Marketing Thoughts by Domus Inc.

Google’s Nexus One phone was an interesting marketing experiment – introduce a new, self-branded phone that Google sold directly, not through the wireless carriers. Unfortunately, sales never reached high enough targets and this week Google announced that it has ended production of the phone (through its manufacturing partner, HTC) and is closing its web store.

The questions of why the phone failed and even whether the phone failed are even more interesting, though. We’ll never know for sure, but here are some thoughts.

First, assuming the phone did fail (which we’ll come back to later), one possible reason is that Google did not pay enough attention to its four marketing Ps – product, price, promotion, and place (distribution). Let’s assume that the phone itself was good, so that leaves the other Ps.

First let’s look at the distribution channel (place). Cell phones – more than most other products – are inextricably entwined with their service provider, so attempting to bypass the service provider was already a daunting gamble by Google. Even Apple, which garnered enough interest in its phone independent of the network, still chose a service provider with whom to partner.

The cell phone distribution channel is especially important because of the marketing effort that the service providers put into their phones. First, there’s the next P, price. As everyone knows, you can always get phones for less than the retail price when you buy from the wireless carrier (as long as you accept the two-year commitment). So why buy outside of the wireless carrier? We’ve all been conditioned to think that way.

And finally, let’s consider the last P, promotion. Google didn’t just introduce a branded phone. More importantly, it also introduced a phone operating system (Android) that it hoped to induce others to use in their phones. One of those manufacturers who immediately decided to do so was Motorola. They, in conjunction with Verizon (as opposed to Google’s approach of going it alone), launched a huge advertising campaign for the new Droid phone (“Droid Does”) at the same time that Google started selling its Nexus One. With Verizon’s massive marketing push, everyone knew about Droid, everyone got a good price for Droid, and everyone associated the name, “Droid”, with “Android”. Where did that leave Nexus One? Apparently nowhere.

However, all of the above was based on the assumption that Google did fail with the Nexus One. What if, though, the primary purpose of the Nexus One was to generate enough buzz about the Android operating system to propel all Android-based phones (i.e., Google-based phones) to mainstream success? Once the buzz did its work, the Nexus could happily be retired. In that sense, maybe the Nexus One was an outstanding success. Android-based phones are quickly challening the iPhone for smartphone market share. Google never was in the physical product business anyway.

Domus, Inc. is a marketing communications agency specializing in integrating the digital and social media worlds with classic marketing principles to deliver high returns on investment for our clients. For more information, please visit us at http://www.domusinc.com.

So many companies put extensive resources and budgets on search engine marketing and brand building advertising. But how many of those same companies apply effective resources to monitor and address online reviews and complaints about their products and services? In reality, “buzz” about you on these sites might well be more important than the number of page 1 Google rankings or any display metric. Today, shoppers regularly go to sites like yelp.com, epinions.com, and others to find out what experiences others have had with companies they’re interested in doing business with. If the comments written about you are predominantly negative – especially in comparison to your competition – then increasing the public’s awareness of you will just increase the number of people who get a negative opinion of you.

So, if you’re not already monitoring these sites and honestly addressing posted concerns, you might want to think hard about your current marketing allocations.

Domus is a full service marketing communications agency that combines classic marketing experience with digital marketing expertise to effectively deliver improved business performance for our customers. For more information, please visit use at http://www.domusinc.com.

Last year Microsoft introduced the world to an up-and-coming technology called “Project Natal”, its Xbox appliance that enables gamers to interact with Xbox games without any hand-held controllers. This week at the E3 conference Microsoft is finally introducing it for delivery this holiday season. But as part of all of the fanfare, Microsoft officially named the device “Kinect”.

Now, “Kinect” is actually a good name for the product, and the device has the potential to be incredibly successful, but that’s not the point of this blog post. Rather, I’d like to muse about the strategy to use one name for the many months leading up to the actual launch, and then change the name just before the launch. Microsoft has always done that with its operating systems. For example, Windows Server 2008 was referred to as “Codename Longhorn” from early 2005 through August, 2007, when Bill Gates announced its official name in anticipation of its February, 2008 release.

Although that might be fine with operating systems, especially those designed for the corporate server market, Project Natal – er, uh, Kinect – is different. It is a consumer product, not a corporate one. And 2010 is not 2005. When Microsoft announced Project Natal in 2009, it released a video showcasing its capabilities. That video has been on the Top 10 viral video charts every month since then. It has received millions of views, and virtually every gamer has heard about it. Moreover, forums and social media sites have been abuzz over it non-stop.

In other words, social media is the name of the game in 2009/2010, for those companies who know how to use it well. Microsoft certainly did use it well this past year, getting the whole gaming world knowing about and discussing their upcoming product. But they didn’t hit a home run because of their naming tactic. Some of that branding value will now disappear because the word “Natal” no longer exists for Microsoft. They absolutely can – and will – spend lots of money to imprint the new name in people’s minds, but a more nimble and cost-conscious company might have come up with the final brand name a year ago. Then they could have gotten their branding done for them without a massive advertising campaign (allowing that money to be used more effectively elsewhere).

Domus is a marketing communications agency specializing in integrating social media, digital, and traditional advertising and PR into effective brand strategies. For more information, please visit us at http://www.domusinc.com.

Everything has a natural cycle of life – even major brands. Yesterday the Wall Street Journal reported that Ford Plans to Kill Storied Mercury”. Although as early as 1985 Mercury was still dominant US brand, since then it has increasingly declined. In 1985 Mercury sold over 500,000 vehicles, but by last year that number had dropped to just over 92,000.

For 25 years (and especially over the last 10) the brand has declined. As such it is a good business decision for Ford to cut its losses and move on. After a certain point, there is not much that can be done to revive a dying brand, no different than a dying person.

That doesn’t mean that there is no room in Ford’s line-up for another brand – Volkswagen does very well with multiple brands – but just no longer Mercury. Mercury’s demise began when it no longer stood for anything special, unless you consider replicating a Ford sister car with fancier trim as something special.

As such, hopefully Ford Motor Company has learned the importance of brand management for its future. Good brand management means that you don’t only declare and communicate the position in the consumers’ minds that you intend to hold, but that you consistently and exclusively deliver products and/or services that meet the consumers’ changing ideas of what that position means. Mercury failed to do so.

Moreover, it’s a recognition that sometimes a brand position can be squeezed into non-existence by other brand positions. Ford, Mercury, and Lincoln represented a “ladder of brands” strategy, giving people smaller stepping stones between levels of prestige. But when foreign auto makers started selling higher quality cars with more standard features at lower price points, Ford had to respond by improving its main Ford brand, which squeezed Mercury from the bottom. Similarly as Lincoln offerred cars at lower price points, it squeezed Mercury from the top. That has left no distinguishing position for Mercury.

Domus is a Philadelphia-based advertising and PR firm as well as a digitial and social media marketing agency. For more information, visit us at http://www.domusinc.com.

In less than a month, the most-watched sporting event on the planet will begin, the 2010 World Cup. But an associated competition is now well underway – brand sponsorship and advertising, specifically the rivalry between Adidas and Nike. Adidas is currently the biggest world cup brand, sponsoring major players and fully one-third of the teams going to South Africa. But Nike is not far behind, sponsoring some of the biggest names in the sport as well as their own teams. Worldwide, Adidas sells about $1.8 billion in soccer gear while Nike sells about $1.7 billion.

This week Nike launched their official World Cup campaign with a new three-minute video created by Mexican director Alejandro Inarritu (Babel, 21 Grams). Called “Write the Future”, it features soccer stars like Wayne Rooney, Franck Ribery, Cristiano Ronaldo, Landon Donovan, and Ronaldinho, as well as non-soccer stars such as Kobe Bryant, Roger Federer, and Homer Simpson.

Adidas, on the other hand, won the rights to be the overall World Cup official sponsor, so it will be interesting to see who wins this battle as Adidas counters Nike’s move.

Domus is a marketing and digital advertising agency based in Philadelphia. For more information, visit us at http://www.domusinc.com.

Advertising Age is reporting that AT&T is “undertaking an ambitious rebranding effort under the banner of “Rethink Possible” to reposition itself as a “lifestyle company”. In other words, AT&T is implicitly declaring that it is losing the marketing positioning battle in the minds of consumers and wants to try something else to retain and gain customers.

Similarly, last month, Comcast decided to rebrand itself “Xfinity”. (“Simply put, XFINITY is about offering our customers more — more HD, more speed, more choice and more control over their services…”) Or, alternately simply put, Comcast is feeling the pinch of Verizon Fios’ competition and wants to try something else to retain and gain customers.

Interestingly, in both situations a company who has faltered in delivering upon the promise of its stated brand position decides to fix the problem by rebranding itself to a new position instead of improving upon its original promise. And just as interestingly, in both situations, the faltering company is being aggresively challenged in the marketplace by a company who dedicates more resources and commitment to delivering its brand promise better and better – and correspondingly communicating its success.

It doesn’t take a marketing genius to determine the better strategy for companies to mimic – especially in this age when consumers communicate with each other faster and more effectively than any one company can do on its own. Continue to invest in your brand promise – improve your product, improve your service, improve your delivery – and then your marketing communication efforts have legitimacy. On the other hand, no matter how many times you rebrand, if you don’t have the commitment to invest in your brand promise (whatever that may be), you’ll continue to come up short.

Domus is a marketing communications agency based in Philadelphia offering advertising, public relations, digital, and social media marketing expertise in an integrated approach based on sound, classic principles of marketing. For more information, visit us at http://www.domusinc.com.

This is a tumultuous time period for consumer brands. Large retailers like Walmart and Target are continually squeezing brands’ prices. R&D and manufacturing cycles are getting shorter and shorter, speeding competing products to the market. Supermarkets are pushing private label products over branded ones. Online shoppers can find out just about everything about brands, including the lowest price retailers in the world.

And now Black Friday and the remainder of the Christmas shopping season is getting so competitive that retailers are squeezing out virtually all of their profits to attract customers, who are spending less and less on better and better bargains. Actually, though, retailers are primarily squeezing their suppliers – the packaged goods and other consumer goods companies.

More than ever, manufacturers need to establish their brand positions in the eyes of consumers, and they need to deliver that message in all of the ways that consumers are receptive. People must want and seek out their brands; otherwise, they will get squeezed beyond sustainability. Every marketer today needs to continually ask if they’ve given their brand a reason not to be removed or discounted from retailers’ shelves.

Domus is a full-service marketing communications agency based in Philadelphia. Please visit our web site at http://www.domusinc.com for more.

Every time I see Cadillac’s commercial for their 2010 SRX crossover, I wince. They come so close with this one, but they still can’t seem to clearly stake out their brand position.

First, the commercial starts with a picture of the SRX – a nice car, but it’s a crossover. If Cadillac is trying to reclaim the luxury automobile market top brand position, it’s hard to do so with a car segment that evokes imagery of sport, utility, and fun. These are areas that fit more with Chevy’s brand position (or GMC’s) than Cadillac’s. (That’s not to say that a luxury brand can’t have a crossover – Lexus has one – but it’s easier when you’re at the top.)

Next, the music, imagery, and wording (re-envisioned, reorganized, reactivated, reignite) are all more evocative of upbeat fun and styling. This would seem to be a brand position that Buick should occupy.

Finally, the ad ends with the line, “The Cadillac of crossovers.” So, at the end of the ad, GM finally tries to position the car at the top of the luxury market. But by this point, it has spread its message across three brand positions.

GM has a great opportunity to turn itself around. It finally has an excellent line-up of cars. It just needs to solidify its brands in their correct positions in consumers’ minds.

Domus is a full-service marketing communications agency based in Philadelphia. For more, please visit our web site at http://www.domusinc.com.

How many people over 40 can still remember the great brand taglines, jingles, and slogans from their youth? On the other hand, how many current ones does anyone remember? The era of great jingles and mottos seems to have passed us; however, something has been lost in the process. The fact that so many of us remember so many of them shows how powerful they can be. They keep the brand front and center in our minds – when we’re thinking of the brand category and often when we’re not. Their impact lasts years and decades. It’s hard to calculate the ROI on that.

Domus is a full-service marketing communications agency based in Philadelphia. Please visit our web site at http://www.domusinc.com for more.

Marketing research data shows that store brands have been making inroads against branded consumer packaged goods items. (E.g., see Progressive Grocer.) But statistics don’t always tell the whole story. One thing reports like this don’t show, though, is why consumers are switching. It would be interesting to find out how many consumers are deliberately choosing store brands vs. no longer having a choice.

From my own personal experiences, I’ve noticed that several of my preferred name brand items are harder or impossible to find at many supermarkets – their shelf space has been taken over by store brands. Therefore, although I might have preferred a name brand in some cases, I had little or no choice (barring shopping elsewhere).

This is a question name brand manufacturers might want to consider. Their future marketing strategies might need to be adjusted if they are losing sales because of consumer choices or because of retailer decisions.

Domus is a full-service advertising, public relations, and social media marketing agency based in Philadelphia. Please visit our web site at http://www.domusinc.com for more.