What a donkey

Well, another year and another London marathon. Well, not quite ...

This year was slightly different as a mate of mine, Peter Muffett, decided to: a) run a marathon for the first time, and b) wear a really heavy donkey costume.

You had to feel sorry for the poor sod as he was overtaken by a dust cart on Tower Bridge - he took something like 5 hours to get there and that was less than half-way!

Think he's till running ... so if you've got a spare few quid, go to the charity site he's running for and give what you can.

Good on yer, Muff - you mad bastard.

Why do I love comparethemeerkat campaign? Simples

I suppose, like many, my first reaction to Alexandr was: "what on earth is going on here?".

But it's actually brilliant on many layers:

1) I defy you to tell me that you have not heard someone repeat the phrase "compare the meerkat.com" or "Simples" during your normal waking day ... catchy: and you just have to look at the insurance masters, Churchill and Direct Line, to twig the importance.

2) Research has shown that there is one overarching flaw common to all the price comparison sites = no personality, no humanity ... just a series of rational statements that you could copy and paste onto each other; here's a breath of fresh air and a hugely distinctive brand in the making.

3) It has recognised that it doesn't have to repeat all the functional benefits of PCWs ... it lets the others tell you what PCWs do and borrows all these assets by inference.

4) They've managed to challenge the core convention of insurance = making something so bloody dull actually quite amusing. Comparethemeerkat.com exists and will put a smile on your face

5) It has over 12K followers on Twitter

6) Nearly 370,000 fans on Facebook!

7) It's got legs ... Sergei (Head of IT) is up next!

8) It's still got banners through to the insurance site ... so it's not a complete brand whim.

Just love it.

Social networks ... don't be a Billy No-Mates!

Was having a rummage around some blogs this morning and came across a new one (well, new in so far as I haven't seen it before) from Brian Solis ... well worth a squizz.

Now the Conversation Prism in the blog (dodgy marketing-speak?) is useful in terms of mapping all the areas one might consider touching people ... but it'll also scare the hell out of those who have to operate in the digital world for a living. So before I go onto my point, try using it in conjunction with his Essential Guide to Social Media, rather than just looking at it in isolation.

Anyway. The complexity of the charts used serve as a useful segue to conversations I have been having with clients and colleagues = simplifying the rules of engagement for brands in social networks.

And there seem to be two common denominators ... and let's face it, these are also the key tenets for any normal conversation you might have in the real world. So if you're not doing this, you're likely to be Billy No-Mates (in which case you've got better things to do/learn than read this blog):

1. Be interesting:
- this is obviously requires some understanding of who you are talking to ... if you're not tapping into a particular passion that the network shares, you're dead in the water and doing more damage to your brand than good
- and being interesting doesn't mean rattling on about your product or service; someone who just talks about themselves in the real world is not a social success so why on earth do you suppose it'll be different in on-line social networks?!
- so pick common ground ... simple Venn diagram will plot the overlaps easily enough, so let's take an example: mobile phones, why not talk about your design process ... what are the design stimuli, what ideas were discarded, what frustrations do you go through, is there anything you're trying to emulate in the big wide world, what's your definition of success?

and/or

2. Be useful:
- there are plenty of ways of a brand playing a role in social networks, even those that on the face of it are "dull" service providers. Let's take any brand that is all about saving money (like Asda or Swift Cover) ... Asda have just launched a "Save Money" initiative on YouTube where everyone is invited to share their ideas.
- Swift Cover are using Iggy Pop (slightly odd, but let's go with it) ... so it's all about saving time: that seems a rich territory for them to explore ... God knows most of us wouldn't mind a series of tips on how to save time in all walks of life
- so whilst not necessarily interesting in an entertaining or slapping your thigh with joy sort of way ... useful, linked to the brand proposition but not flogging the product

Now I know there are other pointers like listening, being open and honest ... but these vanilla tips that don't really help that much.

Now folks, rip it apart. As long as you either interesting or useful when you do it.

What do they do with school buses?

I came across an article by dear old Blunkett in the Telegraph ... saying we should have the American-style yellow school buses ... and to make it affordable, parents should pay £1-£2 per day.

Mmm, right ... so why the American style buses? Actually I shouldn't get sucked into that line of question - the proposal is just idiotic. A better question starts with an observation: The buses drop off the kids at 9ish ... then re-appear at 3ish to drop them off. Then disappear again.

So what the hell do they do with these public assets in the meantime? Couldn't they be used for the rest of, mmm what's the phrase... the tax-paying public. Oh my God, you can't do that ... it says school bus on the side, so that's it - back to the garage!

So leveraging that asset for the rest of the public outside these hours is ridiculous - we would rather park them up, not use them and run the public buses into the ground.

Mind you, I shouldn't bitch about it ... we might end up Red Ken and those bloody stupid snake buses he got for London instead. So instead of asking parents to shell out (for getting another bloody import) and having no access to them, why not let us use what we've already got? I think they might call it value creation ... something completely foreign to our darling politicians.

Simple brand engagement ... take a bow Asda

So just rummaging through the assortment of subscription e-mails I get ... and stumble across one from Marketing Week.

Asda has launched "Saving you Money" on Youtube. They've kick started with some suggestions but it's powered by your everyday punter ... the link to the brand is obvious: everyday savings.

Very simple but at last a big brand that normally spends its money on TV actually engaging customers and prospects alike in a social network environment ... and all because they're not so archaic as to think you have to flog the brand and its products.

So something that's useful and interesting: two key tenets for a brand that wants to participate in a social network ... and the financial risk? Let's face it, it'll be pretty much zero.

So all you brand managers out there ... what's your version?

Monetising peer-to-peer activity

Well, here's the new $64 question in the communications industry. I was prompted to write this particular note when I read David Cushman's blog on the diminishing trust that punters have in brand comm.s.

And I've come across Edelman's "trust barometers" before, but I seem to be hitting the same brick wall with clients time and again. It goes something along the lines of:

"Yeah, Chris, I understand the reports and I would love for customers to recommend our brand, but how do you measure this success? Buzz Metrics may show more positive chat about a brand, but how do you turn that into money? I know what I'll get out of a press ad but not out of creating content and amplifying that content ... and the times they way they are, I have to account for every penny."

Does this seem familiar to anyone? So what's the answer? Not sure I have the answer, but here are a few thoughts:
i) Is it looking at another 'verbal' metric like Net Promoter Score ... so tracking buzz over time and seeing how other marketing activities improve over time: is there a correlation?
ii) Breaking the 'conversations' down into component parts: so crowdsourcing gives you quite a lot of feedback: what would the equivalent research budget be? Do the ideas generated results in brand activity/new products ... so what's the value there?
iii) Is it simply eyeballs seeing positive statements about the brand? Is there a metric for how much more likely someone is to buy something on the say-so of a mate v. on the back of brand communications?

I'll keep plugging along, but if I'm being dumb and this has been cracked, then drop me a line.

What's your brand glue?

No, I haven't been sniffing it and it isn't a typo ... brand glue: every brand should have it but few do. Some call it brand engagement but examples of that tend to be a bit too campaign based and lack longevity.

Now, there are quite a few sceptics of "brand engagement" ... apparently no-one wants to engage with a brand - just with each other, so all a brand should do is facilitate networking ... and nothing else. But I think they're falling foul of just dealing with semantics and rebelling against buzz words.

Let's take Nike + ... sure it facilitates networking, but it's also a very personal tool for users; and this is brand glue. It gives me a reason to use a facility or tool that I find useful ... but is linked to the host brand product.

So when you're creating customer or prospect programmes, ask yourself what communications, content or tools can you provide your target audience that will, in some part, stay in touch with the brand until they're ready to purchase ... and this is not the typical selling or MGM communications.

Ask yourself: "how can I be useful" outside purchasing mode to keep yourself top of mind. Nike, Johnson and Johnson and Huggies have done it successfully ... despite the nay-sayers.