Brand: Nissan Versa
Execution: TV
Link: Click Here
Target: Reluctant mini-car buyers
Rating: ****
Reviewer: David

Description:
A campaign with several executions. The reviewed spot starts with a large man jammed into a tiny car. “It’s too small – car’s too small,” he says. We see him breathing into a paper bag as he hyperventilates. The voiceover says, “Auto claustrophobia – it’s taken a devastating toll. But its days are numbered,” At this point the action freezes into black and white and the voiceover announcer walks onscreen. “… thanks to the Nissan Versa. Versa treats small car symptoms with best-in-class interior space.” The seen shifts to the same tall man inside a versa where he has room to breath. “Now this is roomy!” he exclaims and we see an exterior shot of the car driving past wide open plains. “Versa lets you be carefree and handsfree with bluetooth technology,” the announcer says as the big man whistles happily and remarks “I like that” to the bluetooth comment. “Versa will help you take control of auto claustrophobia today.” At this point the man crumples up his paper bag and tosses it into the back seat. Then we see him spinning around while holding a puppy in a field of flowers holding a puppy. A title “Nissan Versa, 36mpg” appears. The spot ends with the voiceover announcer saying, “Ask a Nissan Dealer if Versa is right for you,” and the Nissan Shift 2.0 logo.

What Works:
It is more than a little ironic that the much-disliked and often-criticized direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising genre allows Nissan to create this spunky and effective little campaign for its new micro-car Versa. This spot does an excellent job of parodying the breathless, melodramatic tone of DTC advertising (our favorites were the ads for ‘restless leg syndrome’) while showing the high points of a new car class to American consumers. The deadpan voiceover, over-acting sufferer and freeze-action misery shots all contribute to the authenticity of the satire. Two more moments we particularly like in this spot are the logo shot for the Nissan Versa which says, “Nissan Versa 36mpg” and the final shot of the man holding up a puppy and spinning around in a field of flowers. The logo shot looks exactly like a pharmaceutical name and dosage and the puppy shot is a dead-on parity of Claritin commericals (Claritin is an allergy drug).

The heavy lifting this spot needs to perform is twofold. Although tiny cars are the norm in most of the world, the genre is virtually unknown in the U.S. outside of the Mini. The Mini is sold through BMW dealerships, is not cheap and has cult status. It has ended up with more of a performance reputation (for precise handling), so it has not firmly established the micro-car category in the minds of ordinary economy car buyers. The other entries in this category, the Honda Fit, Scion Xa and Toyota Yaris are all new and struggling to establish themselves in the consumers mind.  In addition to building the category, Nissan needs to position the Versa as the category leader.

This advertising blog believes Nissan does an excellent job of creating the brand positioning of ‘Smart and Spacious’ for the Versa by showing that class leading technology like bluetooth can be integrated into a small package and that a big guy can fit in a small car. Bluetooth integration is a small product feature but one that perfectly proves out the brand positioning.  The space issue is obviously the thrust of the entire spot and it is relatively effective although we think the object may be to elicit unbelieving reactions which are satisfied by a dealer visit.  Consumers may still be surprised when they step into these cars and realize that there is literally no trunk space (the rear seat converts to storage space), but it will at least engage them with the category. And the category benefit of high gas mileage and low price will be interesting to thrifty consumers who cannot afford a Prius.

The shot selection, pacing and casting for this spot are all excellent. And we are happy to see that Nissan is pooling it out into a campaign which follows the model of this spot closely.

What Doesn’t:
There is some danger that the parody might overwhelm the message in this spot. It really is enjoyable to watch this spot just for the well-earned dig it takes at pharma advertising. But if consumers fail to realize that they’re seeing the emergence of a new class of car on American roads the campaign will have failed. We don’t think this is a huge problem, but it is one to track.

Branding Bottom Line:
Nissan gives us the cure for small car blues – now what can they do for our bursitis?

Issue: Why Pretexting was worse than illegal
Commentary by: David

The news and editorial coverage of the sensational Hewlett-Packard leak investigation this summer has missed an important point from a branding standpoint. The question HP Chairman Patricia Dunn should have asked herself when initiating an investigation to determine which director was having unauthorized conversations with the media is not just “is this legal” or “is this ethical” but “what will the effect on the Hewlett Packard brand be when this comes to light?”

What is today termed ‘crisis management’ should instead be thought of as ‘brand management.’ We suggest that if business leaders consider potential actions in light of the long-term effect on the brand, they would often make different decisions.

So what exactly happened? The short story is that after it became clear during the ouster of form HP CEO Carla Fiorini that the media was getting the inside story, Patricia Dunn initiated a leak investigation. She was aware that the methods being used by the consultants hired to conduct the investigation included pretexting: pretending to be someone else in order to obtain personal phone records of Hewlett-Packard Directors. The pretexting pointed towards Director George “Jay” Keyworth. Keyworth in fact had a conversation with CNET which painted HP in a positive light and had been asked by HP on numerous prior instances to have contact with the press. When Keyworth was confronted about the leak he refused to resign (he has since resigned his post) and instead Silicon Valley legend Tom Perkins of Kleiner Perkins resigned in protest. After some dithering on Mr. Perkins part and the apparent representation by super-lawyer Larry Sonisi, the reasons for Mr. Perkins departure were made public. (There is some disagreement about this but a good argument has been made that it is a Director’s duty to shareholders to let them know his reasons for resignation if it has been done to protest a board action.)

Why do we believe that the decision to conduct this investigation should have been considered in the light of the potential impact on the brand? The legal questions that were not asked would have saved Patricia Dunn and Hewlett-Packard legal troubles. Had she asked more closely or sought impartial outside advice, she would certainly have learned that pretexting is illegal. The ethical question that Ms. Dunn did not ask would possibly have changed either the tactics of the investigation or the disclosure to the board and might have saved her job.

Neither legal nor ethical considerations, however, would have prompted Ms. Dunn to forego the investigation altogether, however. And we submit that it is the fact that HP is investigating its own outside directors and not just the tactics used in the investigation that has caused untold damage to the Hewlett-Packard brand. If Hewlett-Packard cannot trust its own directors, why on earth should consumers trust Hewlett-Packard products? If the company behaves in a way that most consumers would sooner equate with Wal-Mart or Microsoft, shouldn’t they vote with their dollars and find other brands?

The timing could not be worse for HP. In spite of the questionable merger with Compaq and the turmoil that gripped HP during Carla Fiorini’s reign, HP has made a remarkable turnaround. CEO Mark Hurd (who is himself at risk if his involvement in the leak investigation is shown to be more direct than he has yet acknowledged), has seen a dramatic reversal of fortune under his watch as HP has gone from being the laggard of the PC industry to the leader. And the swell of positive press for HP came as Dell was under a high-profile cloud for issues ranging from financial improprieties to quality concerns to the battery recall.

Now HP has given Dell a breather at the most critical moment. And the damage to the brand will not easily be forgotten by consumers looking for a better alternative in this low-satisfaction industry. Which leaves the door open for Apple. Apple has experienced all of the issues that Dell has (some quality problems with the iMac, Nano and other products, a battery recall and an government investigation of financial improprieties) but has so carefully managed the brand that nothing seems to have stuck to the Apple brand image or impaired Chairman Steve Jobs mythic ‘reality distortion’ field.

The bottom line is that too often persons in a position of power in major corporations act like children, putting their pride or personal agendas above the needs of the shareholders or the value of the brand. If one’s directors are speaking out of school, the company has a leadership issue. The solution is to fix the underlying problem rather than simple seeking the quickest way to end the symptoms.

Brand: Travelers (St. Paul Travelers)
Execution: TV
Link: Click Here
Target: Risk-adverse pedestrians
Rating: ***
Reviewer: David

Description:
A young man walks out of his house and starts down the hill on a city street in San Francisco. He trips onto his neighbors folding sidewalk sale table and then rolls into a garbage can. Instead of collapsing in a pile, the garbage cans start rolling with him, like an expanding snowball. The big pile of rubble soon claims a car door, three more pedestrians, a motorcycle and narrowly avoids swallowing a city bus. Then it does take an old Jeep Cherokee complete with driver and plows its way down a green field to an outdoor wedding, swallowing a bride and groom. It rolls past a cafe and through the financial district and finally comes to a slamming halt at the stock exchange. Everything in the snowball is disgorged intact including the perplexed Jeep Cherokee driver who drives away and the original young man who dusts himself off and walks away. The voiceover says, “When your insurance is in-synch, you can roll with anything. Travelers. Insurance. In-synch.” The spot ends with the Travelers logo and the ‘Insurance. In-synch.’ tagline.

What Works:
As we have come to expect from Fallon, this is one of the most visually arresting spots of the year (although they perhaps risk becoming the experts in ‘things rolling down a hill in San Francisco’ after this and the U.K. spot for the Sony Bravia). The CGI animation, courtesy of Weta Digital, (Peter Jackson’s special effects company responsible for The Lord of the Rings and King Kong) make the entire crazy premise look absolutely realistic and convincing.

Part of the struggle for insurers like the Travelers is to build a brand that means something to the consumer. AFLAC has done a nice job of differentiating themselves as a supplemental insurance carrier with an annoying duck as GEICO has with a slightly less-annoying Gecko (although of late they have made puzzling diversions with Burt Bacharach singing beside a claimant). Allstate has tried to position themselves as the ‘intelligent insurer’ offering accident forgiveness and other perks for the smart driver.

Amidst this hubbub, Travelers has to first stand out and secondly find a unique, ownable niche. This new campaign handily accomplishes the first part of that mission. The earlier spots which featured a boxer training hard for a title bout only to be knocked out by the announcer’s mike and a man trying to fly from a bridge with wings who discovers that he can’t swim too late were funny and memorable.

Each spot is weak on branding (Travelers shows up only at the end) but the net effect of this campaign has been to slowly associate Travelers with this particular sense of humor and ‘anything can go wrong’ worldview. While this advertising blog is not convinced that the branding is ideal, we believe that if Travelers continues this campaign with more executions for at least another year it will effectively break through and create a memorable association between the campaign and the brand.

What Doesn’t:
This is a high-risk campaign for several reasons. The first risk is that it places more emphasis on story than brand. This makes the spots engaging, memorable and viewable but it leaves the brand with a very tenuous link to the advertising. That means that it will yield results slowly and will only work if the client maintains commitment to the campaign for a multi-year period. That is a lot of faith to have in a client.

The next risk of this campaign is that the brand positioning is very soft. Travelers appears to be a real innovator in the insurance industry. The company claims the following:

Travelers has a proud history of keeping in step with changes in the lives of customers and developing new products to address them. The company was the first to issue an auto policy, the first to provide flight insurance, the first to insure space travel, the first to insure data processing, and the first to introduce mobile claims headquarters.

This innovation has to be carried in this spot by the tagline ‘Insurance. In-synch.’ The action is supposed to show us that good insurance means understanding how your risks change with your lifestyle. It is extremely high-concept and we’re not sure that consumers will really get it. But we do think that if Travelers keeps at it, they will increase their likeablility and brand awareness in what is normally a very grim industry.

Branding Bottom Line:
Travelers might want to insure the cast of ‘Jackass’ before they try this at home.

Brand: The Departed (Warner Brothers/Time Warner)
Execution: TV, Print
Link: Click here
Target: Drama fans
Rating: ****
Reviewer: David

Description:
Television spots for the Martin Scorsese film “The Departed” starring Jack Nicholson, Matt Damon, Mark Wahlberg and Leonardo DiCaprio.  This review deals with the sponsorship of the premier episode of “Smith” with Ray Liotta on CBS.

What Works:
These spots are trailers for the release of the much-anticipated movie “The Departed” from director Martin Scorcese.  They are well executed but there is nothing unusual about them.  What is more interesting is Warner Brother’s decision to buy out the entire premier episode of the new CBS drama Smith.

Instead of presenting the premier of Smith as being sponsored with “limited commercial interruption” a by ‘The Departed,’ the Smith episode was billed in this manner: ‘the following is brought to you by Warner Brothers pictures ‘The Departed’ in Theaters October 6th.’  Moreover this announcement was made not before the beginning of Smith but after the opening sequence which lasted several minutes.

It does appear that Warner Brother sponsored limited commercial interruption for Smith.  The Departed was the only product advertised on Smith and the commercial breaks were shorter and less frequent.

This advertising blog supports this type of unusual media placement.  The Departed needs all of the focused attention it can get with its premier just weeks away.  Sponsoring the entire premier of Smith and limiting the frequency and length of commercial breaks made the repeat showing of ‘Departed’ trailers less annoying than it might have been otherwise.  And the likelihood of creating urgency with the core audience for the film is good.  There is an excellent subject match between ‘Smith’ (where a high-end thief played by Ray Liotta is the protagonist) and ‘The Departed’ (with Jack Nicholson playing a mob boss).  There is also similarity between a television premier and the release of a new movie in that they’ll both attract the most motivated viewers first.  Spending a concentrated block of money against this target on Smith was a good bet.

What Doesn’t:
There is a real risk to running a movie trailer six times in a single hour.  Warner Brothers compounded this risk by opting not to make a bigger deal of the fact that ‘Smith’ was being sponsored with limited interruption by ‘The Departed.’  The risk paid off, but we’d hate to place odds on another movie pulling this off successfully.

Branding Bottom Line:
Television sponsored by the movies.  Could this be a new ad model?

Issue: Facebook opens gates to all users
Commentary by: David

What exactly is Web 2.0? For those of you who have been professional marketers for over a decade, it may sound like ‘convergence’ or ‘customer-centric marketing’ – the catchphrases of another generation. It offers the mystical allure of deeper relationships between consumers and brands and communities of interest where marketers and consumers collaborate to build brands.

For the record – here is the Wikipedia definition of ‘Web 2.0′

Web 2.0 is a phrase coined by O’Reilly Media in 2004 to refer to a supposed second-generation of Internet-based services that let people collaborate and share information online in new ways — such as social networking sites, wikis, communication tools, and folksonomies. O’Reilly Media, in collaboration with MediaLive International, used the phrase as a title for a series of conferences and since then it has become a popular, though ill-defined and often criticized, buzzword amongst the technical and marketing communities.

As ill-defined as it is, there have been two good ways to illustrate Web 2.0 to date. One is Wikipedia itself. It is a collaborative tool that web-addicted individuals update and edit for free and is (mostly) freely open to change by anyone. It functions like a free market in that definitions that are self-serving or strongly biased tend to be quickly changed by Wickipedia-watchers. The net result is a useful, up-to-date reference tool that rivals the depth of commercial encyclopedias.

It’s somewhat difficult for marketers to grasp the branding implications of Wikipedia, however, although wikis have a great deal of promise as collaborative tools.

For some time now, an easier way to illustrate the power of community in Web 2.0 has been Facebook.com. Like MySpace, Facebook is a social networking site. But unlike MySpace, Facebook is a gated community, closed to anyone who is not a college student (originally) or high school student (more recently). The power of this is not to be underestimated. The emerging metaphor for MySpace has been the playground – a good place to have fun (meet friends, learn about new music, trends, share stories) but also full of stalkers and dangerous people.

Facebook created a different community by closing the gates. Instead of attempting to connect strangers, Facebook created an easier way for people who would likely come to know another (in the same school) could interact. In doing so it reinvented the college social experience. Life and interactions on Facebook influenced real-world experiences and the physical space of college life and the online space of Facebook life meshed seamlessly in a way that is difficult for pre-2005 graduates to understand.

What was the marketing implication of Facebook? The opportunity for brands to find their most fanatic supporters, learn from them and allow these brand activists to ‘hijack’ or reshape the brand as Alex Wipperfurth describes. Facebook feels safer than MySpace because it is a closed community. For the same reason, it has been harder for marketers to understand and to penetrate. But the promise has been there and this advertising blog feels that it has been the best of all the Web 2.0 business models to point to.

We were very disappointed, then, when Facebook announced yesterday that beginning next month the site would open up to non-education e-mail addresses, effectively making it no more exclusive than MySpace. Why is Facebook doing this? Facebook founders Mark Zuckerberg, Chris Hughes, and Dustin Moskovitz are clever enough to understand that exclusivity is what has separated Facebook from MySpace and given it ownership of the coveted college demographic.

The answer is simple – Facebook is up for sale and a broadening of the audience might raise the price. It also allows potential acquirers to dream of extending the facebook model to new audiences, line-extending so to speak.

Our thoughts on this mirror our thoughts on the majority of line extensions. It will dilute the brand and hurt the business model. More importantly this new development threatens to rob us of the one simple example we can use to explain Web 2.0.

Brand: Always Clean Panty Liners (Procter & Gamble)
Execution: TV, Print
Link: Click Here
Target: Women
Rating: ***
Reviewer: David

Description:
A straightforward product introduction shot for a feminine menstrual protection product with an attached pre-moistened wipe. The spot opens with a shot of the panty liner inside the familiar folded paper outer wrap moving towards a small package that looks like it might contain a wet wipe. The female voiceover says, “”Introducing the first and only liner pads to come attached with individually-wrapped wipes. New Always Clean. Now you can feel shower clean without the shower. Have a happy period. Always.” In the middle of the spot, the small package tears itself and the animated wipe peeks out. When the line about feeling ‘shower clean’ begins, a shower rains on the package which rotates slowly like a shower faucet being turned on or off. At the end of the spot, the tagline “Have a happy period. Always,” shows at the bottom of the screen.

What Works:
As we would expect of a Procter & Gamble spot executed by Leo Burnett, this commercial is clear and easy to follow with excellent branding. Unlike many product improvements in this category, this one makes obvious and intuitive sense and the visuals make the wipes look appealing and easy to access. The improvement takes off on the success of the adult personal wipes category which grew out of research showing that a measurable percentage of baby wipe sales were to adults using them for their own intimate hygienic needs. The product-as-hero execution of this spot has the product and the brand front and center for virtually the entire spot. Also unlike many of the spots in this category, the advertising is overly fussy or sentimental and does not patronize or talk down to women (with one exception discussed below). Although it presents a purely functional sales pitch, this spot accomplishes what it sets out to do.

What Doesn’t:
We were impressed with this spot until the end. When we heard P&G’s new tagline for Always, however, we had the unmistakeable sense that P&G and Leo Burnett had finally fallen into the trap of much of the advertising in this category. It tells some women something they will not believe and will find insulting with the tagline “Have a Happy Period.”

This advertising blog knows that P&G will say that this line is meant to empower women, to let them feel that their menstrual cycle is a positive affirmation of their reproductive power rather than an unpleasant experience. And we recognize that different women have different attitudes towards their reproductive health. Research shows that some women will significantly deviate from their normal activities during their period, often avoiding social engagements. On the other side of the spectrum there are women who make few if any concessions to their period and do not limit their activities or change their attitute when they are menstruating. Of course there are also numerous shades of gray in between. Marketers have done a good job of pegging attitudes to different sanitary protection products and modifying their advertising accordingly.

The tagline, “Have a Happy Period,” will appeal most to tampon users (if it appeals to anyone). They are the most likely to keep their routine unchanged and to regard their period as something positive and healthy.

The problem is that this tagline seems to attach itself to the entire Always brand (which encompasses all the different types of women). It doesn’t work with all of the products within the brand and particularly not this particular line extension. Panty liners are tricky because they are used by multiple psychographic segments within the sanpro category. Many women use them between periods to guard against ‘spotting’ or unexpected menstrual bleeding. But they are also used by tampon wearers during the period as an additional level of protection for nice underwear.

The innovation here – putting a hand-wipe on the liner – will be interesting to many women but most interesting to those who are more concerned about leakage and more embarrassed by odor or feeling unclean. Those are the same women who may be most offended by the new tagline which seems to argue with their underlying beliefs about menstruation.

So in spite of an excellent line extension, a straightforward advertising concept and a good execution, we believe that Always fails to connect with this spot.

Branding Bottom Line:
We’ve just joined Always in telling half of the population more than they wanted to know.

Brand: Gap Skinny Black Pants (Gap)
Execution: TV
Link: Click Here
Target: Skinny white women
Rating: ***
Reviewer: David

Description:
This spot starts with a clip of Audrey Hepburn in the Paramount film “Funny Face.” In this scene she’s in a Paris nightclub and says, “I rather feel like expressing myself now. And I could certainly use the release,” and starts to dance somewhat absurdly. As she begins to dance she steps out of the club and the movie into a white frame where she dances to “Back in Black” by AC/DC. As she continues to dance, sometimes mirrored with the fram shifting she says, “If a girl wants to dance, a girl wants to dance. It’s a form of expression.” Then she is briefly split into four identical Audreys before she leaps back into the movie frame. Then the spot shifts to the Gap logo against a tan background with the “The Skinny Black Pant” as the subtitle.

What Works:
This is a visually dramatic spot which follows the pseudo-iPod dance style being evolved for the Gap in its return to television (see our review of the excellent first spot in this campaign, ‘Jeans Take Shape’ here). Audrey Hepburn instantly commands attention as does her shocking step out of the movie frame and into the Gap commercial. The CGI effects are top notch and the entire experience is seamless.

Gap is continuing to do a good job with this campaign at developing an updated visual style which is both a modernization of the classic Gap dance commercials and a badly-needed assertion of fashion leadership for the clothing retailer. This spot is unique and ownable and has continuity with both past Gap efforts and the recent Jeans Take Shape spot.

What Doesn’t:
Gap takes a huge risk with this spot and almost pulls it off. The practice of using dead celebrities to promote brands is controversial and many consumers hate it. This spot intends to walk the line between endorsement and affiliation. The point is to show that Gap is emulating Hepburn’s style rather than the opposite. Even though it’s a good effort, the visual effects will be startling and offensive to some consumers. Audrey Hepburn is a cherished cultural icon and pairing her with the Gap (or with AC/DC for that matter) may strike some as heresy.

There is also some particular (and possibly unintended) irony in this spot. In ‘Funny Face,’ Hepburn plays Jo Stockton who desperately wants to meet the beatnick founder of “empatheticalism” (which sagely allows that to understand other people you must put yourselves in others shoes). To do this she is forced to model ultra-chic fashions for photographer Dick Avery. By using this particular clip, Gap compounds the ironic statement of the movie about trends and fashions. Which makes this advertising blog wonder if they were really watching.

Another minor issue with this spot is that it lacks the “Fall into the Gap” tagline which was successfully revived for the ‘Jeans Take Shape’ spot. The tagline helps remind the lapsed Gap-ista of the days when Gap really did lead fashion and we don’t think it should be abandoned so quickly.

Branding Bottom Line:
Sad but better for Audrey Hepburn than reanimation in a beer commercial.

Brand: Discover Card (Morgan Stanley)
Execution: TV
Link: Click Here
Target: Debt Conscious Consumers
Rating: *
Reviewer: David

Description:
The spot starts in the middle of a city street where a host of orange scissors standing upright prance forward to orchestral music, much like they are taking part in a ballet. They move in and among the commuters and into an office building. Soon we see the commuters tentatively feeding their credit cards to the scissors, who neatly snip them in two. Soon it becomes a sport and people are tossing their credit cards to scissors who jump for them as if they’re black labradors catching frisbees. Even a grandfather sitting on a bench tries it. The city dissolves into a giant parade where people line the streets tossing their credit cards in, even from upper stories as they float downwards like confetti or ticker tape. A voiceover says, “What if you could get rid of the things you don’t like about credit cards – the hype, the confusion? What if you could start over – and this time do it right?” The spot concludes with a Discover Card logo and a link to the Discover Card what if site.

What Works:
This spot certainly attracts attention and has the, “how did they do that,” appeal. The effect of sentient scissors is brought to life convincingly. Curiousity keeps the viewer watching for the eventual payoff and branding.

What Doesn’t:
Destined to become a milestone in the ‘What Were They Thinking?’ hall of fame, this spot confuses more than it illuminates. While this advertising blog supports inventive executions, they must support the brand positioning – or at least build the brand. This execution does neither. For a full three-quarters of the spot we are left wondering what the point is and which brand is being promoted. The payoff (that Discover doesn’t have the hassles of ordinary cards) is a letdown and leaves us wondering who could have possibly created such a colossal trainwreck. Here are the issues by the numbers:

1. Weak Branding – The Discover logo is shown a single time at the end of the spot.
2. High Concept = No Concept – The concept must have been compelling in the storyboard presentation, but it ends up overwhelming the spot.
3. Brand Positioning – Discover is given a weakly stated position which puts it at parity with American Express and Capital One No Hassles cards.
4. Ownability – Surely nobody else will copy this spot, but it could have been created by any brand.
5. Tonality - The scissors actually portray a negative message about the category which may not serve Discover well.

This spot gives us some genuine angst for Discover, which seems to work better as the ‘little card that could.’ In trying to copy the visual splendor of the Sonia Bravia spot (where balls cascade down San Francisco streets – see our commentary here), Discover has created a version without the artistry which feels pedestrian and unconvincing.

Branding Bottom Line:
A brand disaster for Discover. And we thought running with scissors was dangerous!