OCTO-BRAND: TACO BELL

Given the demographics of the Super Bowl, it comes as a surprise that Yum Brands' Taco Bell decided to market to the 65+ retirement community.

Why?

The strategy to reach an older, baby boomer segment is a wise one given they have a higher disposable income.  But there are a few disconnects.

The players in the commercial (watch it below) are well beyond Baby Boomers. Octogenarians.

Historically viewers aged 65+ make up only 14% of Super Bowl viewers.

The song track for "We Are Young" by Fun is ...in Spanish?

A conflicting message could come across as "Taco Bell is for old folks".

Frankly, I enjoyed watching the spot and applaud Taco Bell and Deutsch for producing it (yeah I'm old too).  It's a feel good commercial. 

But spending $8 million for a :60 spot with questionable marketing ROI incurs a huge risk.

NOT YOUR FATHER'S 3D

3D Printing, or Additive Manufacturing, is on the leading edge of a massive revolution in manufacturing and distribution on a global scale.  The "cloud" that follows will provide a continuous update on news and events surrounding this disruptive technology.

THE DISRUPTER OF THE NEXT CENTURY

We are sitting on the brink of a new and huge industrial revolution that has been slowly gaining momentum over the last 25 years.

Additive Manufacturing, also known as 3D Printing, has crept along as the technology that drives it moved from a primitive stage to a more sophisticated base.

The potential applications to manufacturing, medicine, media, hobbyists and yes marketing are mind-bending.

The use of 3D printing takes virtual designs from computer aided design and transforms them into thin, virtual, horizontal cross-sections and then creates successive layers until the model is complete. It is a process where the virtual model and the physical model are almost identical.

Think like The Jetson’s.  The 1962 animated sit-com family popped a couple of buttons on what looked like today’s microwave oven and presto! the item they ordered appeared.  The reality of that futuristic animation has come to roost on our doorstep.

A personal 3D Printer can be had today for as little as $400 in kit form. More professional models start at about $1600.  Even Amazon sells them!

Today’s 3D printers have “printed” guitars, model planes with a 6 foot wingspan, human organs for clinical trials and are currently producing parts for jet fighters.  Limited only by our imagination, as these printers become more sophisticated and as common as a TV set in our home, you can bet that distribution and delivery channels will go through enormous upheaval.

Be prepared.  Everything in manufacturing will change as we know it today.

While the impact on marketing has yet to be determined, imagine the distribution of sampling through this new channel.

 That new toy for your child is only a few buttons away. Order the Computer Animated Design (CAD) specs for that toy online, download it to your 3D Printer and wait a few minutes.  Need a replacement part for a broken taillight on a classic 1957 Chevy?  Print it!

Investments in 3D Printing companies today will become the equivalent of Microsoft, Apple, IBM, etc. when they emerged as new businesses.

In 1439 the Gutenberg Press laid the basis for today’s knowledge-based economy and the spread of learning to the masses.  The 3D Printer is the disrupter that will revolutionize global economies through access to a world of product needs.  This will especially be the case for third world countries representing huge growth markets.

If you would like to explore the potential for 3D Printing as it relates to our marketing landscape, feel free to reach out to me at pbenjou@gmail.com.

A NEW CUP

I can't recall the last time I caught a Starbucks commercial but am not surprised I missed this one as it aired in the UK earlier in the year.  It's worth one minute of your time.  Thanks to Jack Dorsey for bringing it to my attention via Twitter @Jack.

FACEBOOK'S BAR CHART FROM HELL

I could not resist the opportunity to copy and paste this post from Bob Hoffman's Ad Contrartian blog.

Facebook has decided that it no longer wants to be in the business of selling clicks. Instead it wants to be in the business of selling reach and frequency, just like the grown-ups.

Of course, this is a cruel joke because reach and frequency mean nothing if the ads are invisible, which they are on Facebook.

This bar chart (to actual scale) does a pretty good job of explaining why they'd rather sell reach and frequency than clicks.




(C) 2012, The Ad Contrarian

For every 10,000 ads they deliver, Facebook gets 5 clicks. What would you want to sell?

THEN AND NOW

One of the remarkable things about technology is the accelerated rate of change that impacts the devices we communicate with. 

For those that remember what a mimeograph machine is and how quickly it was replaced by a variety of ensuing devices leading up to laser and 3D printers, I hope the following journey will provide a nostalgic respite from the ever-so-fast moving world we live in.

Mimeograph replaced by laser and 3D printers

Rotary phone replaced by the iPhone

Typewriter replaced by Microsoft Word

Transistor pocket radio replaced by the iPod

Car phones replaced by hands free bluetooth smartphones

Telephone operator replaced by Siri

Wang Word Processor replaced by laptops

Monroe calculator replaced by solar calculators

Telegram replaced by ... STOP! Available thru American Telegram! 

WHAT IF??

Many pieces make up the whole.

There is much buzz concerning Microsoft's intentions when it announced that IE10 would default to a Do Not Track option for advertising.  What that would do to its ad business (and that of advertiser's ability to target ads) is a concern for many marketers.

Who benefits from such a move? 

It appears that  Microsoft, if it indeed is exiting the ad business, as might also be reflected in its shrinking business staff, is looking to ultimately move users away from Google Chrome, and its tracking default, to a "friendlier" Do Not Track platform.

But let's look under the covers.

What would Microsoft do with its ad business?  The recent announcement by Yahoo's Marissa Mayer to rethink the use of cash from its Alibaba deal (about $7 Billion) leads me to assume a bigger deal is at hand. 

Reverse engineering the merger between Yahoo and Bing, Yahoo could use the cash to buy out the Microsoft ad business, bolstering display and, more importantly Search.  Given Marissa's oversight of Search while at Google, it's not a far fetched scenario.

What do you think?

THE OLYMPICS AND SOCIAL MEDIA

Social Media fans watch and take note.  How the 2012 Olympics will use social media to increase ratings.  Be very, very worried.

Serious or a spoof?
In either case, still very worrisome.

CTR - THE ABUSED STEPCHILD

The CTR topic has been debated for at least ten years.  For a while CTRs were an accepted standard for the measurement of success … primarily for banner/display ads and often spilling over borders into paid search.

When it comes to performance measurement, however, the devil is in the details.  There is nothing wrong with CTRs as a success metric … particularly in the paid search landscape.

Following years of declining returns, the average CTR of 3% in the 1990s fell to 0.1%-0.3% by 2011. This decline can be attributed in part to abuse (click-fraud), sub-standard measurement practices by ad servers and conditioned rejection of annoying ad platforms….banner blindness.

Enter the digerati with flailing arms to explain away this horrendous cliff dive.  CTRs don’t count anymore!

Really?  An easy trap to fall into!

Admittedly, click to conversion as a sales measure is a terrific metric.  But it’s the first click that gets the customer to the front door.  Ad copy, placement and targeting contribute to the value of the customer at the front door…. all critical to the end result (the sale). But at that point factors not necessarily under the control of the impression delivery mechanism come into critical play.

Welcome to my abused home.

 

As the customer crosses over the transom from SEM to SEO it becomes the responsibility of the site owner to close the sale.  If the site isn’t optimized to close a sale is that the fault of the SEM platform that delivered the customer?  We often confuse, and more often combine, SEM and SEO performance to spoil the value of CTRs as a metric.  While these disciplines can work together they can also work against each other, one tearing down the other.

One obvious solution is to keep them separate. Laser focus on delivering better customers or closing the sale.  Attempting to do both under the guise of a 360 degree solution has taken down more than a couple of SEM/SEO providers over the years.

SHE KNOWS BETTER

A recent internal staff memo from the food editor at www.sheknows.com should outrage management at the popular women's destination site.

Here's the damning excerpt from the memo ...

"We have a LOT of sponsorships going live across all channels and sites from now until basically forever, but the big ones for food are coming in June and July. The bad news is, our click-through rates are not as great as our impressions (which is not your fault). But we can help everyone out a bit if we get in the habit of clicking on any ads you see alongside your articles, on the site, in your section, ANYWHERE. Our advertisers are the reason we all have paychecks each month so it’s important that they’re happy. Literally all you have to do is click on the ad – you don’t have to stay on their site for a certain amount of time and don’t have to buy a thing. Just click! Click 100 times if you want to!"

Ouch!