NBA Marketing Gone Wild!!

Sometimes, marketers have a tendency, like the rest of us, to get overzealous about what they accomplish.  Sometimes, this leads to indefensible behavior.  Maybe indefensible is too strong of a word.  Okay, it leads to questionable behavior.  Is that better?  Good.  The NBA, being the business of basketball that it is, has seized on the popularity of two of their athletes in a sort of disgusting way.  I must also mention the other partners complicit in this problem.  Roll Call:  ESPN, Sports Illustrated, Vitamin Water, Nike, ABC, and the Turner Broadcasting Network.  This list is not all-inclusive, but certainly the worst of the worst.

Nike, always ready to pimp out a star, has put out a line of puppet commercials to help illustrate my point:

t

The best part about this, is that Kobe and Lebron could very possibly NOT end up meeting in the finals.  The other funny thing about the hubub, is that there are two other stars that are playing in these two series.  Carmelo Anthony is playing in the West against Kobe, and Dwight Howard is playing in the East against Lebron.  A true marketer would figure out how to seize the moment and message the current situation so that they could maximize all of the star power the league has to offer.  Carmelo Anthony and Dwight Howard are both engaging and positive personalities that could draw a different type of fan than Lebron and Kobe.

If you think about their locations, the regions could benefit by the introduction of these stars into the hearts of NBA fans and casual followers, alike.  In the southeast, who has greater profit potential than a 6’11″ muscle-bound 24 year old donning a Superman cape.  In the mountain west, Denver’s the only NBA team, and Carmelo has a very mature personality; he could be a great role model.  Yet, the only commercials you see on the networks or the web, feature Kobe and/or Lebron.

Lebron and Kobe are great, but they’re not the only people in the league that can be used to grow the brand.  Plus, what happens if you don’t have that product on the main stage?  It would be like only advertising an mp3 connection in a vehicle, but you only made the prototype with the correct port.  Not only that, nothing’s been said about the gas mileage, styling, or powertrain ; and those may be the best points of differentiation in the final product. If you advertise something the feature should be in the final product.  I think that’s marketing 101.

You can also argue that the casual fan is disengaged in the areas that are home to the teams Carmelo and Howard play on.  If I lived in Orlando or Denver, I would not be too happy with the NBA.  In fact, I would feel a little like a jilted lover.  Carmelo was an Olympian that played huge minutes in Beijing.  Howard has won or placed second in the NBA’s dunk contest the past 2 years.  Plus, both of these young men are on the All-NBA Team. 

I personally hope that either Lebron or Kobe are out of the finals so that ESPN, the NBA and the rest have to scramble to put together a reason for people to watch their product.  I’m actually a little disappointed in the NBA for a horrible tactics to support a good strategy, given that there are no guarantees on who will be the only teams showcased in the next week.   Stars allow fans to become resonant with a brand, because they feel as though they connect with certain people.  Unfortunately, the tactic of only supporting and highlighting a small piece of that is dangerously irresponsible – especially if the stars of favor are not on the biggest stage.

Red-Facebook

Yes, it is sadly true.  As the United States of America is on the precipice of losing its once highly coveted “only superpower” status, the Commies threaten to invade a truly American idea.  As reported in the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124303553603348803.html), Russian internet investment group – Digital Sky Technologies (DST) - plans to invest $200 million at a $10 billion valuation in facebook.  I’m not so interested in the terms of the deal as I am the social implications from the matter.  Has the business environment become so heinous in this country that there are no investors willing to inject capital into the most infectious and popular social networking site in America?

If you view the users of FB as the proletariat and DST the bourgouisie, then all users of the site should rise up against them, as Marx suggested, and beat them at their own game! Should we disdain their capitalist ways in our capitalist system?  Hell yes, we should.  From what I understand, Russisa still has multiple journalists on the run for simply stating their opinion, while FB is amongst the most egalitarian, 1st Amendment supporting, American-as-apple pie businesses on the interwebs. Support for this potential transaction(s)  as a pure business deal is ridiculous to even consider. The Ruskies have dissed the American way of life for the better part of the last 50 years, so we cannot act like a deal of this magnitude – with a company like facebook – is acceptable.

There are a few promises that I make, should this deal go through.

1. The first time my content is censored, I write my Congressman (over and over again)
2. I will search for other social networking sites that can fulfill my digital conversation sharing needs
3. I will post unflattering content about the new partner’s country
4. I will send a “nasty gram” to the FB people once a day, until they tell my why. *Drop to knees and scream -WHYYYYYYY!!!*
5. I will Friend Request and poll as many people as it takes to get support, contrition, apologies, and a “way forward without Russians” strategy from FB
6. I will boo every tennis player who’s last name ends in ‘ova,’ ‘ina’ and  ’ski’  in person (via  myself or my influence)
7. I will issue an official recall on all Matroyshka dolls in America

Admittedly some of those are not that likely, but my dedication knows no bounds.  On a serious note, this does represent a potential PR problem for FB, which has had it’s share of them.  Usually they have been due to content collection and sharing on the site and through the applications.  As recently as last year, FB had to settle with contending parties claiming the intellectual property was actually theirs; and FB “founder” Zuckerberg was their former employee at Harvard;  it probably was theirs and they got ppaid (with two “p’s” for a double dose of that paper).

Meanwhile, as recently as last year Russia was cutting off oil to our allies and rolling through Georgia with tanks and a bad attitude.  If this deal becomes imminent, FB has some ‘splainin’ to do.  They need to be honest about the deal and what a $2 billion interest from a Russian country means to FB users and investors.  They need to answer why this would be a good deal for their users; what are the plans to expand with the capital; what DST’s role will be and how will the investors benefit?  FB is supposed to have positive cash flow this year…what’s the rush?

Media Buys and You

Marketers influence media content, which brings to mind an essential question. Why does this happen, and does the media need marketers more than marketers need them? Furthermore, if the latter is true then are there ways to limit this influence for media purity? This is the marketers version of the famously philisophical chicken or the egg question.

Media and marketers are actually co-dependants. Mediums need marketers to pay the bills, while marketers need mediums to get their to get their message out to the public. The talented few, that can draw eyes and attention with their content via tv, radio, internet, videos, movies, sporting events, etc command the most attention and power because they control the masses’ time and scope of cultural relation. With all that said, they can often draw crowds but can’t but can’t charge enough to make the kind of profit they desire. Therefore, their ability to draw crowds at a larger price makes for the perfect relationship between content creators and companies looking to capitalize on all of those captive eyes. In the end, money talks; many cable and niche stations – on all mediums – owe their very existence to their ability to capture marketing dollars. Thus, I agree with the theory that media needs marketers due to the fact that most are monetarily dependant on ad dollars.

This has been made apparently clear by situations like Imus. He was an idiot, and regardless of the amounts of ears listening to his program, the public fallout from being associated with him made the risk of sponsorship much greater than diverting the ad dollars elsewhere. Additionally, the exorbitant advertising fees based off of the millions of possible impressions Imus commanded, the power of the marketer was raised by the popularity of the radio program.

Media entities are in a precarious position because they are never aware of what will be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back to create the situation for marketer’s power to be exerted negatively.

Powder kegs beset the path of many, from Limbaugh to everyone on MSNBC. The culture of America is so sensitive to every little mis statement, that media types have little room to be edgy and not be villified. Who do you think is next?

Drugs are Bad, Mmmmkay?

I’m in this AdLaw class. In it, we’re discussing the legality of direct to consumer advertising (DTCA). DTCA has been legal since 1997, when DTCA laws changed in the U.S. Only the U.S. and two other developed nations share this distinction, if that’s what it can be called.

So, if you’re wondering whether you’re socially inept, impotent, or believe the Jarvik artificial heart guy you’re probably a victim of DTCA…or a total fool – take your pick. It’s an epidimic that’s sweeping the nation and doctor’s      offices, across this great country. Marketers and companies do some pretty sleazy things, but messing with people’s health? That’s the bottom line.

It was educationally estimated that $4.2 billion (yes, billion) was spent on DTCA in 2005. 94% of which was focused on everyone’s favorite medium, the tv. Is anyone else sick of seeing boner commercials when trying to watch a wholesome episode of Jeopardy with their mothers? I am, and it has to stop. It has to stop like JJ had to stop Michael from joining the Black Panther Party on Good Times. It has to stop like the hearts of those goldfish you bring home from the state fair. It has to stop like George Bush’s term in office. In other words, for the good of the nation we must join together as if we were Voltron to bring justice to the meek.

I’m a marketer and I’m usually all for direct communication to consumers, but drug companies are already known to be suspect. We know they pay off doctors to push their medications to their customers. I call it drugola, from the famous payola of the old radio days; although I think this still exists. How else would Soulja’ Boy Tell ‘Em get on the radio? Come on, “Kiss me Through the Phone”? But I digress. The psychological power and danger that exists with having an overdrugged and hypochondriac nation could be enormous. I remember when the only things we had to worry about as kids was the asthma puffer and lice. Now, kids are popping pills for everything from ADHD to depression – a kid, DEPRESSED!

Can you picture kids needing a boost of legal speed before going outside to play? It’s already hard enough to get their fat asses to put down the PS3. Do old men who can’t get it up really need to be doing it? I’m making t-shirts that say “Remember Vioxx.” If you’ve forgotten, this is the company that went on an all out marketing blitz of their product in 2000 and 2001. They won advertising and marketing awards for being a “power company.” Soon, we found out that tens of thousands suffered severe cardiovascular problems from this drug. The yellow bellied government won’t do anything unless the constituents say something – so say something!

To join the fight against this disturbing practice, go to www.stopdrugads.org/learnmore.html.

Doctor, the TV tells me I’m depressed

Happy 2009!

Seems as though everyone is doing a “Best [Whatever] of 2008,” or “2009 [Blank] Outlook.”  So, Market Intelligentsia jumps into the fray by discussing what will be the most socially relevant marketing trends of 2009.  First, let me review what seemed to pervade the landscape of 2008.

The single most important behavior change was the mass acceptance of social networking in the business climate in 2008.  I received more twitter, facebook, myspace (not so much for business), and linkedin requests than all the previous three years combined.  The ubiquitous use of these media were met with near universal acceptance, but a small percentage of super-users accounted for a bulk of the content.  Meanwhile, some users became a part of the networks to merely sporadically use them – if more than once, to log on and make friend requests.  Still, major corporations have not figured out how to take advantage of this media because habits have not truly been formed yet.  The junk created by the “hardly, if ever” crowd muddied the water.

2009 will see this change.  The regular users will start to develop social media personalities for each of the sites.  Corporations will find social networking tantamount to banner ads and press releases in their necessity to enhance the marketing mix, brand development, and consumer conversation.

Brand affinity, and ultimately purchase, will only be accomplished through speaking to the prospect on the terms in which they use the service.  Branded applications that assist with current usage functions in these various media can be an avenue into the hearts, minds, and wallets of target demographics.  Use the media as a study tool, then develop applications that make the social networking experience more pleasurable, easier, and/or enhanced.  These positive affects can then be transferred to your brand.

The adpopters and heavy users of social networking technologies – often being heavy influencers – can then spread that message out to others, via email.  Let the heavy users of social media be your company’s evangelist.  Research has shown that consumers trust other consumers a great deal more than they do the company vying for their business.  For 2009, manage the message, via social media ,and let prospects spread it for you.

Welcome to Intelligentsia

Throughout the product lifecycle, marketing impacts society and society impacts marketing.  Whether it is manifest through changes in the product itself, line/brand extensions, new promotional programs, delivery, or communication strategy – marketing and society are inextricably linked.

We’ve seen this in social media, the internet (in general), new product introductions, and the change of products to fit lifestyle.  We’ll have some fun looking at the new marketing programs of the day, by analyzing and understanding their impact on society and how society has impacted them.

Join the conversation!