So, I just spent some time walking around a beautiful city.  Paris is beautiful, and the people have been very kind.  It's just about 30 degrees Fahrenheit. Very cold.

It's been some time since Radiohead released their album free of charge online.  I, of course, immediately wanted to comment on the experiential marketing aspects of it, but I was more interested to see what would come next, and what it would all mean.

I think that I've seen more than I expected -- way more!

Just to recap - the band Radiohead released their new album for free.  They then released the album in stores.

What happened?  Radiohead challenged an entire model. A model that has existed since the first records spun around the first record players and people paid for the privilege to listen.

Here's an excerpt from techconsumer.com:

According to a study (by a third party, comScore), only 38% of downloaders paid something while the 62% majority paid nothing. And of those paying, most paid less than $4. While it was fun to speculate on what this could mean for the music industry, turns out any speculation was based on more speculation (comScore's). Here's what Radiohead had to say: "In response to purely speculative figures announced in the press regarding the number of downloads and the price paid for the album, the group's representatives would like to remind people that it is impossible for outside organisations to have accurate figures on sales. However, they can confirm that the figures quoted by the company comScore Inc. are wholly inaccurate and in no way reflect definitive market intelligence or, indeed, the true success of the project."

OK. Back to my train of thought and experiential marketing :)  So, as anyone could have guessed there were disputes about the success of Radiohead's social experiment.  But, did anyone see what was to come next?

Excerpt from Spinner.com:

In Rainbows, the first release by Radiohead on Dave Matthews' ATO label in the U.S., has debuted on the album charts at No. 1. While the band attaining the top spot for the first time since 2000's 'Kid A' is a newsworthy achievement in itself, it's all the more remarkable when you consider that the band had made the album available as a digital download in October on a pay-what-you-wish basis.

The British group's unorthodox music distribution scheme for the critically lauded 'In Rainbows' was scoffed at in many quarters. Yet since the album's official Jan. 1 release date, Radiohead have sold 121,000 hard copies of a record for which some fans paid a dollar or even less as a pre-release download. By some estimates, the album sold in the vicinity of a million copies in its three months as a digital release. This ultimately chart-topping strategy comes off as a sharp rebuke of the existing distribution model of the major labels Radiohead bypassed in the dissemination of their seventh album.
-----------------------------

So, what does this say? The band experimented, and then cleaned up via the traditional sales channel.  How could you possibly explain this? What does it mean, and how can it be explained?

It says that there are all kinds of people in this world. :)  I mean this in more ways than one.  There are people that are willing to pay for something offered for free if that something has value to them, while others will simply take it.  They probably wouldn¹t even say thank you.  This was what was really tested in Radiohead's great experiment, but it also really highlighted the fact that people have an aversion to change (good or bad - any change), have different adoption rates, and varied consumption patterns.

How could an album be #1 on the charts after it had been given away for a while?  It can make a good case that a lot of people have still not adopted the technology that enabled them to download the music for free - or it could mean something else.  All of the free PR that the album got still didn't drive some people online to download the album.  This would have signaled a change in their behavior. These people still wanted the comforting feeling of holding that plastic wrapped CD tightly in their hands for their exciting march to the cash register.  

And now I'm back to one of my favorite points: it takes a lot to change behavior.  Free or not - some folks waited to hold it in their hands and make it #1 on the Billboard charts.

Don't get me started on what Nine Inch Nails did with their latest album release. :)

Out to the Cafe I go… :) Just felt the need to rant.

My day brilliantly unfolded in a way that allowed me to take my favorite role in life - the role of a social scientist! I was the unfortunate victim of United Airline's new international business class - even though I was flying domestic! As an experiential marketer, it was a great day to be alive - so many things to dissect from a Customer Experience Management (CEM) point of view. There was even a chance to see how the on-board employees were going to handle the 80/20 rule and the notion of Customer Lifetime Value (CLV). I couldn't believe that all of these fantastic dynamics were going to come into play in just one 5 hour plane ride. I may be the luckiest guy alive.

Most of the folks around me were really upset, but I was busy acting like a sponge taking it all in. I didn't care to be upset - I wanted to learn - learn - learn.

Ladies and Gentlemen - I present you Flight #XXXX From SFO to XXX - and away we go. Not looking to get anyone in trouble so everyone shall remain nameless.

It's fair to say that we've all had our moments with airlines. If you travel a lot then everyone is bound to reach their breaking point fairly frequently these days.

We were extremely excited to find out that our typical aircraft had been replaced with one of United's new international crafts. They're quite impressive and are designed to deliver a highly customized flying experience through individual entertainment systems. "Everyone have fun playing with the new toys" the flight attendants said joyfully as we all took our seats. I was looking forward to making this flight meet all of my needs - it was all so very cool!

Expectations were high as the plane pushed back from the jetway. Within minutes the screens went black and the attempted reboots of the new entertainment systems began. They tried a myriad of techniques, but nothing seemed to work. Shucks - but wait - this is where it gets very interesting - very!

Let me first say that I felt very sorry for the flight attendants as they clearly weren't IT people, and this was the 2nd "new" plane to fly. From what they said, the first plane's system was completely shut down. So, one would assume that United may have wanted to have one of the vendors responsible for the systems on the plane to troubleshoot. Instead, United Airlines put all of their employees in a very unfortunate situation - one that was totally avoidable. There was no way for the flight attendants to deal with the number of people who were upset. It must have been quite demoralizing for them not to be able to service the customers the way that they wanted.

It turns out that the majority of the lower CLV customers systems in economy were working splendidly, but the majority of the first the business class units were not working. So you have a situation in which the higher paying customers are receiving less. That's fairly interesting, but it gets better. The first and business class section travelers are generally the customers that have a much higher CLV than those that fly in coach. These customers fly more often, and are more loyal to an airline as they are usually enrolled in the Frequent Flyer programs.

I had told one of the flight attendants that the only way to get the system up would be a hard reboot, but that would have interrupted everyone else's movie in economy. Should the flight attendant be put in the position to have to be making those kinds of decisions? I think not!

Essentially - United Airlines failed both their customers and employees by not adequately testing their systems before they put the airplane in use. This all brought one thing into crystal clear focus for me - I feel trapped in my relationship with United Airlines much like I did with my iPod (that story is in an earlier blog post).

I am clearly a loyal flyer, but one company's problem is another company's time to act!

Running under the general assumption that most people are dissatisfied with their current airline, why doesn't one airline make the following strategic move?

Concentrate on customer service - build your entire brand on the platform! Then, go right after the other airlines high CLV customers by offering them the same status they had on your airline - free of charge. These customers have clearly shown through their behavior that they are extremely loyal, and the risk/reward for this strategic move is low risk - extremely high reward.

I'd switch airlines - I do 125-200K miles a year. Perhaps this is a space in which an airline needs to position themselves? Hmmmmmmm. Then make their move to grab all the high CLV customers from all the other airlines.

In any case - random food for thought as I descend into JFK.

I love learning, but wish I could have been entertained by all these fabulous electronics!

 It seems to be the mother of all challenges. It's the one that prospective clients call ad agency offices with daily - sometimes hourly when things are brisk.  "How do we increase relevancy within a particular market segment, and more importantly convert that new found relevancy into sales," they often say.  "How can we drive purchase and purchase consideration by our intended audience - an audience that currently doesn't even know that we exist?"  Both, by the way, are very good questions that brand managers are faced with on an hourly basis.

Walk through any ad agency or experiential marketing firm and you'll see the creative teams addressing these questions that are posed every day by their clients.  Often, agencies don't seem to land on the correct answer. That may explain why the business so often resembles a revolving door - old ones out - new ones in.  However, every once in a while an agency finds a way to shift perceptions to drive purchase.  I'd love to tell you that even those stories end well, but more times than not the agency is still shown the door.   The sustainable agency/client relationships that last are built on a foundation of mutual respect and trust.   When that foundation exists and great work is produced, the relationship only becomes stronger.  I am proud to say that our key clients have been with us for years.  That's the agency's goal and one of the things I value most.

OK, so by this point you're asking what the heck does this have to do with Guitar Hero?  If you're not asking this question then you've read some of my stuff before.  I have a tendency to draw correlations between some pretty strange things and approach things from highly unusual angles. My point is simple actually.

Guitar Hero is a perfect example of how you can get an audience interested in anything if you utilize a clever engagement mechanism that stimulates customer involvement.

I'm not referring to the game sales.  Clearly, it's an amazing game.  I have it set up in our house with multiple guitars and everyone still fights for their turn to play.  The game sells itself - you have to look inside of it to see what I am referring to, because by inside the game I am referring to the playlists.  These, by the way, will soon have every song ever made, but for now the current offerings are what I am talking about.

It's a fair statement to say, for the most part, that the USA has resided in a hip-hop nation for a number of years.  There are absolutely great artists that fall outside of hip-hop, but if I look back over the last few years I see charts dominated by the genre.  Only recently have we seen the reemergence of the singer songwriter.  As a quick side note - I love all genres, but I have been the biggest REM fan since the age of 11.  I am what most people would refer to as a lyrics person.  I find songs that truly resonate with me tend to be about world issues, personal experiences etc.  They're a little less about how much the singer's car cost, or how many diamonds they have in their watchband.  Having written that, I love great beats, and I love to jump on the dance floor to become fully involved with the music. OK, time for me to get back on track - blame the A.D.D.

One thing is for certain - Classic rock hasn't been dominating the airwaves.  It certainly hasn't been flying off the record shelves.  Or, for that matter, it isn't even being illegally downloaded frequently by today's younger generation.  This all leads up to one very important question that was asked to me by a 9, that's right 9-year-old boy.  What was the question?

"Erik, can you take me to Best Buy to get a Lynyrd Skynyrd CD?"  Now, at this point there are several reasons I almost hit the floor.  One is that I grew up in the southeast and live with the running joke of someone screaming Freebird at any concert I've ever attended.  It didn't matter if it was an REM concert or Lenny Kravitz - some yahoo was always screaming Freebird.

The fundamental question was why is a 9-year-old asking me to by him a Skynyrd album?  Guitar Hero had presented a 9-year-old an opportunity to relate to, and connect with, a song from another generation.  The game allowed him to put his own slant on the anthem, and had engaged him with something that he normally would never have even heard in his universe.  Actually, I did ask the question why Skynyrd? -  he had never heard of Skynyrd, but I was so intrigued by what had just unfolded in front of me, I had to ask.  This initial request was soon followed by requests for Santana albums , ZZ Top and Pearl Jam.  OK then.

The lesson here is simple.  Something was introduced to a 9-year-old using a clever mechanism that engaged his interest and attention and also allowed him to take partial ownership of the sound that was exiting the speakers at an extremely loud volume.  Result - album sales for artists the kid never knew existed. We have a winner!

What engagement techniques are you using to make your client's products/services relevant to their new, desired audience?  We should all be thinking about it while I head out to Best Buy to go grab a 9-year-old his latest request - Heart's last album.

It is time for all of us interested in experiential marketing and advertising to offer brilliant insightful comments about the annual parade of Super Bowl ads.  The Burns-Hauser blog is no exception in its attempt to understand the social, business and cultural context of the event and its supportive advertising that, ideally, pays for the show.  Here are a few observations before the big event that we would like to share. 

An Experiential Marketing Rant...

What's that I say? Content is queen in the world of advertising?

You betcha'

I've said content is king in other domains, but when it comes to advertising content is queen.  Which, of course, raises the obvious question ­ What is king?

Connected meaning and relevance is the king of advertising .  Without it - you simply have a seemingly pretty form of art.

One can have the best content in the world in an ad, but if the content isn't connected in a meaningful and relevant way then you'd be hard pressed to remember who even created the ad.

BRAND RECALL ='s ZERO

The ad was funny? So what?
The ad had killer visuals? So what?
The ad was entertaining? So what?
The ad was creative? SO WHAT?

If the ad's creative doesn't creatively make the ad meaningful and relevant than I would argue that it was just a nice piece of art...or a cool short 30 second video.... or a... you get my point:)

The most important part of the creative process is connecting to the audience on as many levels as possible through brand relevant communications.

OK. Back to bed....I feel better now

At the end of the year I think those that feel compelled to blog also feel compelled to write something profound . . . a testimony to the past or some insightful revelation about 2008 or the world to come.  I fear I have nothing that sweeping to offer - but do want to share a recent thought with our readers.  I am driving across the country - from Austin to San Francisco enjoying the "green" feeling at the gas stations that only a Prius can give - and listening to books on CD.  I love doing that - I mean, show me a kid that doesn't like being read to! (OK, so I'm just an old kid.)

Thomas Friedman's "The World Is Flat" has taken me from Texas through Arizona - and I found it stunning.  Beautifully written and well read by Oliver Wyman it's long -- something like 20 hours - but you feel a lot smarter after listening than you did before.  And, if you're part of this global nation called The Experiential Marketing Forum you see the implications of Friedman's convergence treatise for experiential advertising and global brands.  He sees three major trends shaping the future; a truly global supply chain and attitudinal shift based upon world-wide, real-time, collaboration and communication; the rapid adoption in nations like India and China of new technologies without the restraints of an existing infrastructure coupled with entrepreneurial desire not only to be on the playing field but to dominate; and the addition of several billion new people into global marketplace.

Open source and rapid advancement of what we had called "3rd world" countries reminds me of the writings of the Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky where he pointed out that "a backward country assimilates the material and intellectual conquests of the advanced countries" - and as we now know, can in some cases surpass them.  In any case Friedman tells us that when nations become an important part of the supply chain, their economy improves as does the global economic outlook as well.  He also points out that being a part of a vibrant and competitive global supply chain serves as a deterrent to war since the reallocation of a country's resources for weapons and warfare clearly take that nation out of the global economy during the period of conflict. And, once it has lost its "place" it may well take years for that nation to regain its supply chain position and stature. Effective messaging and communication - with businesses as well as consumers - is central to the 'flattening of the world' and serves to actually strengthen local and regional identities as well as develop international knowledge of capabilities, products and services.

So, guess what?  That's where we come in! It is the open systems that The Experiential Marketing Forum provides that will accelerate this process.  When questions are asked concerning how a new bank was introduced - or what was done to support the viral spread of a new application and those of us who have been there provide some advice or a case history the discipline of experiential advertising jumps forward a notch or two - just as Trotsky and then Friedman suggested.  The global community being built by The Experiential Marketing Forum is still in its infancy but maturation of that service is taking place rapidly. Soon the impact of those who have led the experiential discussion will broaden and the innovations being introduced in other nations will contribute to the level of service of all practitioners.  In advertising - as with technology and commerce - the world is flat.

I have seen lots of techniques for bringing about change, and more importantly getting people to change their consumption behavior.  There are several techniques that fall along the technical spectrum ­ from the great to absolutely insane.  Apparently the NFL has decided to craft their own M.O. -  ­ Inflicting maximum pain (shock therapy).  The NFL knowingly inflicted maximum pain to the very fans that have allowed the NFL to grow and prosper over the decades ­ - how awful ­ - and falls along the insane in the technical spectrum.

I was in Austin, Texas last week and I was watching the local news and happened to catch the uproar regarding the local cable provider not being able to carry the Cowboys game. Apparently, the NFL channel was charging too much for the service provider to carry the game.  Who loses in this equation?  The fan of course ­ - and in the long run, which is what counts, the NFL!  Obviously, the NFL knew that this was going to happen and simply didn't address the situation strategically ­ - ouch!  To use some football terminology -  ­illegal procedure against the NFL.

I'd like to suggest that the go to market strategy for the NFL channel would have been to come in with a great value proposition and a strategy intended to get fans excited about the channel instead of playing hardball with the service providers. It's actually pretty simple ­ - drive demand through positive means in lieu of hardball.  The NFL had an amazing opportunity to get off of on the right foot and connect with their fans.  Instead, they wound up on the 6 and 11 o'clock news with people griping about the way that they were handling the situation.

This is the same NFL that has the NFL Experience at the Super Bowl, and is trying to extend overseas with an aggressive strategy.   Yet, domestically, they feel that it is OK to alienate their fan base.  Are people going to stop being fans of the Dallas Cowboys?  I highly doubt it.  However, they will dislike the NFL, which in turn will keep them from participating in anything that exists outside of their home team's ecosystem.

I think that the folks at HQ need to huddle and rethink this one.  Try again.  It's 4th and 9 with some time left on the clock.  The game isn't over yet, but they have certainly rung up a personal foul.

December 27, 2007

Note:  The NFL just changed their position.  In what is being reported on CNBC a brilliant PR move.  Brilliant? How about common sense.

I assert my C3 over the marketplace that exists inside of me.  I, like most people, have my own weighted C3 (convenience, control and choice) algorithms that exist in my head.  Certain things are simply more important to me than they would be to somebody else.  Its not really important how we calculate our own C3 settings - it's just important to note that we have our own independent ranking systems in which one C is more important than another.

I had an interesting conversation with  Walt Mossberg as we happened to bump into each other at an early pre-conference breakfast in Tel-Aviv recently.  He is a smart and engaging man and I'm not quite sure that I've ever run into anybody as tech savvy as Walt.

He said he had attended my presentation and wanted to address one of my points. He wanted me to know that the technology inside the iPod was far superior to other MP3 players.  You see, in one of my presentations I start heading in a direction that addresses the proliferation of technology and how it has redefined the way we talk, and the way we listen, and the way we act.  Then, I kind of bring it back to basics with a slide that speaks to the importance of having a power brand.   The normal example that I use states:

An orange is an orange…….
Unless that orange is branded…….
In which case it is a Sunkist orange

In this case Sunkist can get a premium price as compared to other oranges that come out of the same exact orchards.  The slide is intended to address the notion of brand equity.  That little label and what the branding represents allows Sunkist to sell their exact same orange at a premium price.

Before I jumped onstage I realized that Sunkist oranges don't exist in Israel so it wouldn't have been a relevant example.  I immediately went to replace the slide of the orange with a cup of Starbucks coffee.   However, when I did a little research I found out that Starbucks had failed miserably in Israel.  So, that wasn't going to work either.  I finally decided to go with Apple and the iPOD.  The new slide stated:

An MP3 player is an MP3 player……..
Unless it's branded……….
In which case you've got an iPOD

My intent here was not to get into the nitty gritty of the technology, but just to get people to realize that there was one brand/product that stood head and shoulders above the rest.  After all, for most of us the iPOD revolutionized the way that we thought about our digital content.  My intention was not to say that all MP3 players are alike, or that this is a parity space...  Clearly, certain devices are better than others.  

If one was to view the slide as a technology expert then Walt's point was absolutely correct.  The iPOD's technology makes it a more sophisticated device than the others.  Does that mean that everyone will continue to buy the iPOD?

In short  - NO!  Many of you may know my iPOD saga regarding the dead batteries etc.  It simply became too painful to own an iPOD.   As Walt and I were talking I reached into my pocket and took out my new Sirius Stiletto.  I told him that this was my kind of device.  Walt replied with a few comments about how the device was inferior to the iPOD. He pointed out that it had a lot less storage etc.  Again, there is no arguing with the king of technology - not that I had any intention of doing that anyway.  I simply asked him how much pain I had to go through with the technologically more sophisticated device before I would change my purchasing habits, and for that matter - how much pain was the rest of the marketplace willing to take?  One thing I've noticed in all my travels is that as you are banging your iPOD against the airplane seat you will undoubtedly find someone that has their own painful iPOD story to tell.  Which always makes me wonder when the iPOD's reign will be over.

I pointed out that for me the Sirius was a better device because it offered me more C3.  I really don't always want to know what song is on next, which is why I love the satellite radio feature.  I do like to store some MP3 songs, and occasionally I use the wi-fi features.  Walt asked me if I liked the fact that others were selecting which song I would listen to next.  Honestly, yes - sometimes I do.  There are so many radio stations that cover every possible genre that when I choose a station I am fairly certain the majority of songs will be ones I enjoy from that particular genre/era.  Don't get me wrong, I still love the pre-selected song lists we all create, but sometimes I want to be surprised. I can be surprised with my Sirius Stiletto.  That makes me feel good.

When Walt and I were done talking I had a quick chuckle because I had just inadvertently asserted a point I often make when I speak about technology.  A piece of technology can be the most sophisticated thing in the world, but if it doesn't enhance my lifestyle, then it isn't for me.  I like the fact that I have more options with my Sirius device because my track record indicates that I don't need to carry 80 GiGs of music with me at all times.  

When this line of logic comes up my mind will often drift to the Beta / VHS battles of the 1980's, and the newer example of the Nintendo Wii.  Beta was by far the better technology, but VHS won.  For me, and for most, it's about what meets my needs and not what is technically the most sophisticated device.  If technical sophistication was the holy grail then I'd never be able to drive my 1973 Land Rover series III A.  The darn thing doesn't even have air conditioning or a radio for that matter.:) You couldn't give me a new Land Rover, but they're going to have to dig a hole big enough to bury me in my Landy. C3.  It rules.

My favorite part of the two way dialogue/conversation/chat :) between brand and consumer is showing itself in the area of product design.

Essentially, what is happening is that brands are beginning to understand that they couldn't possibly figure out what each individual customer wants. It was also impossible for them to be able to afford the customers any level
of customization in the age of mass merchandising.

We know that they have been trying for years to get us to buy what they alone manufacture. They've essentially been producing vanilla/plain products and then been letting us know about these products by shouting at us via monologue messages on monologue media. Advances in all arenas have allowed brands to open up the dialogue.

(I kinda' touched on how this is changing in this blog post)

The brand spoke first by designing the basic part of the shoe, and then allowed me to reply by customizing the shoe exactly the way that I wanted to - how brilliantly simple.

This type of activity clearly goes way beyond advertising and creeps into the realm of product development. In my many chats with corporate folks they always tell me that most of the best innovations come from their customers - not their product development team. However, the customers have been shut out for years. A few connected customers saw their input infused into the products and services.

The opening of the door to the every day customer is a great way to see how the monologue world has shifted to a dialogue world.

Granted it will take 4 weeks to get my conversational shoes, but I was involved in the conversation. As you might have guessed - the shoes contain lots of swivel orange.:)