Gone are the days when having a Playboy on your coffee table was making a statement that you wanted to say. The market didn’t change, Playboy lost it’s editorial edge — by becoming a public company that slowly focused on short term profits instead of long term growth. Today, that growth is more important than ever, with beautiful women clicks away and magazines like Maxim, FHM, and Stuff competing with editorial content. Playboy is in a dying industry and losing ground by being stuck in the middle.
This article in AdAge published on July 15th asks the question, what should the magazine do?
Playboy was once the bastion of the playboy culture — jetsetting, lavish lifestyles, and the pursuit of pleasure. It’s Playboy’s DNA, and many would argue Playboy as being one of the most recognizable brands in the world. Still, that DNA is being burned through by cheap licensing deals that erode the brand by meaningless brand representation (Playboy handbag, anyone?).
Playboy needs to pull in their reigns, go private and get back to the sole purpose of why they exist. Licensing is not the most important part of the business — having absolute control over the brand is. If, as Playboy’s Editorial Director Jimmy Jellinek says, Playboy is ” the political, moral and ideological high ground” above all other magazines, then they better start acting like it with everything their brand does.
Playboy used to be a celebration of the hedonistic lifestyle, which just about every man could either relate to or strive towards by some degree. The only way for Playboy to be relevant again is to take a few risks and restore the brand’s soul back to the forefront of the company. There may be risks now, but opportunities will arise to profit, and it won’t be through the magazine or meaningless licensing deals. Until Playboy redefines the lifestyle of a playboy, we’ll won’t get to see what those opportunities may be.
Condé Nast is changing its business model from from ad driven (70% of its revenue) to charging its readers more for the content. It’s an obvious move, but how will this play out for the future?
The magazine era is over. The website as a hub for content is almost done. Content is comfortably digital and publishers are losing control of the channel and now the distribution. Any business that is built on how they deliver its content must build a new model that relies on the value of the content more than anything else.
I’m not saying Condé Nast and others aren’t building a new model. Instead, I’m asking how Condé Nast plans to ask its customers to pay? It won’t be through an iPad app, or a website subscription, and certainly not for print.
I firmly believe that people will pay for truly excellent content they cannot find anywhere else, and that free web content like The New York Times and The New Yorker needs to come to an end — but not without a solution.
Flipboard is the future, and it’s just a humble start. I’m not sure we’ve figured out exactly how to deliver a perfect user experience when it comes to content delivered by many algorithms rather than an editor. I don’t think the magazine style is it, but we’ll figure that out.
My question is this: If a mix of paid content and related advertising fed to us by our social networks becomes the popular channel of distribution, how will companies like Condé Nast charge for content when the distribution is community driven?
Viewing the sales data in wake of the new Old Spice campaign that started back in February, I’ve seen these reports:
Sales for Old Spice Body Wash are up 16.7% (via CampaignBrief quoting Forbes)
Sales for Old Spice Body Wash are up 7.9% (via same Forbes article)
Sales for Old Spice Red Zone Body Wash are down 7% (via BNET)
We have two problems here:
First, I have no idea where CampaignBrief is getting their numbers. The Forbes article they quote doesn’t even have the same numbers!
Second, it appears sales are UP for Old Spice Body Wash (in which there are 18 brands according to @AdLawGuy), and DOWN for Old Spice Red Zone Body Wash.
The research company, Symphony IRI, is quoted as the source in each article (from a 52 week report that ended June 13th), but no links to the direct source are given. I gave them a call, and left a message at some voicemail…
Here’s the point. However you spin the numbers (whatever they actually are), the campaign appears to have increased sales overall. I don’t recall anywhere in the campaign where “Red Zone” is specifically mentioned, just ‘Old Spice body wash’. Even if Red Zone sales are down, it doesn’t matter if overall body wash sales are up.
Most of the chatter I’ve seen is how the campaign was inneffective and sales are down. Let’s get the facts clear before we try to attract more traffic to our site with salacious headlines.
Levis has brilliantly told their story of what they believe in by investing more than a million dollars in the small town of Braddock, PA - into their community center and urban farming efforts.
“We wanted to engage consumers in a conversation about real work,” Doug Sweeny, Levi’s U.S. VP of brand marketing, tells the New York Times. “The apparel category can be about posing, about being somebody you’re not … you always feel your true, authentic self when you put on a pair of Levi’s jeans.”
Why does this matter?
A brand is an idea, belief, or vision empowered by people. People who do more than just make a product. For Levi’s, they believe in something - the value of work and community, and they don’t just talk about it, they do something about it.
The best PR is your reputation, and the best advertising is action and engagement.
Says the Mayor of Braddock, “Across the board, it is an authentic, organic partnership,” Mr. Fetterman said. “At no point did it ever feel it was a marketing campaign.”
Engagement is just as important here, and Levi’s is opening up community workshops all across America. The first one, in San Francisco, focuses on printmaking and making paper out of old jeans.
If you find value in brands being true to themselves, going beyond advertising and making an authentic impact in engaging their community, then this campaign is an excellent case study.
I’ve been a fan of the auto company Saab for a long time. I’ve watched the brand get strangled to death under GM ownership, watched a sale to Koenigsegg fall through, and was on the edge of my seat while just DAYS before liquidation, while thousands of Saab owners held rallies in support of Saab, Spyker rescued Saab from GM.
While most marketers would write off Saab as a dead brand, I would disagree. Battered, but not dead. Saab has a strong DNA: A history of successful rally racing, a long list of industry innovations, a safety record better than volvo, and a mission to build beautiful, ergonomic designed, efficient, exciting (read: turbocharged) cars.
I’m a believer that Saab will bounce back under it’s new ownership, and I’m really looking forward to see what the new Change Perspective campaign from McCann for the all-new 2011 9-5 brings. We’ve got a very long way to go, but its good to see stuff like this again:
Watch this, and I guarantee it will move you - It gives me goosebumps every time. This is a beautiful campaign for Shangri-La Hotels and Resorts. From Olgilvy & Mather HK
As an aspiring strategist, I’m immediately drawn into understanding why this is so powerful. Why do I get goosebumps? Why do I feel this campaign is effective in connecting with me emotionally?
The narrative is excellent. We are given a story that keeps us engaged by escalating to a point - is the traveler going to die in the cold? Just when you think the surrounding wolves are waiting for their next meal, the story twists..
The animals, whose instincts are natural and pure, choose to show love and compassion in the most precious sense - towards a stranger. The reason this act moves us emotionally is because it says something about us - it renews our hope in humanity - that if wolves are capable of showing the deepest compassion towards one that is not of their own, how capable are we to show that kind of care towards other humans?
And, just as this realization has its emotional impact on us, it’s gently revealed to us that this idea, this most instinctive and valuable quality is embraced by Shangri-La.
It’s not about the how, or the what. In a world where hospitality is dominated by everyone trying to tell me how great their experience is, Shangri-La tells me:
“There’s no greater act of hospitality than to embrace a stranger as one’s own. It’s in our nature.”
Our nature. Our DNA. Our why we do what we do. Perfect.
Music Composer:Bruno Coulais more info: Agency:Ogilvy & Mather, Hong Kong Creative Director:Pierre Desfretier Art Director:Pierre Desfretier Art Director:Genevieve Hardy Producer:James Brook-Partridge Planning:Catherine Moustou Director:Bruno Aveillan Director of Photgraphy:Bruno Aveillan
I’ve seen a few posts floating around about Christian Dior’s new “designer contact lenses”. The lenses are branded with “CD” on the side of them, a black rim along the circumference, and what appears to be gold flakes as coloring.
From what I’ve been reading, everyone is calling this “branding going too far” and “creepy”. You know what? Probably so. But when was the last time you wore that crazy peacock hat you saw on a runway, or some sort of coat/shaw thing that you weren’t even sure how the model put it on?
Clearly, top fashion designers are artists who create art. Most of their art isn’t ready to wear, and most of us couldn’t afford it even if we wanted to. However, they are the top of the fashion world for a reason. Their designs become wearable and they make their way down the fashion chain in one way or another.
I’m excited to see these artists pushing the lines of how their art can be expressed. The most important opportunity for an artist is being able to do anything, good or bad, and the best creative ideas that turn into something valuable end up coming from there. I’m looking forward to seeing what comes next out of this.
I like this new spot for the new 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee by W+K. For the brand, its an obvious attempt to connect at a more emotional level by associating the pride, honor, and values of home grown, American craftmanship.
Although, I have to say, its reaching backwards, not forwards - but not that it’s bad. Definitely not - we have a lot to be proud of. But, most of the stuff they show before the Jeep, we don’t make anymore. We’re not the industrial powerhouse in the world, or even value fine craftmanship as much anymore (when is the last time you saw a building with intricate, time consuming detail being built? We don’t do it).
Building upon the past is a good start, but I would love to see more ads that reached towards the future. How about clips from NEW things being built, from a future we can be proud of? High speed trains, new energy sources, city revitalization, and yes, we do have some craftmanship left we can be proud of. Just a thought.
UPDATE: For the record, I think this ad is moving forwards. I can’t wait to see future spots from W+K for Jeep.
This, while awesome and able to hold my attention, got me thinking. How do advertisements and publicity stunts that utilize technology to “wow” me help tell or enhance the story of a brand? How does this enhance the brand story of BMW?
I think it does greatly, communicating cool, fascination, curiousity, and well, joy. Your thoughts?
