Big Ad Agencies And Their Clients Give Me A Belly Laugh

And is that his house in the background? Better keep going. Sun is setting.

Of course these are image ads, and I wish they had some added great copy like Subtle wrote, but I think many brands such as Rolex are PURE image--they confirm high status more so than say, Waffle House. In that case, just running a simple ad in the Economist may say more than any text.

It's not needed...and that copy sucks.

About 10 pages from the Cartier full page spread (which was right after the Hermes ad) is this ad...



I'm willing to bet this ad isn't a 37%.

The Rolex one has a clear message. I get it immediately.

The Hermes one says nothing to me. It's utter confusion. I move on. No brand recognition, nothing.

Why thank you so much for enlightening me.

One thing that's interesting... really high-end stuff (the Hermès & Wally World boats) puts a much greater emphasis on high-quality photography than it does on copy. You'll see a giant photo from a $50,000 (or much more) photoshoot with a paragraph of text. And the text is pretty generic. Go look around your local Saks or wander around Monaco for a while and you'll see what I mean... the copy ALL sounds like the paragraph Mal posted.

You start to get the feeling the rich don't read, or don't believe the words. They get far more out of good pictures. (Plus, there's a social proof aspect to spending that much on photography. You simply can't fake a really expensive photo shoot.)

Edited to add: While I'm musing on the nature of high ticket, it's important to emphasize that after a while all this stuff gets unbelievably boring. The Pateks blend into the Vacherons and the boutiques are exactly the same everywhere you go.

This is why when, if you find yourself a really good 5 star hotel -- and I don't mean the kind where people go to "experience a 5 star hotel" -- there's a very organic, human, slightly imperfect quality to the place. It's genuinely nice, the staff are warm, everything is exceedingly discreet, and you can relax instead of keeping up the pretensions of "gotta look super rich and act snooty." There's nothing about it meant to put you in the luxury-worship "yes indeed" mindset that the Wally copywriters tried to do, because there's no need.

The British do this "luxury through imperfection" better than almost anyone. It's all about human service, putting a person between the client and the machinery.

IMO, you've got something there.

The Hermès watch division sales "only" increased by 17% in 2012, so in 2013 they were applying some investment to that division. Their 2013 campaign was based on the slogan "A sporting life" which at least partially explains their "somebody with walking sticks in the snow" ad.

In the market-specific context of "You already know who and what we are, we're just reminding you" that ad makes some sense, at least to me.

But with a "The Man in the Hathaway Shirt" or a Dos Equis "Most Interesting Man in the World" approach, perhaps it could absolutely sizzle with that particular target audience.

The adventures of a mysterious captain of industry that happens to favor Hermès watches... that's got some potential. It's no longer just some anonymous schmuck wandering around out there in the snow, it's somebody with a far greater purpose. That could prove a bit more effective.

With the right campaign and recognizable context, it might not even need more text, just the established context of the mysterious man himself.

Rubbish. Everyone has something to contribute. Some of us have been around a bit longer is all. Doesn't mean we're always right. I welcome your input. Just wish there were more women here to counter the chest-beating and sexism sometimes. Cheers.

Don't get me wrong, I love branding.

A client of mine runs a retail chain that deals in big brands, household names with brand recognition along the same lines as Rolex or Honda. The strength of those brands is a tremendous marketing asset - it's invaluable - you literally can't put a price tag on it.

100% of their marketing budget goes into direct response. Things like...

-Direct mail to existing customers.

-Email marketing.

-Lead generation: Opt-in pages offering related reports/discounts. Or "call now and instantly save x%".

-TV/Radio promoting limited time events, 3 day sales, one day only, etc.

-Followup sequences to encourage testimonials, referrals, word of mouth advertising and increasing customer LTV.

We can only track about 65% of new customers directly to any given campaign. We use tracking numbers to monitor calls and tie leads into sales. On those sales we can track the buyer from the specific lead source and tie a specific ROI to each campaign. And we can constantly measure and optimize our marketing.

For the other 35% or so, we're in the dark. People are exposed to the ads, but aren't ready to buy, but they remember us a few months later when they are. Some people just walk in - we can't track where they came from. We have the sales people ask but that's unreliable, most of the customers will just say "we see your ads all the time" - which doesn't help when we've got 20 different campaigns going across a dozen different media channels at any given time.

But the majority of that 35% is aware of the brand as a direct byproduct of our direct response stuff. I love branding, it's awesome. But direct response and branding don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Yes, you can somewhat measure the impact of branding. But it's an educated guess at best. You can't reliably measure it to an exact ROI per campaign. And that which can't be measured can't be improved.

And I don't care how strong any given brand is, the only time it matters, when something gets sold, there is direct response at work.

Someone mentioned Coke earlier. They're huge because they have distribution. They use a lot of direct response tactics to gain that distribution. McDonald's doesn't choose to carry Coke products over Pepsi because of the brand alone. There are a lot of other incentives - and a lot of selling going on to acquire and maintain those relationships.

Another example - Sweepstakes, Rewards & More | My Coke Rewards - think that's for branding? No, that exists solely to get people to keep buying Coke. They're offering incentives for a very specific desired response, people's business.

Ever shopped for a Rolex? Think the sales guy is just going to point to one and ask if you'd like it? Not if he's good. He's going to be able to tell you anything you want to know about every different model in the store. How they're manufactured. What materials are used and why. How they're put together.

And if he's been in business for more than a month, he's going to have a strong reason why to buy now. And he's going to upsell you. And he's going to have enough product literature for you to read for hours. And once you buy he's going to use direct response strategies to convince you to buy from him over and over again.

Apple is another example - the epitome of an amazing brand. So why the need to use product launches and events for everything they put out, people would buy anyway right? Because events work.

Steve Jobs was amazing at selling from the stage. Why does AT&T bribe you with an $800 phone for only $100 for signing a 2 year contract? Classic example of pitching the premium and using a self-liquidating offer to generate revenue in the back-end.

McDonald's is another great example. Their profit centers are fries, soda and franchises. Everything else they sell are just a self-liquidating offer to funnel people to their profit centers. Their up-sells "would you like fries with that/supersize your meal (more soda and fries) for just $1 more?" are no coincidence.

My point is that branding is powerful. But direct response is what drives sales, they go hand-in-hand.

I agree with Mr. Subtle that those ads are laughable.

And LOL at the idea that just because a company is successful it doesn't mean that they can't make horrible marketing decisions. If that were the case we'd all own Apple Pippin's instead of Xbox's, we'd all be rocking out on Zune's and drinking Crystal Pepsi while having this discussion on Myspace and browsing Digg while waiting for reply notifications to come through on our Galaxy Gear watches.

*This reply isn't directed at anyone in particular - I just quoted Dan because he brought up a valid point that I wanted to address.