Brand: Buckley’s (W.K. Buckley, Limited)
Execution: TV, Social Networking
Target: Listerine Users
Rating: ****
Reviewer: David Vinjamuri

Description:
A series of simple ads featuring a comparative taste test between Buckley’s and various awful alternatives including Spring Break Hot Tub Water, Snail Trail Accumulation, Used Mouthwash, Public Restroom Puddle (which is yellow),  Trash Bag Leakage,  Pig Tongue Scrapings and Cardio Workout Perspiration.  In each spot (shot on video and with a hum in the background to simulate a handicam),  the subject is shown drinking the second alternative (Buckley’s being the first) and commenting that it either tastes the same as or better than Buckley’s.

Accompanying the TV spots is a MySpace campaign including a consumer generated photo contest for the worst Buckley’s face.  There is also a contest for selecting a town to be crowned “The Capital of Bad Taste” between Buckley, Washington and Buckley, Illinois.  Both Mayors are featured showing their Buckley’s face.

What Works:
This advertising blog is not normally a fan of gross-out humor but it works well here.  Buckley (a Canadian company, founded in 1990, now owned by Novartis) borrowed the brand strategy which had been so successful for Listerine in the 1970′s.  Listerine had long struggled with it’s unpleasant mouth feel and finally hit on the idea that the bad taste could be used as proof that it was actually doing something (killing the bacteria that cause bad breath, in Listerine’s case).  Buckley took this strategy and made it more explicit with the “It Tastes Awful, And It Works” tagline and a campaign exaggerating the terrible taste of Buckley’s cough syrup.

The result is a clever and memorable campaign which creates an ownable brand positioning for Buckley’s as the ‘no frills’ cough syrup for people who just want to stop their cough.  This will be impossible for any other brand in this category to copy, and we expect the brand will do as well in the U.S. as it has done in Canada.

What Doesn’t:
Any campaign that uses exaggeration as a technique treads a fine line and Buckley’s is clearly on that line.  A step further and it will actually suppress sales – which is probably not the goal of the campaign.

Branding Bottom Line:
We’d like to say that Buckley’s left a bad taste in our mouth – but we’re not that brave.

Issue: The Hollywood writers strike may have unintended consequences
Commentary by: David Vinjamuri

This morning at 12:01 am, Hollywood writers went on strike for the first time since 1988. Most of the commentary around this strike has been focused on the earlier writers strike and its estimated $500mm cost to the industry.  Media critics and stock analysts are wondering how great the revenue loss to the industry will be and what burdens any eventual deal with the writers will place on the industry.

Instead of looking to the 1988 writers strike for historical lessons, pundits should reach a year further back, to the 1987 NFL strike.  In that strike, professional football players were replaced by scabs – mostly undrafted former college players willing to cross a picket line to be able to wear the uniform of an NFL team for a few weeks.  Although the interval was short – after a few games, pros began crossing the picket line and the season was not lost – those few weeks were interesting.  Fans saw a lower level of football, but also a lot of people playing for nothing more than passion.  Although most of the scabs disappeared immediately with the return of the regular season, a few joined the big league.

Hollywood is far too unionized for this scenario to play out on in the writers room for The Tonight Show, Desperate Housewives or Heroes.  But if the writers strike creates an extended dearth of new material on the big screen and televisions nationwide, new media may have its moment in the sun.  Sites like YouTube have already shown that American consumers are willing to watch consumer-created media.  If television content disappears – creating an extended summer break of sorts – the conditions might suddenly exist for a tipping point shift towards new media.

Hollywood knows that it has a lot to lose from the writers strike.  But the real loss could be much larger than anyone imagines.  When consumers become more expert at finding video on the web just as amateurs are getting better at delivering it, the advertising model behind network television, which depends heavily on the scale of the audience watching commercials, could vanish.  Then Hollywood writers could return to work and find the stadiums empty, the fans gone.

Brand: Apple
Execution: TV: iPhone / iPod Touch
Target: Business People / Mainstream Users
Rating: **** / ****
Reviewer: David Vinjamuri

Description:
Two new campaigns from Apple feature real Apple consumers.  The new iPhone campaign features a variety of real consumers, from a businessman to an airline pilot.  Each explains how they use the iPhone to help them with real everyday problems while visually demonstrating on the iPhone.  The second campaign is for the new iPod Touch.  This campaign does not feature a consumer, but was created by a consumer from stock footage and gained a viewership on YouTube.  Apple began running this spot last weekend nationally as the launch spot for the iPod Touch.

What Works:
Apple has suffered from a series of missteps over the summer which showed the company to be somewhat removed from the everyday concerns of its core brand followers.  First was the $200 price drop on the iPhone.  In itself a good idea (a classic skim-pricing strategy), Apple neglected to consider the impact on those who had waited in long lines just a few months earlier to pay more for the new phone.  After some waffling, Steve Jobs announced a $100 consumer credit on the iPhone for early purchases.

The next misstep – also affecting the iPhone – was the strategy Apple initially adopted of keeping the phone locked from outside developers.  This may have resulted from Apple’s contract with AT&T, but it mirrors Apple’s general approach to design which is to tightly control all aspects of the final product.  In the case of the iPhone, this strategy proved unpopular as developers and consumers alike wanted to add functionality to the phone.  Compounding the issue, a number of users who had made unauthorized alterations to their iPhone – including unlocking it to use on other carriers than AT&T – found that installing phone updates disabled the phone entirely.  Apple eventually reversed course by allowing outside developers to design applications to run natively on the phone.

Beyond the specifics of the new spots for the iPhone and iPod Touch – which are both extremely well executed – there is a more important underlying theme for Apple which is a good sign for the company.  Pulling a video off of YouTube and blessing it as the launch spot for a major new product is a startling development for this close-lipped organization.  Spotlighting ordinary consumers is an old ad technique (the testimonial may pre-date even print advertising) but shows an engagement with real consumers that is a definite change for Apple.  In sum, we think Apple is starting to realize the power of the brand cult it has created beyond their usefulness in populating the churches they have built for the – the Apple Stores.

Allowing consumer to engage in co-creation with the Apple brand is a good sign for the brand as well as a sign of the times for marketing.

What Doesn’t:
Co-creation is a process that is difficult to stop once the lid is ripped off the top.  Apple needs to carefully map the path of its upcoming brand extensions to ensure it will continue to listen to and engage with consumers.

Branding Bottom Line:
The iPhone proves more useful than the U.S. national air traffic control system.  Scary.