I’ve owned a Flip Video camera since July. I enjoy the product, so when I heard about the Cisco-owned product’s consumer ad campaign, I was especially interested. But when the ads started showing up on TV, I was immediately disappointed. The campaign is built around what Cisco is calling “flipable moments,” which apparently include a dog almost barking “I love you,” two young children having a screaming contest, or a woman doing a handstand on the beach.

So what is a flipable moment? The through-line for most of these is that they appear to have been captured on impulse. The people depicted in these 15-second ads have fun—they enjoy the little things in life, and now they’re able to capture them on video and share with friends and family. What a great concept for a brand to own! …a brand other than Flip Video. …Read More…

Thanks to Mom for pointing this one out:

Cool idea, but I was a bit disappointed they couldn’t get Tom Hanks to come recreate his famous rendition of “Heart & Soul” (sorry for the terrible video quality on that link).

See more of the campaign here.

An article on Mashable asks “isn’t [this] the definition of a perfect brand campaign?” because of the subtle placement of the VW logo and viral success of the videos. But should success be defined by …Read More…

One of my favorite blogs to check regularly is The Ad Contrarian (thanks for pointing it out, Ewan). As suggested by the name, posts on the blog regularly take a devil’s advocate point of view on popular trends, like Twitter, or the web in general. I’m not sure how I missed it for so long, but I just recently came across a series of posts targeting one of TAC’s favorite gripes: branding.

Before I go further, let me say that part of the reason I enjoy the blog is because I respect the point of view of its author (Bob Hoffman of Hoffman/Lewis). In fact, I often agree with him. While I understand his frustration over “branding”—I’m easily annoyed by misuse and overuse of both the word and the concepts behind it—I did think these posts took aim at a bit too big of a target. As one commenter put it, he may be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Anyway, here’s a summary of one of TAC’s posts and my response. You can follow the links below to see a few more of his posts, and you’ll see I’ve commented on those as well. It’s worth reading everyone else’s comments, too (many enthusiastically agree with Bob’s point of view). Would be curious to hear your stance, as well. …Read More…

I’m guessing nothing all that positive, given his reaction to some market research in the first season of Mad Men. As recounted in the online Episode Guide, “Greta hands the report to Don who promptly files it into the trashcan.” …Read More…

Picked up some flowers the other night from a place called Affluent Flowers. I should first mention that the lady who helped me there was polite and helpful, and the flowers I purchased were very nice and well-priced.

That said…

While I didn’t go there specifically so that I could write this post, I was thinking about their name even before I walked into the store.

You didn’t call this place ‘Affluent Flowers’ because everything here costs a lot, did you?

No, the woman behind the counter assured me that the name “Affluent” had been chosen primarily because it starts with “A.” The owner is hoping that as a result, his store will show up near the beginning of alphabetical listings. I’m sure the question’s been asked before, but is this still a relevant concern in most industries these days? I’d argue that it’s not. I found the flower shop by using Google Maps; I just wanted something that was on my way. For flower shops—and maybe most single-location retail stores—listing yourself in map-integrated online directories is probably more critical than choosing a name that starts near the beginning of the alphabet. …Read More…

As a student of cognitive science turned brand strategist, I was especially interested in an old post on Bob Hoffman’s blog, The Ad Contrarian (he refers back to it in a much more recent post, or I probably never would have noticed it), about “Salesmen & Sociologists.”

The point of the post is that “we have substantially exaggerated the power of brands. Most consumers in most categories have little or no brand loyalty.” The author goes on to say that most purchasing decisions are made based on functional differences like price and convenience.

So, as a cognitive science dork and a brand strategist, I have to say…he’s absolutely right. At least about the part I’ve mentioned here. The idea of brand loyalty as something that is complete and infallible is greatly exaggerated. (Although, just after reading that post I saw this. Funny timing.) And even if that level of loyalty was commonplace, which it’s not, it wouldn’t be easy to create without a great product. …Read More…