For the past two years, my office pod wall has been adorned with a quotation from Ralph Lauren, torn from a magazine advertisement for fashion website Brand Alley:

“I don’t design clothes, I design dreams.”

Ever since I first came across it, this kernel of an idea has informed my interest and belief in the power of brand communications. Marketing that goes beyond the product, that can trigger and play on emotion and aspiration – now that is powerful.

So it was with interest that I came across the latest development in Ralph Lauren’s marketing of their children’s wear. ‘The RL Gang’ has been created as a group of fictional child ambassadors for the label’s kids range, living for the most part online, on a dedicated micro site. Visitors watch the video story unfold of Hudson, Willow and friends having fun and getting up to mischief in the schoolroom.

And all the while looking sensationally adorable, kitted out head-to-toe in the latest Ralph Lauren Kids back-to-school fall season range.

There’s no denying it, the film feature is beautifully produced. Traditional children’s book illustrations in fine-line ink and watercolour are interlaced with live action from the exceptionally cute child models as they run around their animated school yard. Added kudos is given by narration from Hollywood’s Harry Connick Jr.

The impression is a warm glow of childlike imagination and adventure, strongly conveying the sense (illusory or otherwise) that Ralph Lauren loves your kids as much as you do. The idea, of course, being that Mom logs on, watches how delightful Willow looks in her Cotton-Cashmere Sampler Jacket and thinks how cute her own offspring would look similarly attired.

Naturally, the route to purchase is instantaneous. Via links embedded throughout the film, Mom can hover over each of Willow’s garments and ’shop W’s look’, taking her straight to the online store for purchase.

If a particular role model strikes a chord, Mom can even peek inside the little one’s ‘closet’ to skip through their personal style and view their particular collection – be it Oliver’s country-gentleman-in-the-making or Zoe’s more rock chick vibe. Mothers of wannabe Suri Cruises can shop the Mae look.

But that’s not all. As a nice addition, RL has produced a kids storybook (yes, a real old-fashioned traditional paper page-turner) to go alongside the digital campaign that captures the story in an offline platform. In ten different languages, no less. And a percentage of the proceeds from each $18.95 book sale go straight to charity. It’s a cute idea, and whilst the marketer in me thinks the book reads like a slightly more engaging version of the kidswear fall catalogue, essentially it’s a well-presented children’s story book that just so happens to dress all its characters in Ralph Lauren.

Because the production values are so strong, the video is highly watchable and I should imagine any Moms logging on do watch it in its entirety and that the click-through rate to the online store is high. It beautifully captures the brand values and presents them in a way that Moms can relate to – a visual representation of childlike imagination.

So to return to Ralph’s principle, The RL Gang sees the brand staying true to its guiding light. If it were just about the clothes, the brand could simply post a digital catalogue online. Ultimately, Moms hope for and dream of the very best for their kids, and The RL Gang has brought this to life perfectly.

By Lucie Bartlett on August 20th, 2010

Tags: Brand marketing, Communications, Digital marketing, Fashion

No comments

Seemingly building a reputation within brainstorms for throwing out the term ‘Augmented Reality’ (AR) without much back up, I started to question if I fully understood the capabilities of this increasingly fashionable term.

Defined by Wikipedia as ‘a live direct or indirect view of a physical real-world environment whose elements are augmented by virtual computer-generated imagery’ I realised I was not really any the wiser.

Having experienced examples using a ‘magic symbol’ where one can hold up a piece of card in front of a webcam and before you know it, a space rocket is taking off in the palm of your hand;  JLS appear with an exclusive performance; or even a fashion show of models appear on the table before your very eyes (all on-screen, yet seemingly in front of you).

All a bit of fun plus added wow factor (as long as you have a webcam), however as I researched further, I found some interesting ways AR is increasingly becoming part of brand activity.

Hugo Boss livened up their Christmas window displays with a sales promotion through an interactive game to drive people in store.

Fashionista use AR to allow customers to ‘virtually try on clothes’.

A really fun example is by Yahoo, which was simple and engaging, and was installed during the Winter Olympics in Vancouver.  Through motion detection, passersby appeared on screen to be dressed in various accessories from hats and scarves, to sunglasses or rain hats.

AR is clearly developing fast. As a late adopter in many forms of technology I don’t own an iPhone – yet – however am curious around the AR capabilities it offers.  iPhone users can download various applications that use the phone’s camera and GPS capabilities to gather information about the surrounding area. Then information about pretty much anything programmed such as restaurants or bars, overlay on the phone’s screen. In the Netherlands you can even point the phone at a building, and the Layar application will tell you if any companies in that building are hiring, or it might be able to find photos of the building on Flickr or to locate its history on Wikipedia.

It is thought that soon we will be walking or driving down the street with augmented reality displays, which will be viewed through what, looks much like a normal pair of glasses, with informative graphics appearing in our field of view, and audio will coincide with whatever we see. These enhancements will be refreshed continually to reflect the movements of your head.

I continue to be intrigued by the merging of the physical and virtual world, and look forward to seeing how far this can go…and to buying myself an iPhone!

By Samantha Pillage on August 9th, 2010

Tags: Brand marketing, Branded content, Communications, Experiential marketing, Olympics, Vancouver 2010, YouTube

2 comments

Last year not many national newspapers made big money – in fact some lost a lot of it set against declining circulations. One paper however, The Metro, made its seventh successive year of profit.

In fact, last year the paper, which has a circulation of 1.3 million distributed free across 16 cities, had more display advertising than any other UK generalist (114,647 single column centimetres compared to 94,875ccms at The Sun for the statisticians among you).  

So with much talk about the demise of newspapers  how is it that The Metro turns in a profit year after year without charging a cover price and are there any clues of the newspaper of the future (on and offline) in this?

Looking in from the outside, the success would seem to boil down to two simple reasons.

Firstly – content. The Metro knows its audience and it’s not trying to be anything more then what it is – a quick commute read.

No in-depth articles, no weighty columnists and little analysis – just a bite sized chunk of news meant to last as long as your tube/bus/train journey or if you like an offline version for an online audience – or what they refer to as ‘City Clickers’. This amalgamation of easy news comes with probable lower overhead costs from staf size to news gathering.  

Secondly – a closer relationship between commercial and editorial or a breakdown of the old ‘church and state’ mentality.

Few barriers exist – your brand wants to wrap the paper? Not a problem. Sponsor whole sections? Sure thing. An advertorial in the house style? Editorial will even write it for you. In addition, there is a clear link between the offline and online products with commercial links across both.

The Metro gets away with it partly because it’s free. As a consumer, I don’t mind commercial spill-over into editorial, I see it as a decent trade off for getting a free read on my tube journey in.  

But it’s this blurring of the line that gives clues to the future for the wider industry. It’s no surprise that there are increasingly numbers of ex-journalists in the commercial teams at papers helping brands to run ‘integrated’ campaigns but it’s a difficult balancing act to maintain – editorial independence and powerful journalism versus commercial reality.

While it continues to vex established national newspapers (The Times Online recent move behind a paywall is an attempt to address it), The Metro has proved it knows its audience and although it may be a dangerous sign for in-depth, quality journalism you have to admire its ability to buck the trend.

By Dominic Curran on June 28th, 2010

Tags: Brand marketing, Communications, Digital marketing, Media, Paywall

No comments

As the “Golden Generation” of England footballers bid for the umpteenth (and probably last) time to realise their potential at a major international tournament, fans across the country will be reaching for their Three Lions replica shirts, keeping their fingers crossed, and praying that “Wazza” really can Write The Future.

Back to the present. Before a fly-away Jabulani ball has been struck in earnest, the contest between “official sponsors” and those pesky ambushers has truly kicked off. The FA and Mars, an official partner of the England Team, are reportedly considering legal action against Nestlé, for “passing off” an association with the England team through Kit Kat’s “Fingers Crossed” campaign. Yes, this is the same Mars who undertook the infamous “Believe” ambush marketing campaign around the 2006 World Cup. For 2010, and the first football World Cup on African soil, a classic case of poacher turned gamekeeper.

Three questions, one for each lion on John Barnes’s Mars Bar :

1. Is Nestlé actually passing off an association with the England team?

This should probably be left to the lawyers, but from a layman’s / sport industry professional’s perspective, using Sol Campbell and Mansfield Town manager David Holdsworth as your “talent” is not the best way to infer an association with the England team. And despite the well observed allusions to England’s World Cup heritage – “cross your fingers for no penalties…no broken metatarsals…no tears” -and liberal use of the ambusher’s best friend (the St George’s flag), nothing suggests that Kit Kat sponsors Capello’s boys.

2. Should Mars be trying to protect their hard bought status as the England Team’s confectionary brand of choice?

A lesson for all official sponsors. Complain about the ambushers and you are giving their campaigns the oxygen of publicity. Mars clearly had good reason to turn gamekeeper and pay for the privilege of England partner status. They should be confident that their association, leveraged properly, will pay off. Otherwise, why not remain a poacher?

3. Whose current World Cup campaign is better?

No contest. Kit Kat have tapped into the very essence of the English sporting psyche, and the pervading sense of hope over expectation that grips every England football fan during international football tournaments. Their TV ad brings that insight to life in a down to earth, domestic football environment. Compare that with John Barnes re-hashing a song from 1990 in a sparsely populated park, with production values that suggest too much money in the FA’s coffers and not enough in the activation pot.

Reports suggest that Mars may have won the battle of the lawyers, and that Nestlé have agreed to curtail the campaign. Is that the final whistle on this contest? Probably not if Kit Kat’s PR team are on the ball. What price England players crossing their fingers during a crucial penalty shoot, or being caught on camera tucking into one of the 200 Kit Kat’s that have been delivered to the England training camp by the FA’s official supermarket …?

Whatever happens, fingers crossed that 2010 marks the end of John Barnes’s singing career.

By Tom Gladstone on June 11th, 2010

Tags: Advertising, Ambush campaign, Brand marketing, Communications, Content, Football, Football Sponsorship, Media, Public relations, Social Media, Sponsorship, Sport

1 comment

Who would have thought a simple name change could cause such a rumpus? St James’ Park, more a cathedral to the Geordie Nation then a stadium, has been given the catchy title by its beleaguered owner of ’sportsdirect.com@St James’ Park’. Cue much uproar across the media and more importantly among the fans.

However, rather then add to the derision already rightly poured on this bizarre move, we think there could be an opportunity for a canny brand here. Any brand in sponsorship is fundamentally looking to engage, not alienate, fans and this naming rights debacle actually offers up a unique opportunity.

The answer is simple – try and strike a short term deal with the Newcastle United commercial team, buy the naming rights for the rest of the season and call it – this is the simple bit – ‘St James’ Park’.

In other words, give it back to fans: they’ll love you forever and no doubt you’ll get more than a few column inches to boot – for the first naming rights deal to get rid of the brand name.

By Dominic Curran on November 17th, 2009

Tags: Communications, Football, Football Sponsorship, Naming Rights, Newcastle United, Public relations

No comments

OK so the news is bad – you’re the tournament organiser of the Rugby World Cup in New Zealand in two years and already you are having to re-forecast, again, the level of loss you expect the event to make (now up another $9.3 million to $39.3 million). Much of the increased loss is based on lower expectations around ticket sales.

But I suspect that the tournament organiser, Martin Sneddon, may see his latest stance on the situation quoted back to him in the coming years.

Asked recently by the media whether he expected a game between minnow nations from Europe and America in New Plymouth on a Thursday night would be hard to sell, Mr Snedden came out with the classic: “It will sell out. I am prepared to put my reputation on it.”

While admiring his passion, I just hope the good folks of New Plymouth see it the same way and turn out for both the sake of the sport and Mr Sneddon’s mortgage.

By Dominic Curran on October 19th, 2009

Tags: Communications, Default, Public relations, Rugby

No comments

So there it is, all over. 100 days and 2400 people later; today marks the final day of Antony Gormley’s live art installation ‘One & Other’.

34,520 people applied; 1208 men and 1192 women aged between 16 and 84 were randomly selected to take part. People from every walk of life from across the UK, spent an hour alone on the empty plinth in Trafalgar Square creating a collective portrait of humanity.

And not a single ‘celebrity’ or former Big Brother contestant in sight.
Marvellous.

The project – the focus of articles, photos, tweets and blogs well before the first person took to the plinth on 6th July 2009 – has been deemed a success. In Gormley’s own words, “Whether you see the plinth as a protest or pole-dance platform; studio or stocks; playpen or pulpit; as a frame for interrogation or for meditation, it has provided an open space of possibility for many to test their sense of self and how they might communicate this to a wider world.”

So did we like it? The art critics did not.
Me? I loved it.

I first wrote about the project last July on this very blog. I didn’t get picked in the ballot but I have enjoyed watching those who did, including three people I know. ‘A snapshot of Britain’, the creation has been described as. Well certainly it showed off the great British sense of humour – as well as raising over £24,000 for charity through plinthers performances.

A brief snapshot of just a few of the plinthers who caught my eye:
- A modern day naturist Lady Godiva astride a child’s rocking horse in only a pair of boots (Gormley himself had said that ‘he would be very upset if somebody didn’t take their clothes off’)
- A 26 year old dressed as a giant turd in a plea for cleaner water, resulting in some nice PR & awareness for Water Aid
- A Stringfellow’s dancer whose pole dancing performance apparently caused the Sky Arts website to crash
- An 8ft Godzilla
- A bent over skin-tight morph suit
- A number of folk advertising themselves in a ‘Give me a Job’ bid to gain work most of which resulted in employment
- The girl who led an impressive flash-mob audience in a world-record bid for the most people dancing to Thriller (Michael Jackson, RIP, would have been proud).

The list goes on. Right up to the very final plinther, Emma Burns from Liverpool who used the last hour of the people’s plinth (08.00-09.00 today) to remember the victims of the Hillsborough disaster.

The good, the bad, the ugly and the downright bizarre have all been up there.

The art critics may not have raved about it.
Stuff ‘em.

Over 720,000 people watched online – a huge figure for an arts website – with 7.5 million page impressions during the 100 days. And the project will live on through a TV documentary due to be screened on Sky Arts; a book produced by Random House; and within the walls of the Wellcome Library who plan to store the footage and interviews with every participant for future historians and academics.

Antony Gormley never actually made it onto the plinth having been rejected four times in the public ballot (and refusing to insist on a slot). One suspects he won’t mind. Without a shadow of a doubt, he will be kept busy over the coming months regardless, his profile further elevated by the successful way in which One & Other has truly brought art to the masses. And if you need further persuasion, take 4mins out of your day – right now- and have a watch of the final highlights video on Sky Arts. It’s emotive stuff.

- Next month, Sir Keith Park, a Battle of Britain hero will take to the Fourth Plinth in a more conventional memorial statue format

By Stephanie Branston on October 14th, 2009

Tags: Blogging, Communications, Flash mobbing, Media, Public relations, The Arts

No comments

Being half Aussie, one of the stories in yesterday’s Brand Republic email caught my attention.

The Australian Government recently announced that it is looking for an agency to develop a new brand identity to embody Australia in the 21st century with a budget of A$20 million over four years.

In response to this, agency DesignBay has launched a competition challenging people to submit their own logo and strapline for the chance to win a A$2000 prize. The global competition, which opens today, will run for two weeks, with the winners and short-listed entrants announced in the marketing industry’s B&T magazine in November.

DesignBay founder Alec Lynch, has been quoted saying: “Australia’s brand is important. We want to find the best logo and tagline ideas that Australia’s creative talent and the world can come up with and we’re going to offer them, for free, to the government. We want to give people the opportunity to contribute to Australia’s brand and we want Australia’s brand to be the best it can be.”

In this day and age we are all used to brands and media outlets asking for our contribution and I’m right behind giving the public the chance to translate their patriotism into what could become the new identity for their nation. However on this occasion, I can’t help but think that the aim of the game is more to drive publicity for the design agency than to give consumers a voice. Although hats off to their PR team, as I’m writing about them and I’d certainly never heard of them before reading the article this morning.

The Australian government are due to launch the new identity domestically in February and internationally in May and I’ll be keeping my eyes peeled along the way to see whether the Design Bay competition has any impact on the outcome.

Either way, you’ve got to be in it to win it so I’ll be off to the drawing board…..

By Kelly Russell on October 14th, 2009

Tags: Brand marketing, Communications, Media, Public relations

No comments

I’ve just rushed to get the tube and I’ve amazed myself with how much access to information I need for my 20 minute trip home. I left the office frantically grabbing marketing press, to make sure I’m up to date with the ever changing marketing environment in which we live. On the way to the tube I picked up the (sadly only remaining) evening free sheet to stay in touch with London, sport and news. Not forgetting hastily refreshing my Twitter feed before I head to the depths of the underground to ensure I’ll be up to speed with all the goings on with my many new online buddies. They’ll be fixing the signal down here soon right?

All this for just 20 minutes? And in that time I’ll guess I’ve had 200 plus brands trying to talk to me.  The problem being (particular at this time of day) I don’t feel that up for a chat. I just want my facts and stats to keep me up to date. I don’t need info overload.

My short journey home provides a small example of the millions of channels available to me – but hopefully you see my point – engaging with your target can be more and more challenging each and every day. I recently heard someone with supreme intellect profess “It’s not the message, it’s the medium”. Wise words I thought. But, then two days later, I was at a fabulous talk when the online guru said “The channel is secondary, it’s all about the content”. Two quite different views and further weight to the challenge we face in the future of marketing.

All of this got me thinking. How would I engage with me if I was a brand? A quite simple task you’d think. I know the target audience reasonably well. I’ve got a good grip of what makes me tick and can tap in to the inner brain that is so important to both influencing behaviour and planning the most opportune moment for interaction.

I’m quite a simple being. I love sport, cooking, a bit of music, the odd drink and going on holiday is right up there. I want short and relevant bits of information and, if you can give me something with added humour or something of genuine interest I’m hooked. Simple.

Now, the challenging element is finding how to give me this gift of humorous/interesting content along with the brand’s message. How do we know what media I’ll be consuming, how much time I’ll have and what distractions I’ll have along my way? The truth is we don’t, but we do know I’m loyal to certain media platforms, albeit ones that change and fairly regularly too. At the moment I’m hooked on Twitter and I scan the free sheets on my way to and from work, so get your message to me there and I should get it (as long as it intrigues me). Through Twitter I might even respond and you’ve suddenly gone beyond just a message and I’m in dialogue with the brand.

Now if that message was to invite me to an experience or event that floats my boat, the brand’s on to something. By engaging me further with one of my passion points, I’m happy to interact but I won’t hit the dance floor on my own. I need to be invited.  As soon as I’m hooked, I’m loyal and I’m long-term – the perfect consumer. And for me, here lies the true power for the future of marketing; an integrated approach to communication leading to an immersed brand experience to drive powerful long-term consumer relationships. 

Partnerships between brands and content/experience platforms strengthen the opportunity and that is why sponsorship is increasingly becoming the core of many major marketing strategies.  I certainly see it as the future, but am keen to get some opinions; if you’ve read this far please feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments.

Now, all this thinking has made me miss my 20 minutes with the London Lite, Marketing Mag and Twitter. I’m also questioning the content I’ve just produced. I guess if no one reads it I could always blame the medium?

By Ben Wilkinson on September 29th, 2009

Tags: Advertising, Communications, Digital marketing, Experiential marketing, Sponsorship, Sport

2 comments

Read any of today’s national newspaper reports on Leeds United v Liverpool in last night’s Carling Cup and you’ll notice something – a total lack of any pictures of the match. Instead there is a box out in all papers saying the same thing, below is how The Guardian framed it.

Although, Leeds decided to allow just Action Images and a local agency in, they did allow national papers to send a photographer each which sounds fair enough until you listen to sports editors stating that they need a variety of photos from a game in order to chose the best shot.

Leeds may have sensible reasons for precluding leading agencies such as PA and Getty from the ground based on space, congestion, spectator viewing impairment etc but it does re-kindle an age old ‘debate’ between sports rights-holders and the media.

Here’s the problem – rights-holders have successfully packaged their product for television and make a vast amount of money from it, for example the latest Premier League / Sky deal is worth around the billion pound mark. At the same time, monetising the rest of the media has proved elusive.

You only need to look at the increased pagination of newspaper sports sections to know that sport is an important circulation and advertising driver, however, unlike TV and radio, newspapers don’t have to pay a penny for the right to air. This becomes even more acute with photographic and written agencies who directly make money by selling photos and copy from the matches without having to pay any sort of license to the rights-holder.

Agencies and media say they are providing the global publicity and coverage that is the oxygen of any sport and allows the rights holders to make more from sponsorship and in turn drives people to the television completing a virtuous circle. Are they right? Absolutely but it is almost impossible to actually equate that return. Is it frustrating for rights-holders trying to monetise all elements of their product? You bet.

While this argument rumbles on there will only be one loser, the team / event sponsors, missing out on the very exposure they paid for in the first place.

By Dominic Curran on September 23rd, 2009

Tags: Communications, Media, Public relations, Sponsorship, Sport

No comments