Pizza Hut needs a time machine

Dear Pizza Hut,

The money you spent on this ad (concept, production, media) might have been better spent trying to invent a time machine to go back in time and name your restaurant something besides “Pizza Hut.” (Note: that won’t work for your China operations, since time travel has been outlawed there.) And no, dropping “Pizza” from the name now, after 50+ years, will not have the same effect. Alternatively, you could’ve spent the money trying to improve your pizza, like Domino’s did. Or you could’ve used it to run ads that focus on a strength we already associate with your brand, like pizza for families (not frat houses), or the in-restaurant dining experience (brick walls, arcade-game tables, and pitchers of icy root beer).

Because all this ad does is a) remind me that your pizza was never really that great, b) show that you’re not focused on improving the pizza, and c) make me think you probably set a similarly low bar for all this other food.

Hut’s Chicken Steak? Clearly, the naming troubles run deep.

Sincerely,

Rob

Li-Ning is one of 2010’s top brand stories in China

The fourth-quarter issue of Labbrand’s LABReport contains an article on the top five brand stories in China for 2010.  I’ll post them here individually over the next month or so, but if you’d like to read them all right away, including our point of view on the underlying trends involved, please follow the link above (and subscribe to receive LABReport for free, while you’re at it!). This article was written and researched with help from Kevin Gentle and the rest of the Labbrand team; thanks for your help, everyone!

I’d love to hear feedback on what stories we missed, where you agree or disagree, etc. Here’s the section on Li-Ning:

continue reading…

Mind the Gap(’s new logo)

The picture above is not the new Gap logo. It’s a version that I created myself, in PowerPoint, in about 15 minutes. I just used the logo-design steps I outlined in one of my old, sarcastic posts titled “How to build your brand for free.” While it’s tough to objectively judge a logo, I do wonder whether the ability to quickly replicate it in a Microsoft Office program should be cause for concern.

It seems the new logo, announced earlier this week, has mostly experienced a negative reception from the general public. Time’s NewsFeed may be one exception (if they’re not kidding):

But “generic” and “looks alike” are not usually words you want to hear in reaction to a logo. And since the same words could be used to describe the vanishing uniqueness of Gap’s clothing, the brand may be squandering one of its few remaining strengths: a link to its own past. I’m not saying the logo has to stay the same, or that it should look like something from 1969, but if this dramatic change conveys “a streamlined, technologically dominant future,” can we expect a matching change in Gap’s overarching strategy (including products, of course)? If not, I have trouble seeing this as anything more than desperate attention seeking.

For contrast, check out something Levi’s has been up to lately. It’s not a logo redesign, but I love how this campaign at once romanticizes the company’s history and makes relevant connections to the present.

[Thanks to Shireen for pointing out the new Gap logo.]

When the ad impairs the offering

In this situation, when does The Economist start to ask themselves whether their advertising on their own site is becoming counterproductive? I count four near-identical ads above the fold, but because they’re all the same red as the logo, I at first thought the logo was a fifth ad. Aside from being visually disturbing (the online equivalent of a “BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE” infomercial), it also distracts from the content, which was what I came to the site for in the first place.

Maybe the underlying message is that subscribing is the only way to read an article without seeing four ads on the same page.

“By an inch”

Back in April, Rob Campbell (now head of planning at Wieden+Kennedy’s Shanghai office) posted an “assignment” on his blog. He and some other account planning types, including Russell Davies and Gareth Kay, have for awhile now been running what they call the “Account  [Planning] School on the Web,” or A[P]SOTW. They more or less take turns posting assignments on their respective blogs and accepting submissions from anyone who’s interested. Then they look at all the submissions, pick a “winner,” and provide useful feedback based on their significant experience in adland.

Having met Rob a few months back in Hong Kong, I check his blog sometimes and I decided I’d give this assignment a shot. The challenge was

continue reading…

Really? That fast?

As seen today on Dictionary.com