all about the things we want. A whole lot more engaging. Luxury, shiny, creamy, gooey, exotic travel, exquisite perfumes. The list goes on. Stuff that excites, pleasures and feeds our self-indulgences and social image.

Qantas Airlines enjoys one of the best safety records in the world but rarely promotes it. Comfort, service, and destination are all better selling points than the scary safety notions. Car brands are notorious purveyors of greed. Sleek, sexy, fast. Volvo played the family safety card. Even though successful over the years, it has been difficult for them to also sell the performance and image of that owners seek.

If you understand where your brand competes in the ‘greed and fear’ contexts, you will know how to position, message and market it.

But as mentioned at the beginning, for the first time in maybe five decades, this I believe is changing and quite profoundly so.

Fear is still fear but greed is in many ways is much less in vogue. At one time it was quite aspirational to be wealthy and successful. Big car, big home, big career. You were to be congratulated, envied and even admired.

No so much today. Perspectives have changed. The rich are still rich and even richer. But the poor populations, the environment, and nature are all at higher risks and the stigma of power mongering and corruption among ‘elites’ the world over is now at a flash point. New terms like ‘clean the swamp’, ‘populist view’ and ‘purpose-driven’ marketing are emblematic of this.

I remember at one time being on the team to sell the new American Express Green Card campaign, ‘Membership has its privileges globally. It was very successful in the North America but not so internationally. To many cultures, only the ruling classes enjoyed privileges. I believe that North America has caught up with this now and again the idea of greed or excess so to speak is no longer PC.

So what do we do? Clearly, consumers still want their luxuries and pleasures and will buy brands in this context. But be careful.

If your brand is supported by those over 50, I’d say be as hedonistic as you want. But if your consumer base is under 40 and Millennial then I would rethink your Greed platform.

Folks under 40 have a greater sensitivity to the notion of greed partly because of the basic inequality or injustice issues, but also importantly because of uncertainty of the future and more so their future. Clearly fear has crept into greed. Some of this is real of course in terms of the health and safety of the world, but some of it is also from the daily flood of negative news. Between the 24/7 broadcast news and social digital media, we not only get all the negative world headlines (bad news sells) but we get on the spot, real time videos with the more scandalous zooming around the Internet at warp speed. So we not only hear the official news but also the supposedly ‘real’ backstory often from someones’ cell phone.

We hear and see way too much of the bad stuff, and it plays major havoc with our sensitivities and sense of well-being.

So here is my simple answer.

Let’s rethink ‘greed’ as ‘hope’ and if our brand needs to live in the ‘I want more’ space (formerly known as ‘greed’) be very careful how we moderate our message and present our brand. It’s not just about being better but being human. It’s not about isolated individuals but social fun and engagement. More authenticity. Less BS.

Bottom line. If you are building a brand in a ‘fear’ context, go at it full blast but if you favor the ‘greed’ context then at least think long a hard about moving into a ‘hope’ context where humanity and authenticity thrive.

We love this stuff at Rocket Branding.

What say you?

 

Filed Under: Business Book Author Branding, Business Growth Branding, Global Branding, New Product Branding, Political Brandi9ng, social media, Uncategorized

Brand Bashing … The New Norm?

February 25, 2017 by


A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.Saw this on Facebook, apparently reposted from TV celeb, Anthony Bourdain.

Asking myself have we moved into a new era of public ridicule? Is extreme disrespect a new norm?

Could anyone imagine a similar President Obama doll zooming around the Internet in his first month in office?

Yes, we all understand free speech and free markets. As distasteful as this is someone has the right to make, sell and promote this doll. (And here I am of course, unfortunately, furthering the image’s exposure). Every day there are similarly low posts all over the Internet.

“Hey did you see the one about Putin leading Trump around like a dog?”

So here is my question.

Regardless of your politics is this good for America?

Is it Ok to so personally and publicly attack the President of the United States in this manner? Are we now going to show our disagreement with someone’s view or preference by personally debasing them?

Certainly, Trump was the ‘against-all-odds’ nominee and his ‘plain speaking – call for change’ posture has been a lightning rod for the opposition’s wrath, but why does it have to be so childish and ugly?

This kind of thing has happens from time-to-time, but cooler heads usually prevail, and the discourse returns to a higher level. Not now. It appears that many of the loudest voices out there in Hollywood and the media are on such a tear against Trump and his policies that nothing is too crass or mean-spirited. And it doesn’t look like it is going to let up anytime soon.

And more to the point, many who oppose Trump and who would normally keep that on higher ground are relishing these barrages and pushing for more gutter sniping. SNL used to be funny now it’s just a Trump trashing show. CNN used to be balanced news now it’s a constant drumbeat on everything Trump bad, every day.

So is this extreme brand bashing going to become a normal tactic for politics? And if so, will it transfer to how we brand builders take on competitors? Wouldn’t be the first time. Regretfully it’s the outrageous, witless stuff that seems to fuel the social, digital marketing world in which we compete.

I guess, or at least I hope, that this style of brand marketing will not prevail and that we will all return to that place where we can disagree on ideas but agree on respectful and dignified behavior.

The world is always watching and judging. Right now they see this stuff and again regardless of their politics America just looks stupid and small.

I strongly recommend that brand builders do not ‘go gutter,’ not only because it brings your brand down, but it also weakens quality perceptions over time.

Remember the age-old truth. People don’t want to know what the other won’t do for them until they know what you will. A lesson well-learned by Hillary Clinton’s Campaign and apparently is still being learned by her rabid, party supporters who are just hell bent on bashing away.

What say you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Business Book Author Branding, Business Growth Branding, Political Brandi9ng, social media, Uncategorized

The ’30 Rule’ Rules

February 1, 2017 by


A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.30% support you and will, no matter what. 30% won’t and probably never will.

It’s the 30% in the middle that needs convincing. The other 10% never seem to matter.

In almost half a century of building branded businesses, I find this rule to be such a great tool. I don’t even know where it came from. Heck, perhaps I made it up.

There is no better example than in politics. And now we may even be seeing a whole new wrinkle in the ’30 Rule’ with the new Trump White House. Barely two weeks into his Presidency and already it is clear that the word ‘support’ in this definition is inadequate.

Clearly, some 30% do strongly support what President Trump is trying to do. He is doing what he said he would do over the last 18 months. However, there is the other 30% who do not support him at all, indeed they seem to openly hate him at some level. The 30 in the middle clearly have a bit of both. Enough of the ‘middle’ voted for him to win but my guess is that many are just waiting to see what happens before they confirm more support or not.

Interestingly, I see similar phenomena in the upcoming Super Bowl. Typically fans will fall into the three buckets with varying degrees of fanaticism for or against their team, and yes there is passion, but again there seems to be an unusually high amount of angst among the 30% non-supporters especially for the favorite, New England Patriots. Seems you either like them or hate them a lot.

Apparently, the stronger and more dominant those are perceived to be, the more intensely the detractors dectractthese days?

I saw the same in the UK last year with Brexit. Those for it were relatively quiet and were able to rally a greater percentage of the middle bucket than the opposition. The opposition though was much more angry and vitriolic … and remains vigilantly so.

So what does all this mean to brand ed businesses and rocketing them?

Two things.

Firstly, go ahead apply the ’30 rule’ to your brand market. Yes, I know the specific percentages may change somewhat from brand to brand but think about the principle. You have a brand-building budget. What is the best way to apply it to encourage rocket growth?

A little bit for everyone – lovers, haters, middlers? Costly.
Go after non-supporters who are tending more towards haters today? Good luck with that.

Go after lovers? Hmm, don’t you already have them and especially now as the more the haters hate, the lovers support. Possible waste of money.

What then?

Well, how about identifying the potential lovers in the middle and pushing them further into your bucket? That is turning them from supporters to advocates? Thereby expanding the love bucket and hopefully, in doing so, increase brand purchases and frequency. And also importantly provide a bigger antidote to the negativity from the hater camp.

This leads to the second thought.

Beware your brand detractors.

In this new digital world, haters are more vocal and gather as ‘victims-in-arms.’ They can and will mount noisy and emotional campaigns to the middle folk. This can be nasty, personal and disrupting. Trump’s case again.

Of course the term ‘haters’ maybe a tad strong for those negative to your brand. They may just be ambivalent which could be a worse problem. The point remains the same, however. Unless you see the dire need to somehow offset the negative bucket, then we would suggest you aggressively focus on your brand lovers and particularly potential lovers in the middle.

Regarding Trump brand? Well, it is quite simple. His Presidency’s promises are his brand promises. He was elected on those promises and his expected ability to fulfill them. At this stage, if he succeeds in doing what he says he would do, especially with jobs and security, then all is good. If not then his non-supporters will become even more emboldened to hate just that much more.

I do have a final word for him though, and this gets to the heart of his America First position. He has certainly painted the picture of a need to ‘strengthen America again’ but in deference to the globalists, rather than stop there we suggest that he start making the point that a stronger America means a stronger world. Strength starts at home and spreads. If the US is weak then the world is weaker.

What say you?

We at Rocket Branding love this stuff.

Filed Under: Business Book Author Branding, Business Growth Branding, Political Brandi9ng, Political Branding, social medai, social media, Uncategorized Tagged With: , ,

It’s Caddyshack Time.

October 18, 2016 by


A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.Is Trump Al Czervik, the bawdy, politically incorrect businessman that takes on Judge Smails and his elite, country club establishment? Or at least he might hope so.

Before the barrage of sexual misconduct stories, you could say that the presidential race was still within the confines of the grimy politics of the House of Cards series. Now it,s full-out pop tabloid warfare. Policies forgotten, the media is having their best time ever with Bill Clinton’s dalliances, Hillary’s endless e-mail gaffes and of course Trump’s ‘p**sy grabbing, locker room banter.’ Why even the Kardashians are envious.

Can the Trump brand channel Rodney Dangerfield’s lovable, ‘I get no respect,’ ‘for-the-little-people’ character and save the day? Or is the brand beyond even the perennial box office draw of the underdog champion?

Do enough American female voters look beyond Trump’s foibles or are the endless polls and pundits right in predicting Hillary’s inevitable victory with a few weeks to go?

I guess we’ll find out, but in time left, brand experts what would you do to ensure victory for either brand?

Some thoughts:

Hillary’s brand is shaky but OK. Her ‘career politician’ label is still a double-edged sword. Supports her experience but turns off the growing numbers who feel ‘Washington’ has failed them. If all the pollsters are right then it’s her’s to lose at this stage. So probably best to stay the course. Push policy and ‘Presidential tone’ and keep goading Trump. Yes, it’s possible that more damaging emails will surface. It would have to be pretty bad to change the game. She has already been exposed for probable lies, possible Clinton Foundation issues and her unfortunate views of voters … deplorable etc. But it is probably all ‘baked in’ at this stage. And as long as she stands up in public, her health issues if any will not be a factor.

Now to Donald. Well, as mentioned earlier, a tough path to victory. Again if you believe the experts, Trump’s poor numbers among women will be hard to reverse especially with the prospect of the first female POTUS let alone more ‘sexual predator’ stories. This on top of reports that his ground game is no match for the Democratic Machine in the supposed ‘swing’ States.

But we are brand experts and love a challenge, right?

This may well be impossible, but Trump should try to take the spotlight off him and put it back on the American voter. Like Al for the little people, not for him.

His supporters are reportedly still with him. If he spends the time left fighting his accusers, then he will do little to woo new voters … women or ‘undedicededs.’ His ground and media support are not favorable. He needs to muster all his media genius and focus on one message. It’s not about me. It has never been about me. It is about YOU and WINNING. The bigger the Government. The bigger the loss for YOU. Let US fix the problems and get us back to jobs, peace, and prosperity. If you believe that the likes of Hillary, Obama, Pelosi and so on will lead us out of the mess, we are in, then vote for them. If you want change. If you want to be able to support your family and have some control over your life then vote for my party and together we’ll make American Great Again. Vote For us, for our children and the world.

Further, with this as an opening, he needs to get personal so that voters can see themselves in what he is saying. Something like. Today you pay X% of your income in Government costs. That was Y% before Obama and Hillary took over. Vote for her and bigger govt. and you will pay 2X% in four years, and your children will each have $X million dollars in debt on their head every day. If you make less than $50K with the current regime, you are more likely to be closer to the poverty line than in no other time in history. Quality education and health services will be out of your reach, and shared housing and living will become your new norm. Yes, dark picture but it is America’s reality unless we do something about it.

Now I have no idea if any of this is possible or even true, but quite frankly the Hillary brand will prevail unless the Trump brand can go back to their original premise and make it real. Just like Al in Caddyshack if Trump can be the peoples’ force against the ‘establishment’ then his message may resonate with voters as they go into the booth. Hey, it might coalesce his party and even bring in a few Bernie Sanders voters who are still skeptical of a Hillary Government? Win-win for all.

What say you?

We love this stuff at Rocketbranding.com. Let us know what you think.

 

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Business Book Author Branding, Business Growth Branding, Global Branding, Uncategorized Tagged With: ,

When Bad Brands Collide.

September 15, 2016 by


A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.Well, here we are. The big choice. Hillary or Trump? An incredibly important choice between two huge but sadly unpopular brands. Not Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump but ‘Hillary’ and ‘Trump.’ The brands are that precisely defined now and recognizable as such the world over.

Unfortunately behind that exalted status are very low levels of popularity and respect. When the dust settles, it is hard to imagine the losing supporters accepting the other candidate. In fact one could argue that this is about ‘voting against’ more than ‘voting for.’ The popular phrase – ‘I’ll vote for anyone but …”

The stakes are ridiculously high. International and domestic issues have never been more complex or uncertain. The next ‘leader of the free world’ will have less margin for error than any other in history and unless that individual can lead a government that unifies and creates positive momentum for all, then tough times will be the new norm.

Yes, I know someone will find a speech from a hundred years ago that spouts the same gloom and yes, we all survived just fine. Far be it for me to be so learned and profound, but humor me. Let’s play this out.

You are the brand master for Hillary or Trump. Do you take the high road like Obama did and promise love and unity or do you play the anyone-but-the-other card and just hammer the bejesus out of the opposing brand?

My guess is that everyone would prefer to take the high road and tout unity and hope for all. Hal Riney wrote perhaps the sweetest Presidential ‘love’ campaign ever for Ronald Reagan called “Morning in America.” Made you cry.

But then the new media reality pops up and no matter what positive pitch your candidate makes someone will find a grainy clip or dog-eared speech from childhood that will serve to knock your contender right off the high road. And then, well, it’s time to start pointing fingers again and poking at your opponent for their similarly shoddy history.

So Mr. or Mrs. or Mx. Brand Master, how do you help your Hillary or Trump brand win and save the world to boot?

Well here’s a thought. I have not read Trump’s book the Art of the Deal, but I do like the notion of ‘win-win’ that most deal makers support. Who doesn’t? Everyone is happy. What if your candidate announced a radical new approach that made their unpopular aspects dissolve in the bold pursuit of real solutions?

If this was a business, you might entertain the idea of having, not one, but two official Vice Presidents. One dedicated to each of the two biggest problems facing the US and the world – ‘jobs’ and ‘peace’ – with real resources and goals. Yes, you could say that this is just more government, etc. but perhaps by doing this, all voters can start to believe that there is hope for solutions and action? This might soften the blow for Hillary haters or establish a higher level of credibility for Trump haters. And maybe restore some respect for politicians? (Well, maybe that is a bit too optimistic)

Or how about this? What if one of the candidates gets up and announces a new world initiative, called UNOJ, The United Nations of Jobs. It’s not hard to see that the biggest single problem today is people finding jobs. Disenfranchised young people are becoming terrorists. Mature workers are losing out to robots. People, not working grind capitalist countries to a halt and create untold anarchy for the others. What if the new world order’s mantra was ‘jobs for all’ and the UNOJ was legitimate and singularly focused on that one goal? Pollyanna-ish? Of course. Naïve? Certainly. But at least it’s an attempt at changing the narrative from the usual ‘well he/she said this shitty thing about kittens BS’, that just sinks a Presidential brand and turns off voters.

Hey, perhaps Trump can use his famous border wall as the HQ for the UNOJ and change it from a border crossing to a job fair? Or Hillary can use her rich Clinton Foundation as a sponsor?

Ok, so there are my feeble attempts. What thoughts do you have brand wizards?

Can we innovate and provide the American voter with credible hope for the ‘good’ brand America? Or are we now just destined to remain divided, mediocre and lost?

We love this stuff at Rocket Branding. Let us know what you think of a way forward for either brand? [email protected]

Filed Under: Uncategorized

BREXIT … A Stand for Sovereignty

July 2, 2016 by


A soldier is putting something on another soldier 's face.I was in Athens, this time last year, and witnessed ‘Grexit,’ the Greek’s agonizing vote to leave the European Union. They voted to stay in the EU.

And, last week, I was in London, in the midst of Brexit, UK’s similar battle. They voted to leave the EU.

Different outcomes but largely driven by the same basic issue … protecting sovereignty i.e. not having others dictate their future and culture. The Greek’s poor economy trumped their ability to rid themselves of EU rule but the Brits are financially able to stand-alone. They can regain independence from EU leadership and more pointedly control the open in-flow of unskilled migrants. They lower the wages, soak up the social benefits, fuel the fear of terrorism, and in time, change the culture.

These are emotionally charged decisions and run deep and wide across the populations. It would be somewhat akin to a California or Texas deciding to become independent of the US. It strikes at the heart of the livelihoods and security of each individual. Over the next year we’ll watch the same story play out for many other European countries who will also be assessing their sovereignty and independence in light of a possible ‘exit’ from the EU.

So what is really happening here and, importantly as ‘master branders’ what should we take from all this?

Well actually it is fairly simple.

As generations march forward things change and some times that change is quite pivotal. In each case, Grexit and Brexit, the older generations voted overwhelming for ‘exit’. They wanted to keep their cultures and traditions and resented deeply the changes they saw around them with foreign migrants taking over their neighborhoods, jobs and social benefits, terrorism etc.

The younger generations (under 35) certainly understand the loss of tradition but they are in a completely different place. They voted to stay. They are underemployed. They want jobs and see the opportunity to freely travel throughout the larger European market as an enormous benefit. This is certainly the case with Greece with very high unemployment for under 30’s but also in the UK where again the chance to easily work in other countries is tremendously beneficial.

The younger generations are also very different in some very important ways. They are more globally oriented and connected. They are less trusting of politicians, moderately ‘sovereignty-centric’ and generally much more sensitive to the overall global condition … environment, resources, hope for everyone. Yes, they do understand and respect tradition but “it’s really tough when you are still living at home”. “And it would be really great if they could find a better way to live on earth”.

This is not just European. Younger voters, the world-over is similar. In the US they jumped on the Sander’s ‘share the wealth’ and the Trump ‘anti-establishment’ platforms in droves in the current election season. These aren’t ‘stay the traditional course’ and rigid sovereignty sentiments.

All this I believe triggers quite a sea change.

We really need to take a pause and have a serious look at the next 5-10 years or so and see what this all means to these new generations of consumers, leaders and influencers. Brands that do not do this are at great peril of falling way off the radar of this new group. A mere whiff of personal irrelevance will be whisked away with a click, swipe or touch. Brands that get it will thrive big time. Brands that don’t will die quickly. And the sad thing is that they may not know it until it is too late.

We at Rocket Branding have a grand global view and understand how this relates to each individual across the age and need spectrums. Let us help you plot the future of your brand. www.rocketbranding.com. 312 316 5290.

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Business Book Author Branding, Business Growth Branding, Global Branding, Uncategorized
Next Page »