Advertising and Marketing of Old

Advertising, which was well developed by 1900, has changed a lot over its lifetime. Obviously because of changing products, changing societies and changing values, but also the theories in and of themselves have changed a lot. I think it’s important to know how something started and its history to have an inkling of knowing where it’s going.

By the early 1900s, although advertising had blossomed, marketing was still in its infancy. That makes the marketing function only about 100 years old. Compared to economics, accounting and other business areas, marketing is still a little kid! That means there’s plenty of room to grow and try new things. Prior to the early 1900s, issues that are now filed under the marketing realm were just business or economics (e.g. setting prices, advertising). Many concepts that make up a huge chunk of marketing, like customer purchase behavior and distribution partners, weren’t even a glimmer in marketing’s eyes.

        

  

Marketing as we know it really grew in the 1950s – before that it was basically a “sell, sell, sell” mentality, with little regard if any, for what the customers wanted or what they customers felt. Companies would just push the “sell,” figuring people would want it because the companies were basically telling them to want it; no customer research needed! Doesn’t that sound absolutely ridiculous nowadays?

 

Scholars from universities started studying marketing before 1950 and realized that by using certain strategies that took the customer into mind, they could actually alter and benefit the seller/buyer relationship. Instead of thinking of new strategies that focused on selling more products, they started using strategies that included getting to know the customer. Of course, heightened competition in many industries helped this new marketing shift, as customers were getting miffed at being sold at, instead of sold to. So the whole idea of consumer research – finding out what the customer wants and then developing a marketing and advertising plan – started in the ’50s. That makes modern marketing a teeny tiny baby!

The ’60s ushered in a humorous movement in ads – no one had equated persuasion with humor before this time, apparently – and big names like Volkswagen, Avis and Levy’s bread used humor in their ads. One Levy’s bread magazine ad showed a boy enjoying a sandwich with the headline “You don’t have to be Jewish to love Levy’s real Jewish rye.”

   

This humor has continued on to this day, with commercials from Wendy’s “Where’s the beef” to a recent Bud Light “Breath of Fire” commercial during 2008’s Super Bowl.

  

And the marketing mantra of getting to know your audience is first is, of course, still going strong. So what have I learned from this very brief history lesson? Research your audience’s sense of humor, and then use that info to create a humorous, successful ad. 

No More “Cribs” Style of Houses in Advertising

With the tight economy, advertising budgets aren’t the only thing getting un-supersized: houses featured in TV commercials are starting to look like houses you and me live in, rather than millionaires. Advertisers have realized that people that see commercials shot in fancy neighborhoods with electronically gated communities like you see in the MTV show “Cribs” aren’t what people want to see – most people don’t see themselves in that kind of scene. And therefore, they don’t see themselves as being able to afford whatever product is being sold.  

So, advertisers have shifted their focus from making their products look exciting and indulgent to sensible and affordable. Most people don’t have the “indulgent” money to spend, so the advertisers’ messages that include the huge mansions and fancy cars are falling on deaf ears.

Right now, those that do have the money to spend don’t want to. They don’t want to flaunt their wares to others who don’t have that luxury. It seems crude when they do. “At times like this, you don't want to be as conspicuous. It's really rude,” says Stephen Hoch, professor of marketing and director of the Jay H. Baker Retailing Initiative at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

Many advertisers are touting value and price over quality these days. Kia Motors, which has always touted value with their cheaply priced new vehicles, claims in recent commercials that their new SUV, the Borrego, is “a new kind of luxury SUV” that’s priced under $27,000. 

And Target is including prices for their products in TV ads as well as magazine ads. One ad shows a couple reading the newspaper and enjoying espresso – not in a café – but in their own home, using the espresso maker that only costs $24.99. The words “the new coffee spot” flash across the screen, followed by the espresso maker price. A song proclaiming “This is a brand new day. And it’s getting better every single day” nails in the idea that this is a new consumer era – where people need to cut back on coffee shop trips and pricey hair salon treatments. The commercial shows a woman with gorgeous red hair looking in the mirror at her new color, and the words “the new salon trip” flash across the screen, showing bottled hair color that cost $8.49 – a bargain for any salon trip.  

The low-priced brands and the high-priced brands are still doing well in this economy, says Tim Calkins, a marketing professor at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management. “The brands that will struggle are the brands that ask people to step up, because people are not inspired to do that right now.” The brands in the middle of the pack are losing more customers who decide to take it down a level to more affordable than spend the extra dough to kick up the quality a notch. Macy’s and Target fall into the middle range (although, to me Macy’s is way more expensive than Target, unless something’s on clearance, but I’m cheap anyway!). 

I hate to say that advertisers and business owners need to follow suit because I hate to be a copycat, but this is one idea that everyone is flocking to. If you aren’t showing your value these days, you’re just going to lose out to the brand that does.

How Technology Is Changing the Marketplace

When you read or talk about how the marketplace is changing, it’s generally linked somehow to the Internet, and technology that connects people to the Internet. The Internet has changed how businesses conduct their sales and marketing, as well as how they whole business operates (online-only businesses). The Internet has also changed how consumers research and buy products and services. The Internet has changed how people find and apply for jobs, and even what is sold. (What did Google start out “selling” anyway? Nothing. And Craigslist stays afloat without charging anything for classified ads (although, that’s starting to change in Craigslist’s bigger cities.))

Who would have thought that Wikipedia would render your parents’ Encyclopedia Britannica set useless? Wikipedia is not only as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica, but is also over a hundred times larger.

Consumers also make recommendations to each other and discuss pros and cons of products and services in ways online that was never possible before the Internet. Now you can compare notes with people across the country, or even across the ocean. Homebuyers don’t have to consult realtors any more to browse available houses.

What do all of these changes mean for the marketing industry?

Plenty.

http://www.obuinteractive.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/push.jpg

Marketers need a blog. These days, blogs are more popular than forums or product review Web sites, and anyone can have a blog. It’s up to the marketer to find out what consumers are saying about your company on these blogs, and to either give out info that consumers need, or do damage control and correct the record when bloggers get something wrong about your brand.

Your company should already have some sort of Web site; a blog is the next logical step. But in addition to just having a blog, you should also be keeping closer track of the traffic to your blog. You need to have good visitor metrics and ways to find out what kind of people are visiting your blog. You should also think about video blogging, as that’s becoming more popular as well.

Texting. Texting consumers cell phones is also a new trend that seems to be growing. Many people say they don’t want marketing texts, but some marketers are having such success with texting that they keep doing it. This is an iffy trend right now that we’ll have to wait out to see how it flows.

Increasing your marketing budget, or better allocate your budget. If you can’t increase your marketing budget to include Internet ads, text messaging and newer technology, then you need to allocate your budget to include these tactics. Traditional marketing techniques like brochures, postcards and billboards still need to be used in addition to the newer marketing tactics. And if you can afford it, tweaking traditional tactics, like a billboard, into an electronic billboard is a great way to get consumers’ attention while integrating technology and traditional marketing.  

Affiliate Marketing: A Legit Way to Get Customers?

When it comes to finding people in your target market online, it can be hard, grueling process. Although you can buy Google AdWords that are targeted on different Web sites, or pay for Google search engine results, there’s no guarantee that people will click through to your site. There’s also no guarantee that people will even read your ad – I know that I tend to ignore Google AdWords anymore, just because I see them everywhere. I don’t have to read them to know what they are.  

So how else can you get a target market online?  

Many blogs and articles I’ve read talk about using affiliate marketing, but it all seems fishy to me. Let me explain how I understand affiliate marketing, and then if I’m off base, maybe someone can help me understand.  

From the HowStuffWorks Web site, I got this definition: “Affiliate programs, also called associate programs, are arrangements in which an online merchant Web site pays affiliate Web sites a commission to send them traffic. These affiliate Web sites post links to the merchant site and are paid according to a particular agreement. This agreement is usually based on the number of people the affiliate sends to the merchant's site, or the number of people they send who buy something or perform some other action. Some arrangements pay according to the number of people who visit the page containing their merchant site's banner advertisement. Basically, if a link on an affiliate site brings the merchant site traffic or money, the merchant site pays the affiliate site according to their agreement. Recruiting affiliates is an excellent way to sell products online, but it can also be a cheap and effective marketing strategy; it's a good way to get the word out about your site.” 

That’s the clearest explanation I’ve seen from any other sites I’ve visited. It sounds like swapping links, but instead of an affiliate getting some link love, they get money instead. It almost sounds better for the affiliate site to me.  

Amazon.com has over 500,000 affiliate Web sites that they pay if the affiliate can send someone over who actually buys something from Amazon. It seems kind of easy to work for a site like Amazon, which is known as the place to buy books, but what about the new sites that are unknown? I don’t usually buy from Web sites I’ve never heard of, or at least can’t find reviews of because I’m afraid of getting burned. I ordered some clothes from a Web site I’d never heard of, and when I tried to return an item, no one would email me back and I couldn’t find a phone number. Now I know better!  

I suppose if Amazon is using an affiliate program, as is TiVo and many others, then it could be legit. Then again, the HowStuffWorks article talks about multilevel marketing being similar to a type of affiliate program – that makes a red flag go up. Anything that reminds me of Amway tells me it’s bad.  

But still, I’m torn. Are affiliate programs good or bad? Someone please give me some laymen terms into what’s going on and whether it’s shady or not.

Army Strong Advertising

It didn't occur to me until I read a recent blog about Army advertising that the Army shouldn't really be advertising. Who else advertises for a chance to get yourself killed, and if not, you'll get some money and good health benefits later? 

Don't get me wrong - I'm not bashing the Army or any of the armed forces and I'm very thankful for all the women and men who are out there fighting for us and those that have been wronged. This post isn't about whether the Army is right, I just want to talk about the Army's advertising. 

In 2006 the Army recruited the McCann Worldgroup to come up with a new slogan, which is now "Army Strong." You know how much this is costing the Army? $1 billion for five years. That's right, the Army spent a billion dollars to use that slogan for five years. I hope that McCann is also doing all the advertising, which I would assume, but I know it's dangerous to assume anything. Military.com just says that McCann signed a five-year contract with the Army, with $200 million guaranteed each year for the first two years. 

The Army did away with its previous slogan "An Army of One," which it only used for six years. They decided to get a new slogan in 2006 because in 2005 they missed their recruiting numbers by the widest margin in more than 20 years. 

I guess it worked because in 2006, recruitment of 80,000 new soldiers was met. The "Be All You Can Be" slogan was used for almost 20 years, so the "An Army of One" slogan was just in infant stages before it was pulled. According to Military.com, the slogan "Army Strong" was "developed in numerous tests with focus groups and interviews with soldiers, is meant to convey the idea that if you join the Army you will gain physical and emotional strength, as well as strength of character and purpose." 

The new slogan, along with an enlistment bonus topping out at $40,000 rather than $20,000 also helped the Army meet recruitment goals. Oh, and not to mention that they've lowered the bar on their standards. Many people that usually wouldn't have made the cut are over in Iraq, fighting for us. People that don't know how to shoot a gun straight, among other things. Scary, huh? Of course, I'm not going to talk too long about this, because I don't see my butt getting up and going to Iraq, but it's just sad that we are even in this situation. 

Anyway, back to my point. Most people know that the Army isn't as glamorous as the ads make it out to be, yet these kids at 18 years old, seem to think it could be. They're hoping it could be and they're hoping for a change, and they see the possibility of that change that generally isn't real in these commercials and ads. To me, the Army ads seem like any other kind of company, touting its benefits and hiding its negatives. Being truthful is at the top of the "required" list for a good ad. I wish the Army ads would just let people know what they are in for from the beginning.