Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Communications Lessons from Mark McGwire and Richard Nixon

We've all seen TV "confessionals" as part of a media strategy: Bill Clinton's, A-Rod's, Mark Sanford, Jim Bakker, et al. Now comes Mark McGwire's all-out media blitz Monday in which he admitted using steroids to enhance his game.

Since the dawn of the TV age (and probably earlier, but I'm lazy to do the proper research), the idiot box has been viewed as a useful platform for addressing concerns, silencing critics, apologizing for wrongdoing, etc.

Richard M. Nixon famously used the then new medium (the "Checkers" story) to dispel corruption rumors and build public support that would force Eisenhower to keep him on the ticket.

Recently we saw South Carolina governor Mark Sanford attempt to use TV to very publicly get a handle on a messy personal life. First, he held a press conference to talk about how he lied about going hiking, but was with his mistress in Argentina, then he (mistakenly) KEPT going on TV to ramble on about his misdoings and have a meltdown.

The difference here, now, with a case like Mark McGwire, is that it's all being VERY carefully stage-managed (WHO or what was in control of Sanford?). As the New York Times notes in a great, behind-the-curtain story (a piece that was surely managed by the McGwire PR team) about the PR strategy:

The one-day plan — coordinated over the past month by Ari Fleischer, a former White House press secretary who runs a crisis-communications company, and the St. Louis Cardinals, who recently hired McGwire as their batting coach — contrasts with last year’s roll-out of Alex Rodriguez’s steroid admission.

In this case, it looks like maybe the strategy will work. Why? EVERYONE has known forever that McGwire used steroids. So the "news" that he is admitting it is NOT a big deal. There is no "wow" factor here. He was properly coached to be very contrite and emotional about the admission.

But the pitfalls lie along the road of contrition: He COVERED up wrongdoing. It's not the crime that gets you but the obfuscation.

  Nixon stands as a interesting example of a communications strategist and what he did/or could have done. There is a great quote from the Oliver Stone film "Nixon" that sheds light on crisis communications and the art of public confessionals:

H. R. Haldeman: Eight words back in '72. 'I covered up. I was wrong. I'm sorry'. The American public would have forgiven him. But we never opened our mouths, John. We failed him.

Since we all knew McGwire did steroids, that aspect doesn't much matter. Note the A-Rod example. We don't really care. Regardless of the Times saying that A-Rod's confessional was rolled-out differently, there are different factors here. A-Rod is a beloved Yankee. We can all get past it. He has built up (and continues to increase) his personal capital with the public over the years and we can forgive him.

Communications, marketing, branding, all things at work here -- all revolve around TRUST. Trust with the consumer, which in the case of sports is a BIG group: basically the entire audience who watches or cares about what Mark McGwire (and in some sense, baseball in general) is doing. Do we trust McGwire? Has he built up the trust capital with the public over the years? Is he a "beloved" figure?

The crisis communications approach at work here is about restoring and enhancing trust with stakeholders. The messages: Trust me, I fouled up, I'm sorry, I know it was wrong, I will never do this kind of bad thing again.

The trick has always been to say "I'm sorry" and do it quickly and earnestly. Mark McGwire has done it a little late in the game, but we'll see how this affects his own legacy.

Thanks for reading.
-Jonathan Gardner

Posted by Jonathan Gardner at 8:44 AM

Labels: A-Rod, Alex Rodriguez, apology, Ari Fleischer, Checkers, confessional, crisis communications, Eisenhower, Jim Bakker, Mark McGwire, Mark Sanford, New York Times, Nixon, PR, steriods, Strategy, TV

Monday, January 4, 2010

Wherefore art thou, Weber Shanwick Korea?

A few months ago, Weber Shandwick (not sandwich, SHANDWICK) made a "pledge" to open an office in Korea before they end of the year (2009). You can read about their promise (now broken) here. For whatever reason, they have never had a presence in one of Asia's biggest markets. Realizing their misguided strategy, they poached a guy named Tyler Kim from Edelman Korea. Tyler's a good PR guy but maybe this assignment was too much for him? Or was it too difficult for Weber Shandwick to handle? They have NOT been doing too well in Asia recently, that's for sure.

Anyway, they made this pledge more four months ago and yet, they still have no Korea office listed on their website, only an "affiliate" (In marketing-speak this is a local office that you farm work out to because you are too cheap or poorly managed to have an office there. You tell your clients, "sure, we have a great local team" when you've probably never even met them and have no idea of their competency or lack thereof). Based on experience, it is REALLY not that hard to get at least a small presence up and running within a few months. Perhaps this doesn't bode well for them.

In the marketing game we believe in something (maybe there are other things, but this one I'm sure of): under-promise, over-deliver. It means, for example, you say "we'll have our Korea office open within 6 months or so" and then you have it open in 5 months and everyone is like "wow, they did better than expected." This is why Amazon.com (et al) tells you the stuff you ordered will arrive in 7 days and they get it to you in 3 days. They know it will impress you, it will make you happy. There is only backlash if you do the opposite: over-promise, over-deliver. If Amazon.com had said you'll get it in 3 days but it takes 7 days, you'll be pissed off. If a PR company says they'll be open by the end of they year, and they're not, people start to question their integrity and their ability to deliver.

HOW is a prospective client of Weber Shandwick Korea to believe ANYTHING they say? Looks like they need some lessons in the basics. Remember guys, UNDER-promise, OK?

Thanks for reading.
-Jonathan

Posted by Jonathan Gardner at 8:01 PM 0 comments

Labels: agency, Asia, Edelman, Korea, PR, Tyler Kim, Weber Shandwick

The big firms, and many others (in PR, marketing, advertising, etc.)have EXTENSIVE operations in Asia. It was there that I had experience working in a senior-level capacity with them. It was SHOCKING how little attention was paid to acting ethically (or simply appropriately) in Asia, while the HQ and leadership back home would pay lip-service to acting responsibly, transparently or (insert meaningless "value" here). While I'm not sure if these firms are violating the letter of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, they may be acting without regard to the SPIRIT of the law governing the behavior of American firms overseas.

The following are some examples witnessed of bad behavior by PR firms overseas. I'll leave it up to you to judge whether the situation described was unethical, immoral, distasteful, or simply just inept:

1. Making an under-the-table cash payment to officials of a state-owned internet service provider in China. This was to keep service "running" on behalf of a major U.S. beverage manufacturer doing an event there.

2. Making payments to a "middleman" to arrange meetings with the top officials of a state-owned company. It was understood that some of these funds would go in the pockets of the officials.

3. A manager at the overseas office of a U.S. PR company created a hostile work environment, akin to something out of the Tailhook scandal. The regional leadership was made aware of the situation through written communications and did nothing about it, save promoting the individual. In this case at least,  the inept regional head was eventually replaced.

4. A supervisor at the overseas office of a U.S. PR firm channeled a contract to build a website for a client (a tourism bureau) to a family member.

5. The CEO of one of the largest U.S. PR firms was asked about a recent article about corrupt media practices in China. The CEO avoided the question. Leadership of the company (heads of Asia offices for the firm) strongly criticized the questioner for bringing this up. Much like the Wizard of Oz, they didn't want the curtain pulled back.

6. U.S. PR firms routinely provide "taxi money" to journalists in China and other countries, in exchange for attendance at press conferences, briefings and other events. These envelopes of up to US$200 are ostensibly for covering "transportation."

These are but a few examples. It is interesting to try and understand WHY this happens.

There is to some degree an "out of sight, out of mind" attitude among the HQ leadership at these companies. As long as the overseas regions continue to deliver results, they are pretty much left on their own. While for most firms, Asia-Pacific only delivers 8%-12% of global revenues, their operating margins are high (due to lower labor costs, etc.). MANY firms, not just PR firms, function this way. "Just deliver, don't cause a major scandal, and carry on."

Some of these Asia offices are run by long-term expats. Many of these folks are Brits/Aussies who have been in Asia FOREVER and have gone "tropo" (as the Aussies like to say) or have "gone local." The local markets often have few or any ethical standards for PR firm/corporate behavior, let alone ANYTHING resembling U.S.-style workplace harassment rules. It can be very tempting for a foreign boss, given a fiefdom in a far-off land, to act like an emperor. Just think of the line from Apocalypse Now: "Out there with these natives it must be a temptation to be god."

At the same time, there is also a lot of pressure among the local office leaders to JUST DELIVER. Get revenue, build the pipeline. If you are a foreign manager or a local who is running a country or city office, this is your NUMBER ONE concern. How much are you really going to be thinking about ethics when your regional president is screaming at you to increase your revenue?

We'll continue to explore this issue further. Feel free to share your examples of PR firms gone wild.
Thanks for reading.
-Jonathan

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Fauxscaling and the Risks of Repositioning Brands in Asia

Pirate handbags sold on the street aren't the only "brand fakes" around these days. There's a whole sector of the global economy dependent on taking a downmarket to middling brand and -- given the breath of a fresh start -- repositioning in new, developing markets. Often, these strategies rely on something we call "fauxscaling," creating a fake brand story/legacy and using tactics to create an image inconsistent with the brand's more downmarket image in its home market.

One could spend all day making a list of the American or European brands that have:

1. Repositioned themselves from downmarket (or middle-market at best) to "upscale" overseas and/or in doing so have

2. Created some dubious back-story and other propaganda for the brand (read: lying).

I have personally seen a GREAT deal of fauxscaling in Asia. With newly emerging, rapidly growing economies there, Western companies have rushed in to make as much money as fast as possible, creating a brand-land-rush to make a market and establish a brand (no matter how crappy the brand is perceived back home) before the competition.

Examples of fauscaling Western brands abound in Asia:

Buick in China is positioned as upscale.

Haagen-Dazs has created upscale-ish shops in Asia and engages in fauxscale tactics like the "legacy myth" in many markets. In Taiwan, nearly all locals believe the faux-story publicized at Haagen-Dazs shops: that the brand is some kind of vaunted European company with an accompanying false creation story. No one I spoke with in Taiwan is aware that Haagen-Dazs (a phony name, to boot) was started by a couple in Brooklyn and the company is part of the General Mills conglomerate.

Pierre Cardin is STILL considered an upscale brand in some parts of Asia, though the last time it was consider such in the U.S. was probably 30 years ago.

Starbucks is growing its reputation as "upscale" in developing markets, such as China and Thailand.

In Taiwan, TGI Friday's is considered an "upscale" date night option for young adults in the major cities (just TRY impressing your date here in the U.S. by taking them there!).

Mary Kay has fauxscaled its way to its current "upscale" position in Asia. The New York Times recently had a story about this in China. When I worked with a marketing/communications consultancy in Asia, my colleagues in Korea were working on the first wave of this, helping to create the fauxscale myth for Mary Kay there.

So, how hard is it to fauxscale a Western brand in Asia? It's REALLY not that difficult, just follow some steps like these:

1. Hire a multinational marketing/communications consultancy. They will be your fauxscale "bridge," bringing together local market sensibilities and a connection to "main office" U.S. brand leadership.

2. Create a lot of fake creation story buzz and endorsements. This is usually accompanied with the promotion of the brand's tenuous connections with "celebrities" back in the U.S. or other home markets. Even better if you can bring the celebrity to the local market to promote. A great example of this is the Lux brand (VERY downmarket) in Asia. They used Liv Tyler as the spokeswoman/endorser in their ads. I don't think the C-lister would sell much product here in the U.S.

3. Bring your fauxscaling brand to the local market to create a new category. Starbucks is a great example of this. They have had no problem convincing the local market (most of whom have never lived overseas) that they are "upscale" as they open "posh" looking coffee bars and introduce coffee culture to markets where this never existed before ("You don't know what upscale American culture is? Well, look here, THIS is what we are telling you it is.")

4. Focus some of your fauxscaling on markets where: A. There is a built in obsession with anything foreign and/or "upscale: (in China ANYTHING with a brand name/logo is worshipped); and, B. The media is corrupt (or at the least, not very ethical or skeptical) and will collude with you in promoting brands.

BUT, with any fauxscaling strategy, there is the danger of SERIOUS missteps.

A couple of years back, there was a HUGE wave of media sensation throughout greater China regarding a Haagen-Dazs scandal. The tabloid press had a field day showing video of bumbling Chinese workers storing ice cream cakes in filthy bathrooms in an illegal factory, etc. (read the story here)

Gawker has a post on the most recent trouble for fauxscaling Haagen-Dazs in India (item here). The brand's new India branch overreaching in trying to market itself as upscale. In doing so, they've been accused of racism, elitism, and just general cultural insensitivity.

These gaffes have certainly hurt the brand but they are by no means the only risks that may come with fauxscaling.

Along with the risk of global brand confusion and inconsistency that is inherent with these strategies, there is the real possibility that these fauxscaling efforts could backfire and negatively impact the brand back in the home market. What if, for example, 20 years from now China is REALLY dominant. Let's say immigration policies have changed, lots of wealthy (not just poor immigrants) Chinese move to the U.S. They will carry with them the idea that Buick is an "upscale" brand. Well, this is inconsistent with the brand's positioning here in the U.S.

What if all those folks who believe Haagen Dazs to be this upscale European brand with lots of history find out that that is COMPLETELY untrue? Wouldn't there be some backlash against the brand and erosion of brand "trust" and value?

You should multiply all the risks by 1000 due to the tremendous growth of social media and its ability to destroy a brand overnight (Dominos, anyone?).

It is clear that fauxscaling will no doubt continue unabated, but so will the pitfalls experienced as brands try for a second life overseas. The smart companies out there will be successful and stay out of trouble if they have the right counsel and teams in place as they embark on these global ventures.

Thanks for reading.
-Jonathan

Posted by Jonathan Gardner at 5:23 AM
Labels: 2010, Facebook, FlickR, marketing, Mashable, New Years Resolutions, Twitter

The Worst Dead People of 2009: Let’s Review!

December 28, 2009

Yes, we all love our celebrifucks. Everyone’s famous these days, no one knows why. Lots of celebrities (or people “famous” for one reason or other) died in 2009. We are pretty happy that some of them are gone as they were talentless/worthless/assholes. In one way or another, each of them were one of the “WORST PEOPLE” of 2009, even if being the WORST in this case means they weren’t evil but actually just sucked. So hereto with, our list for 2009 (with explanation appended).

The WORST DEAD PEOPLE of 2009:

Brittany Murphy – Talentless

Lou Albano – Worthless

William Safire – Asshole

Army Archerd – Asshole

Adam “DJ AM” Goldstein – Talentless & Worthless

Kim Dae Jung – Asshole

Billy Mays – Asshole

Ed McMahon – Talentless

Dom DeLuise – Worthless

Natasha Richardson – Talentless

James Brady – Asshole

As you see, we can go on like this forever, but to REALLY create a complete list would take us well into 2010, by which time we’d have to get started on the list for the new year.

Thanks for reading!

-WorstPeople

Leave a Comment » | Uncategorized | Tagged: 2009, Adam Goldstein, Army Archerd, Asshole, Billy Mays, Brittany Murphy, Dead, Dom DeLuise, Ed McMahon, James Brady, Kim Dae Jung, Lou Albano, Natasha Richardson, Talentless, William Safire, worst people, Worstpeople, Worthless | Permalink
Posted by worstpeople

funny blog with some great observations!
http://worstpeople.wordpress.com/

my new blog's just getting started but i think it has the potential to be pretty cool: http://themoneyspins.blogspot.com/

Polishing Turds: Your Personal Shame for 2009

What were your "2009 Turds?" Do you have outstanding "Turds of the Decade?"

Throughout my marketing life, I've been asked to belly up to the table and massage a great number of steaming, stinking turds. Back in the way early days, I regularly enjoyed massive turd helpings when I was an intern/entry level AE at a communications firm.

The turds (clients) I was handed were some of the following:

A snack treat for dogs
A kitchen cleaner
A paper manufacturer

Why do I call these "turds" and not "wonderful, fulfilling, exciting client experiences?" Because they weren't, but also, MAINLY because in the marketing arts, a "turd" that needs to be polished is a "crappy, uninteresting client/product service with no USP to speak of."

As marketers, we always PRAY that the clients/colleagues of the world will recognize not only our genius, but the tremendous power of marketing and bring us in at the VERY BEGINNING of the product development process. This personal sacred wish of marketers has us envision being brought into the boardroom to consult and weigh in on the creation of the product/service and help to inform and guide the development of a HIGHLY MARKETABLE product. Of course, this is mere fantasy and it is only rumored to happen at very evolved corporations. We know that progressive companies do often have the marketing people involved FAIRLY early. Apple, for example, does this very well.

BUT, for most of us most of the time with most assignments, we are brought in to share our EXALTED wisdom way after everything has been said and done. The product has launched, the designs are finished, the building has been completed, the deed is done.

The unfortunate PR people are sometimes not even brought in until the original marketing plans have failed or there is some other problem.

What does this all mean and how does it create TURDS?

Well, honestly some TURDS that need to be polished will simply always be turds, no matter when marketing people are involved and/or if they have any input whatsoever. The dog snacks and kitchen cleaner were NEVER going to be interesting, fun accounts. And, honestly, the % of people who make purchase decisions for these products based on ANYTHING besides traditional above the line is woefully small.

A TURD has no redeeming marketing value and therefore no organic raison d'etre. Nothing special to say. It is not the "biggest," "first," "cheapest," "trendiest" or launched by a special company like Apple, or designed by Frank Gehry.

So there is nothing inherent to the product that lends itself to a story, to buzz, to press coverage, to ANYTHING.

So you try to attach said product to trends: "this is an example of what companies in X sector or doing to try to succeed in a recession," "this is the pioneer in a new neighborhood," "this is part of trend X." Most of these TREND/feature lines of talk are completely invented, just look at the criticism the NY Times gets when its reporters invent trend stories.

ALL that invented trending only lasts so long. But you STILL have this TURD laying there in front of you, it needs to be polished, it's still your project. So, next up are the gimmicks: "the grand opening had people on pogo sticks," "we will give free apartments for a week at Christmas to people named Jesus," etc.

The problem is that these gimmicks are disconnected from the ACTUAL product. They do nothing to promote the true brand elements and tell the public nothing about a USP (because there really is none to speak of). ALL THESE DO is get a bit of buzz in the 'nets and the media and keep the product's name out there for a bit longer until the TURD gets flushed with all the others flowing along in a sewer-pipe of global unconsciousness. It's all there in the background, all these undifferentiated products and services.

There is no magic polish for TURDS. As mentioned, bringing marketing people in early, especially in the case of completely generic products, will maybe help the process of MAKING products more marketable. The WHOLE POINT of creating something for sale is so you can sell it, how about allowing some experts in to help you create a product that WILL SELL MORE? For product development people who work with marketers, I propose the following New Year's Resolution: Make something interesting together in 2010, not just more turds.

So, as we look forward to 2010 I hope you will help lead the fight to have marketing play a greater role in all levels and forms of product development and promotion, no matter how discouraged you may already be.

Thanks for reading.
Jonathan

CNet Asia's Jonathan Gardner has posted a not-too-flattering perspective on why Asus will not succeed in its quest to become an established brand like Samsung or Acer.

While some may regard the article as border-line racism in that it stereotypes Taiwanese companies as rudderless re-active operations chasing trends after trends, I tend to agree with him on his assessment.

The thing is Taiwan's PC (personal computer) industry got started in the mid-80s when the Taiwan government developed a legal compatible BIOS (ERSO) that enabled mom-and-pop's to cheaply manufacture IBM PC motherboard clones. When these became a big hit overseas, add-on cards soon followed. And after that, cheap peripherals such as mice, keyboards, speakers, etc. As the PC market uptake exploded worldwide, a lot of these mom-and-pop's became very successful and transformed into big corporations - at least in terms of sales and size. But a lot of these are still run by the original entrepreneurs, and the "merchant" mentality persists and is manifested through the product lines.

Side note: Most Taiwanese trace their roots to Fujian province, where traditionally people have earned their living as traders or merchants, and often deal in commodities or merchants that happen to be in demand.

Thus, with the "merchant" mindset, these companies often introduce "me-too" products rather than undertake serious R&D. They count on suppliers like Intel to provide them with reference designs instead. Other component makers (LCD, keyboards, SSD, etc.) are naturally all too happy with standardization as well - less SKUs, more sales - and readily support the set-up. This is one reason why barely six months into the release of the trendsetting Asus Eee PC 701, competing products began popping up left and right, with little distinguishing features from one another.

And as Gardner correctly pointed out, most companies with an OEM background, such as Asus, actually made their money (and are still making their money) producing hits of the moment, as dictated by their various clients. Of course, OEMs never really have to map out a product line covering a number of years in the way that Apple does. They simply produce what their clients ask them to do.

And that is precisely the quandary that Asus is caught in right now. While it has achieved a degree of success with its branded motherboards and notebook lines, the company has never really established its name beyond the techies of the industry. The Eee PC brand, in spite of Asus' flaky marketing efforts, is the first and nearest to being a Asus brand recognized by ordinary consumers. But apparently, the Eee PC's huge success has caught Asus by surprise.

Without a well-defined product follow-up, it made a big blunder when competing products began appearing in the market. Instead of pushing the envelope and coming out with a newer model that provided even more bang for lesser bucks, it introduced models that tried to compete with the competing products that, in the first place, failed to match up with the original Asus Eee PC 701. The disastrous move quickly eroded Asus' early dominance in the very market segment it has created.

As to why Asus introduced those models is anyone's guess. Mine is it was merely continuing the "merchant" mindset. Someone at Asus must have surveyed the market landscape, saw all these look-alike products, concluded it is an emerging trend, and decided Asus must have a me-too product, notwithstanding the fact they already have the original.

Having also lost its early market dominance, Asus must have decided the best way to gain it back is to flood the market with Eee PC products - again, a "merchant" mindset. Although, somehow I wouldn't be surprised if someone at Asus actually took a look at Nokia's product strategy - swamp the market with tons of models to confuse the competition (and the consumer) - and decided to do the same. After all, Nokia has been among the leaders in mobile phones for quite sometime now.

Unfortunately for Asus, Nokia phones go as low as $40 (and as high as $800). The range means genuine variety for consumers. It also means impulse buys for a good number. Asus Eee PC products, on the other hand, have a higher price range. Meaning they are not as much of an impulse buy for most people. Rather, netbook purchases are often informed decisions. And based on trends, it appears the Eee PC is fast losing its top position, if it has not lost it yet. Given the low-cost netbook market is price driven, this implies consumers increasingly do not consider the Eee PC brand as the best value for money - which the 701 had represented.

So, unless Asus gets it act together, Gardner is right in that Asus will not be the next Samsung. At least not in the near future.

site map

 

• We Brand Stuff
• We're Un-Same

• Partnering
• For Groupies

• Thingnamer Blog
• Meet Thingnamers
• News
• Mailing List
• Namer's Store
• Jobs

The Thingnamer Commentary and Criticism on Naming and Identity, Names in the News, and The Branding Industry. -->

Heavy Hitter Award - WEIGHT WATCHERS FOR MEN October 22, 2009 | Elizabeth FACT: 75% of annual weight gain occurs between Halloween and Valentine's Day. This was the sign I passed alongside the gym entrance last night. Thanks Washington Sports Club, I needed that extra kick. There's nothing like the threat of unwanted poundage to really notch up the speed on the old treadmill.  But hey, if you do find yourself resembling more of a pumpkin silhouette than a broomstick this year, fear not. Weight Watchers is a well-known diet plan based on a points system. Foods are allocated a certain point value. Each person is assigned a daily point allowance based on his or her weight and weight loss goals. Weight Watchers has been around since the 1960’s. However, that’s kind of a miracle considering their most recent ads for Weight Watchers for Men. This week’s brand-of-the-week goes to Weight Watchers Men for bad-brand-of-the-week. Weight Watchers for Men fails big for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I am willing to bet some green that when most people think Weight Watchers they think women. Some may say this is because women are more frequent dieters. Weight Watchers seems to have been unsuccessful in effectively marketing to the male population. Weight Watcher’s “Real Men Don’t Diet” motto is doing nothing to change this. I would bet a triple chocolate brownie that there isn’t a single man out there okay with being told he’s not a real man! Weight Watchers’ general tagline “Stop Dieting, Start Living,” does a good job of positioning themselves as the “un-diet” without being offensive. “Real Men Don’t Diet” is just emasculating to those men enrolled in one of their programs. Wait. It gets better. Another one of Weight Watcher’s new tags touts, “Eat like a man, not like a rabbit,” one of the least clever things I have ever heard. And speaking of unoriginal, the whole “Eat like a man,” saying is strongly resemblant to diet competitor Nutrisystem's “Mmm…man food” flavored standpoint. Although Weight Watchers for Men ads were created to entice big-boned dudes, the campaign managed to degrade the very demographic that they were trying to reach. If the diet company wants to target men they would be better off just using their existing campaign, “Stop Dieting. Start Living,” that resonates with many folks. Or they could just re-brand Weight Watchers for Men using anything but their current jargon. At least that rings true to the “un-diet” positioning without being offensive. Comments (2) 2 Comments birdiegirl October 22, 2009 11:45 AM You'd think they would have more success if they'd gone with something a little more pithy, like: Eat less, get more It's not "Chunka chunka burning love" and so on. Layla Masri October 23, 2009 9:08 AM Men don't like WW because a) you have to count points and track what you eat, and b) they are not interested in weekly meetings to discuss food issues. I tried to get my husband to do WW and he thought I was crazy. We did South Beach together both lost a lot of weight. WW should stick to women...they OWN that market and could make it a sales point, just like Curves is a gym just for ladies. Leave a Reply Sign in if you are a registered user.

Subscribe Get Thingnamer via feed reader or email Stokefire on Facebook Search Thingnamer Greatest Hits What Is Creativity? When Naming, Almost Everyone FAINTS (or whatever they call it...) O, What a Tangled Banshee We Weave Because Every Man Needs that Extra Optical Inch Copycat Web 2.0 Naming. A Stokefire Exclusive Report (Cue Staccato Marimba Music) The Name Game - A Monday Morning Brain Stretch What’s the Deal with Optiva Credit Union? Realtors: Please Step Away From Your Tagline Archives Categories Show Category List Hide Category List Admin (56) Advertising (2) Bad (131) Blogroll (1) Branding (293) Clothing (9) Corporate (133) Locality (35) Non-profit (14) People (35) Personal (12) Politics (18) Realty (17) Business Incubators (2) Contest (22) Directories Events (37) FAINTS (1) Good (59) History (18) In The News (167) DC Local (23) International (75) Mid Atlantic Regional (6) National (109) Interviews (3) Judging (1) Marketing (4) Marketing vs. Branding (11) Name Generators (1) Name and Tagline (1) Names (249) Off Topic (12) Partners Photo (1) Rants (8) Resources (26) Reviews (7) Schwag (1) Sour Grapes (9) Stokefire Launch (3) Taglines (106) Theodore Joseph Linden (4) Uncategorized (25) baby boy (2) baby names (3) boy names (1) naming of a child (2) research (5) tattoo (1) thingnamer (17) Recent Posts A Day in the Life of 2 Stokefire Workers It's That (Recruitment) Time! Heavy Hitter Award - WEIGHT WATCHERS FOR MEN HOW Now, Brown Cow? (See You In Denver!) Obama: This is NOT Healthcare Reform. Drip Drip Droppity Drop... The Smart Car Award: Honda Insight Branding Done Backwards? NOT Coming Soon to US Markets... An Open Letter To Our Most Awesome Potential Client, Ever. Recent Comments dad in HOW Now, Brown Cow? (See You In Denver!): Hi Bow Bow, I see you Bow Bow.... Layla Masri in Heavy Hitter Award - WEIGHT WATCHERS FOR MEN: Men don't like WW because a) you have to count poi... Doc Mike in Obama: This is NOT Healthcare Reform. : http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2009/0... birdiegirl in Heavy Hitter Award - WEIGHT WATCHERS FOR MEN: You'd think they would have more success if they'd... Dr. Florence Webb in Obama: This is NOT Healthcare Reform. : Go, Tate! You are exactly right. How do we get o...

Home Contact Us --> Contact Us

yikes! that's bad marketing. epic FAIL