Checkers is getting better for me

Even though I am very conscious of advertising in general and am more critical than I’m sure an average non-marketing person is, I generally dislike being forced to watch endless ads- most of which are arguably terrible and completely irrelevant to my life.

One campaign that has managed to capture my interest outside of work-prompted critical analyses, however, is the Checkers “Better and Better” campaign. It is rare for a food retailer not to loudly bombard me with low prices, specials and seemingly happy shoppers all in the space of 30 seconds.

Checkers seems to have broken that mould slightly and it is doing a great job at getting my attention, retaining my attention and portraying a very sophisticated and appealing brand image.

In my mind, gone are the days of the cheap, yellow supermarket where I picture wilted lettuce and polony in place of the ham.

So what has attracted me and changed my mind?

First, the adverts are slightly seductive. One is seldom “seduced” by a supermarket, but Checkers is doing just that. They seem to portray individual product ranges in an enticing manner and consistently allude to quality through both visual and audio cues, reinforced by slightly indulgent, light-hearted music.

Second, they have approached products differently. Instead of listing a number of unrelated items with corresponding low prices, they take the time to tell me about certain product ranges and why they are good and worthwhile for me to buy. In other words, they add value to the products that they sell.

An example is the Odd Bins wine selection- a range of unlabeled wines from top South African estates. Most brands struggle to create value around items that are usually referred to as “no-name brand” and that are perceived to be cheap and of sub-standard quality. They redefined this practice by creating a brand that reassured and offered value and a guarantee, but at an affordable price. This is a difficult balance to strike, but Checkers has done it in style and with dignity.

Checkers’ approach to advertising their offering is distinctive. While the products they display are arguably not unique to Checkers, the feeling that they leave me with about those products and the brand that is bringing them to me, is.

I believe that Checkers is striving to live up to their promise to be better and better, even if it is just the manner in which they communicate.

In light of this success, I do not think that their latest message, “Don’t change your lifestyle, change you supermarket” will be translated as “Checkers is cheap”. They have done enough ground-work to be able to send out a bold message in particularly challenging times without compromising consumer confidence. The message challenges shoppers to try Checkers because Checkers guarantees exceptional quality at sensitive prices- again, a fine balance nicely achieved.

Standard Bank finally admitting it's a bank?

I am quite pleased that Standard Bank has "rebranded"...

I had intended for this to be a positive take on this effort, but already my mind is objecting. Therefore, in fairness, I'll present both sides of my view.

From a cautionary front, I guess it would be more comforting if it was just a new and relatively insignificant campaign, but it isn't. It's clearly a declaration of a new direction. The issue here is that this represents the second rebranding attempt in a few years for Standarad Bank. Banks, to most, should be consistent and reliable, not constantly trying to figure out their role in their own customers' lives.

In light of this, it should come as no surprise when some express their severe disappointment that Standard Bank is no longer inspired, motivated and involved and likely, never really took the opportunity to prove it. You see, it is difficult to believe that a bank, which people pay to keep their money safe; pay back with interest; and pay to help their money grow, is inspired and motivated in any other way than to make more money. It is similarly difficult to fathom how a bank is involved. The only example of a bank demonstrating its involvement via mass media, in the true, positive sense of the word, is Nedbank's solar-powered billboards.

Thus, while a change is slightly disconcerting, it is equally welcome and finally representative of a move towards something that is far truer to a bank and a bank that is operating in many emerging markets.

Let's recap. "Simpler. Better. Faster" was arguably a disaster. If one person waited in a queue for an ATM a little too long or stood in a bank queue a few minutes more than patience could tolerate, this claim and promise fell flat. In fact, I suspect that this promise not only fell flat, but, on occasion, got subsequently stamped on and, in extreme cases, maybe even spat on.

Therefore, it was a wise move to re-evaluate the consumer promise. We were then introduced to a smooth-talking and friendly man, who told us that Standard Bank was "Inspired. Motivated. Involved." Despite the obvious problem I have already highlighted regarding this, these words are so abstract that they are almost impossible to live up to. First, people will interpret them in different ways and second, they sound so angellic and impossible that they just simply couldn't be believed.

However, Standard Bank is now "Moving Forward." Cynics might be a little concerned that this implies their bank was standing still before, but I believe this is Standard Bank's first honest attempt at being a bank, especially in a number of emerging markets.

Although "Moving Forward" could be perceived as a slightly cowardly move that leaves constant room for error, it certainly is relevant. Do most people not bank and invest as they move forward or to move forward? Andit is certainly something that has the potential to resonate in many markets, both developed and developing.

What will be interesting to see, however, is whether Standard Bank can prove to its customer base that it is fully equipped and willing to assist them in moving forward. It also needs to be able to demonstrate that it is capable of moving forward and evolving its business- this includes its products and services, which will need to represent forward-thinking.

They have set themselves quite a challenge- let's hope that Standard Bank will be able to truly demonstrate this promise as opposed to using it as an excuse for when something may go wrong.

Branding Anti-rape

I found a recent news24 user’s article a little difficult to digest in light of his fervent anti-rape stance. I am certainly not against him, or any other men in particular, being anti-rape, but I have slight problems with how vocal people brand and truly live the cause they advocate.

From a branding perspective, I believe the author advertised his sentiment quite fervently. He outright condemned rape and condemned the perpetrators of rape. In essence, this could be considered good. South Africa needs men who unify and stand up against something that can be likened to a plague in South Africa and something that “disempowers” women (and children) for their entire lives.

My problem: this author was not standing. I believe he was and is sitting, like most privileged men and women in this country.

If one is going to be vocal about rape, firstly do not attack the people who actively dedicate their lives to researching the dynamics of the problem and the very structures that perpetuate or condone it. Secondly, have a brand plan in place. If you are anti-rape, what exactly are you DOING about it besides writing a careless and reactive article, which can be likened to a badly convincing Verimark or detergent ad? How do you plan to demonstrate to the world of women, men and children who have been raped that your opinion is able to transcend mere words?

A good brand lives what it advocates- it is believable. A good brand or brand ambassador would have written that article not encouraging anti rapist sentiment, but encouraging other men (and women) to unify and do something about it.

Not once did I get a hint that this self-announced anti-rape brand ambassador was part of any organisation or movement for change regarding rape.

For those whose actions speak louder than words, I presume that you are ready active supporters or funders of organisations such as Men as Partners, Rape Crisis, 16 Days of Activism, POWA etc. etc. These are brands. They have an action plan inherent to their stance or what they stand for and they, and their supporters, deserve fitting titles as true brand ambassadors for or agents of change.

The article can be found in the My News24 section of news24.com titled, “Stop excusing rapists”: http://www.news24.com/Content/MyNews24/YourStory/1162/2326525654c84c8fa7da106ebdf0a8de/13-07-2009%2002-07/Stop_excusing_rapists

Confessions of a cop-out consumer or “prosumer”?

I’ve had to look at my own “consumer behaviour” quite critically and have noticed a slight inconsistency.

I’ll begin by reviewing my consumer profile. I could arguably be considered to fall into a comfortable middle-class financial- and lifestyle bracket. Looking at my history of access to education, my home life growing up and leisure activities, I am certainly what many would regard as privileged.

However, at my present life-stage and considering my financial position and its move towards complete autonomy, I believe I fall into a mass middle class bracket and subsequently, feel (and notice) the effects of a financial recession and the rising costs of living in the most basic areas: electricity, food and fuel. In fact, I grudgingly admit that I feel these things quite significantly. I also have to acknowledge that I have become acutely aware of the radical jump in price over the past two years of the most meaningless items, for example, a tin of tuna, a 4-pack of chicken breasts and a single roll of one-ply toilet paper.

I resigned myself to the fact that a shift from free-range chicken to no-living-conditions-mentioned chicken was necessary. Included in this, I gave up John West in favour of bland-packaged tuna and even accepted the fate of the cheapest one-ply toilet paper. Simultaneously, I despise the fact that I have no control over what I pay for things and very little knowledge as to why I pay what I do.

You’d think that with such conscious shifts (I’ve only mentioned a few) and a fervent distrust of my position as consumer, I’d be the type of person to make every effort to shop where prices are low and quality is lasting. I should be the person who actively shops for personal care and cleaning products at Shoprite (where I noticed they are slightly cheaper), but who buys her fresh produce from Pick n Pay because their longevity is more reliable, and hence more valuable than the few Rand discount Fruit & Veg City offers me. Essentially, I should be a discerning and cautious shopper with the objective of surviving, if not beating, The System.

I am (sadly) not.

While I have given up brand names in favour of cheaper, not-so-pretty-looking products, and while I do dig into the back of the fridge to ensure I find the milk with the most distant sell-by date, my efforts at being Miss-Conscientious-Consumer have been completely insulted by the fact that I shop at the Spar down the road where prices are noticeably inflated. I shop purely for convenience at the expense of price.

You may be thinking that I’m clearly exaggerating my financial situation and that in fact, I am a born-and-bred privileged consumer, who fakes fitting in with the masses, but who can actually afford to shop for convenience over value. The reality is that I cannot.

I shop for convenience because I cannot stand the Monday evening queues in Pick n Pay or their perpetual lack of items I tend to want or need. I loathe the fact that they have too few baskets for Monday night month-end shoppers. I despise the shop layout and that silly perpendicular section that creates traffic jams, especially with my superfluous trolley. I do not like walking down the stairs to my car with four full and heavy bags and I get quite upset when a week later, I realise that a person living alone should never have bought a month’s worth of fresh produce in the first place.

Alternatively, driving to Checkers or Shoprite is a hassle and parking is unpleasant, and shopping on a quiet Sunday is like sending me to Siberia to find inspiration and meaning in life.

Instead, while I am still brand- and quantity-conscious within my local Spar, I disregard their overall pricing strategy in favour of short queues, friendly staff, every random item I might need for my spontaneous cooking occasions or awkward cravings, a mostly guaranteed parking space, and the only outlet that seems to sell electricity (without complications or extra charges) for my block of flats.

I admit that convenience is expensive (and perceived to be a privilege), but the overall experience of convenience when I work and study and value the time in between, is priceless. Convenience may be considered counter-recession, but I do believe that it still holds on to the essence of “prosumerism”- i.e. the things that count to me.

How sincere are brands, really?

What I find incredibly interesting is watching the attitude of brands during an economically challenging period. Recent months have seen media littered with talk of rising interest rates, inflation, global food and fuel crises, rising petrol prices, rising food prices, electricity rate hikes etc. etc. I believe we have only seen the start of a very new way of living or era of consumerism and one that we are certainly not accustomed to and are hence, under-equipped to deal with.

Bearing the brunt of the recession are consumers. While challenged to make purchases that once seemed regular, consumers are faced with companies or brands that are more dependent than ever on their loyalty, while still aiming to meet the objective of every business or brand: to grow and increase or maintain profit margins. The latter becomes a lot more challenging as consumers wisen up to their new financial limitations and are less likely to investigate new brands confidently.

What brands need to do is defend their existing customer base and prioritise the retention of loyal customers over immediate growth. This isn’t always easy and cost-effective, but it is certainly necessary in order to increase trust in a brand and hence commitment to it long-term, through economic instability and until conditions balance out.

I believe that it is imperative that brands take responsibility on behalf of consumers during times like these over goals of short-term growth and profits. However, I do not believe that all brands do.

First, it is evident that retailers are suffering the immediate consequences of an economic recession and continued customer support is necessary for sustainability. However, more aggressively than ever, retailers are attempting to encourage consumers to take out retail credit accounts. While this system allows a way for people to afford certain items by paying the value back over time, it is certainly not encouraging responsible consumer behavior, nor is it instilling any brand values into the minds of consumers that demonstrate care or consideration.

To accentuate this is the fact that a majority of account-holders are likely not in a position to be purchasing goods from the selected retailers, but credit or account systems make consumers feel like they are. Completely contrary to the mission of the Credit Act is this system, which subtly encourages consumers to spend in advance as opposed to helping train them to function the other way: save and then spend. Furthermore, the slight mismanagement of any retail account is monitored and recorded, affecting that person’s ability to make larger and often significant investments in the future. These systems are accelerating credit debt when the aim should be to combat it.

From a branding perspective, this demonstrates brand values that are irresponsible, profit-driven, selfish and uncommitted- essentially counter-values.

The second example I have is regarding one of South Africa’s leading banks. It is obvious that the business has been accelerating its marketing of a scope of products in order to subject existing customers to a larger offering, likely with the aim of customers extending their investment in one brand as opposed to across many. For example, banks offer savings solutions, investments, short-term insurance, life insurance, mortgages and bonds, loans, student facilities, car funding etc. A colleague of mine was contacted by his bank and told that he really should consider applying for a credit card. He said that he is quite happy with the way he spends his money currently and has no need for credit at this stage. The person who called him insisted that a credit card would benefit him because he has proven to be a responsible customer, who has managed his money effectively and responsibly.

We told him to tell the caller that it is irresponsible for a leading bank to be insisting that customers consider offerings related to credit spending during an economic recession. I stick to this and feel that it is a method of securing long-term spending with the bank in the name of profitable sustainability. From a business perspective this seems like a perfectly wise solution, but the brand will ultimately suffer and it will in turn affect the business in the long-term. Acknowledging a customer’s mature money management is a ridiculous way to disguise the blatant sale of credit. If anything, the brand should acknowledge good money management by discouraging consumers to change mature and successful patterns of spending. The brand would be a lot more respected and I wouldn’t have “Inspired to make money and motivated to get it” ringing sardonically in my ear.

It may seem very easy to comment on profit versus values, but I honesty believe that working hard through tough times to really demonstrate a brand’s values and entrench its commitment to customers will result in increased brand loyalty and ultimately more secure long-term sustainability.

Are we up for the challenge?

When brands go bad

Recently MTN held a competition for customers to celebrate their 15th birthday. It seems like a perfect opportunity for a brand to profile itself and reward loyal customers, especially in light of the ridiculously high rates South African consumers are expected to pay for mobile services in relation to the rest of the world.

MTN arguably botched this one up. Customers stood the chance to win a homeloan to the value of R1 million, 14 Toyota Fortuners and plenty other prizes that MTN would give away daily.

In order to win, participants had to answer general knowledge questions. The more questions that were answered correctly, the more points were accumulated, and the more points were promised for answering the next question correctly. Each SMS cost R7.50.

Firstly, to expect a loyal and regularly paying MTN customer to fork out R7,50 for a competition SMS and then encourage them to continue accumulating points through subsequent SMS’s, is not in the spirit of a celebration and certainly no reward for a majority of South Africa’s cell phone users. One could be forgiven for thinking that this entry mechanism had the sole of objective of funding the competition in the first place.

Secondly, according to an IOL news article, The Star newspaper had established that winners seemed to know each other, were friends on Facebook, colleagues or spouses. Rumours surfaced that there was a website where entrants could check their accumulated points and knew exactly how many SMS’s they needed to send in to accumulate enough points to win.

MTN launched an inquiry into this matter and to top this off, independent complaints about the competition resulted in the National Lottery Board investigating and finding the competition illegal.

The competition was closed a month ahead of schedule on the 5th July. This is what MTN had to say: “Whereas this competition generated a lot of excitement and participation, it unfortunately reached a stage where the debate surrounding it was not consistent with the MTN Values and detracted from the intended spirit of the game for our customers.”

Interesting. It is reassuring to know that illegality is not a value of MTN’s, although I still find it immensely disturbing that such a massive brand considers R7,50 for competition SMSs consistent with their values and proceeded with a mechanism for a competition that was so obviously not customer-centric.

I am dying to know exactly what their values are.

MTN, you have disappointed me immensely. This makes it tempting to change to another brand. Realistically, I won’t because of the admin and time associated with a sim swap and change in service provider, and because I do not believe any one network in this country will truly liberate me from paying about 5 times the price of my Indian counterparts (who similarly live in a developing nation).

Sources: IOL News, Bizcommunity.com and News24.com

Acknowledging a legendary brand

In light of Michael Jackson’s death and the overwhelming reaction by people across the globe to this, I believe it would be appropriate to comment on Brand Michael Jackson, specifically looking at what he represented to his “customers” or fans.

Words that epitomise media and public responses to Michael Jackson after his death are: iconic, legendary, extraordinary, talented, transcending, inspiring…the list goes on. On the other hand, there are a number of cynics who will always harp on Jackson’s awkwardness, strange behaviour, controversy and insecurity, but in light of the epic reaction to his sudden death, it seems that brand Michael Jackson was a lot stronger and far less tainted by negative associations than many might have imagined.

If we consider a brand to encompass the accumulation of experiences, encounters and interactions between a product/service and a consumer, Michael Jackson certainly succeeded in creating a plethora of experiences that infiltrated not only peoples’ personal lives, but popular culture as a whole.

Arguably, Michael Jackson’s “product” or “service” was his music and entertainment. (Perhaps it would be more dignified to refer to this as his brand’s reason.) Not only did he completely differentiate his music from other performers at the time, he wholly broke the mould of music and introduced this to people in an exciting, individual and captivating way- a continuous offering of albums, flawless performances, a unique sense of style and his signature moonwalk.

What really solidified the Michael Jackson brand in the minds and souls of consumers was the actual music and individual songs. Not only does well-liked and often revolutionary music have an inclination to live an extended life, but particular songs cling to people’s specific experiences and distinct moments in their lives. I have yet to meet someone who does not recall a certain moment when hearing a certain song or vice versa. Music has the ability to cement moments and feelings into our consciousness and Michael Jackson’s songs did just this.

Lastly, the actual lyrics of his music appealed to a collective consciousness for social change and cohesion. His music coincided with a time when the world needed to review the structures and norms it had established and subsequently realised that there may be undesirable consequences to some of these.

Brand Michael Jackson used music to facilitate hope, change and simultaneously ignite excitement in the prospect of the future. The result is a legacy of encouragement and likely a brand whose underlying values have just been reborn, allowing its iconic nature and positive associations to triumph over the negative.

And the brand is…?

I read about this brand advert yesterday and saw the ad for the first time last night.

24 hours ago I had absolutely no clue what Brother was. I read the press release about this ad and concluded that it must be some inspiration-inducing ad for another financial services company. It had that air of patient achievement- an arguably overplayed theme in financial services’ brand advertising.

The press release sounded like a Barry Ronge movie review, but it certainly got me interested and I was pleasantly surprised when the ad interrupted my religious Survivor viewing.

I paid particular attention to the art direction, epitomised by striking camera angles, dramatic contrasts and the filtered colours that alluded to a romanticised notion of freedom. Indeed, the wakeboarder also provided a seemingly flawless performance in a remote and surreal setting.

Investec? Alan Gray? A bank? Life insurance?

No, Brother Printers that apparently provide a “flawless first impression” just like the wakeboarder, I presume.

I am trying to establish what the thinking was regarding this piece of communication.

The only link I can possibly force myself to make between the product and the advert is that the wake-boarder’s moves were apparently flawless and I presume Brother wants to say that the result of their printers and copiers will be too. Or to quote a colleague, is it the “flawless way the paper enters and exits the Brother machine” (just like the wakeboarder carves the wake) and the perfect colour that defines every printed copy like the colour of the setting in which the wake-boarder finds himself?

How far is a brand willing to go to try and establish a link?

We need to review this in context. First, can a pro wake-boarder be considered analogous to a printer? Second, is there a real and believable connection between a pristine and noticeably secluded natural setting and a printer?

Advert: A talented man wakeboards effortlessly on pure glass- his movements and grace a tribute to himself for mastering nature and to nature for allowing him the playground to do so.

Product: A printer that is made in a factory (which pumps out environment-compromising greenhouse gases) and that gets used in offices with fluorescent lights, office chairs and neutral-toned walls, complimented by the constant drone of air conditioners.

Brand?
Assuming that the brand is the connection between the potential customer and the product, perhaps the brand appeals to an office-worker’s desire to live a natural and free life, devoid of the daily 9- 5 slog and the admin that accompanies it. Or, are all printer/copier customers and printing professionals moved by a poetic metaphor for perfection when all they likely want is a direct guarantee of colour superiority, functionality and convenience inside an office space?

The setting of the advert or “brand’s voice” is so far removed from the functionality and existence of a printer or copier, I truly battle to understand what the brand wants consumers to understand.

The only link that I am left with is perfection. This makes sense if I aspire to all things natural from my printing room or corner in my electrically-illuminated office or if I deem the niche sport or leisure activity of wakeboarding to be appealing to my experience or aspirations.

We’re back to that awkward analogy between nature and wakeboarding versus a printer.

However, it did say something about lasting impressions, in which case if I can’t be shown a realistic portrayal of lasting impressions created by a printer/copier in a printing-appropriate world, an advert of a tropical island or volcanic eruption, the birth of a baby, the sprint of a cheetah or looming tsunami could have sufficed.

Brand Score: 5 (but only because I love nature and love a glass-like body of water)
To access the press release (and a link to the ad): www.bizcommunity.com/Article/196/17/37614.html