Archive for the 'McDonalds' Category

McDonalds and the Big Chicken Caper

Thursday, May 11th, 2006

mcdonalds chicken.jpgBrand: McDonald’s
Execution: TV
Link: Click Here (link is to AdCritic, a pay site)
Rating: **
Reviewer: David

Description:
The spot opens with a man watching his friend gobble down a McDonald’s Premium Chicken Sandwich with some alarm. The music is forbidding. He says, “Man you keep eating those - you’re going to turn into a chicken.” The spot then follows the friend as goes home, keeps eatching McDonald’s chicken sandwiches, starts leaking feathers and eventually gets out of bed to reveal chicken feet. The spot ends with a black screen with “all-white breast meat Premium Chicken Sandwiches,” followed by the McDonald’s logo and the “I’m lovin’ it” tagline.

What Works:
This ad certainly gets our attention. It has roughly the same pacing, cinematography and scoring as an M. Night Shyamalan film. It is utterly unlike anything we’ve seen from McDonald’s before. It is a memorable spot.

What Doesn’t:
This spot has issues on several levels. First, it completely violates the brand character of McDonalds which is meant to be approachable and fun. This spot is scary and forbidding. Secondly, it misses the fundamental brand positioning for McDonalds - the place for kids of all ages. Every time McDonalds has aimed its advertising to adults it has misfired, most famously with the McLean Deluxe. McDonalds is a place for families, first and foremost. It is true that heavy-eating adult males are the most significant user group for McDonalds, but as this advertising blog has noted previously, these men come to McDonalds to recapture a connection to their childhood and adult advertising will not necessarily have the expected effect on this group.

What is McDonalds thinking? Even the basic selling proposition is flawed here. We are supposed to be more attracted to McDonalds Premium Chicken Sandwiches because they are addictive and might turn us into a chicken? McDonalds seems to have turned back to the Burger King school of advertising that believes that any talk about the brand is good - even if the talk is about how absurd the advertising has become. We are surprised that DDB Chicago is behind this brand disaster.

Branding Bottom Line:
Memo to McDonalds - please stop scaring our kids or we’re not coming back.

COMMENTARY: McDonalds follows Burger King

Monday, January 16th, 2006

Commentary by: David
Issue: New McDonald’s Ad Campaign

Kate MacArthur reports in AdAge today that McDonalds is launching a new ad campaign that in some ways emulates “the King” campaign from Burger King via Crispin, Porter + Bogusky. The ads will feature the plastic Ronald McDonald statues that are found in the restaurants. They will show consumers interacting with these icons.

A McDonald’s spokesman says that the idea is to, “share how our customers relate to the world’s most famous clown and the bond they have with our brand.” They are reminiscent of the McDonald’s spots of years ago that tug at your heartstrings.” The chain says that this campaign will continue and build on the “I’m lovin’ it” theme and will use the music associated with these spots. Up to 10 different spots will air on event-oriented programming including the Torino Olympic games.

This campaign will be an important one for McDonald’s as it marks two important transitions: the first work from TWBA/Chiat/Day in the U.S. for McDonalds and the first new campaign produced under Mary Dillon, the new McDonald’s CMO who has moved over from Quaker Oats.

This advertising blog cannot review advertising before it is seen. Nevertheless, we have some significant strategic concerns with the direction of this campaign. Neither we nor the U.S. consumer were fans of the Burger King campaign (see our review and links to the USA Today advertising preference survey here.) And we have been similarly queasy about the Quaker campaign featuring a statue version of the Quaker from the Quaker Oats box.

What’s the problem here? Why shouldn’t an iconic brand like McDonald’s show off its mascot and (as the company claims), ‘the world’s most famous clown’?

The problem is not the mascot but the presentation. Using objects that are inanimate or semi-animate (as with the Burger King - a real person wearing a plastic head) changes and distorts the relationship between the consumer and the brand.

This is most disturbing in the Burger King spots, where the Burger King stands at the intersection between friend and stalker and never once appears in the setting of the restaurants. The McDonalds spots should be tamer - with Ronald McDonald simply a statue and within the restaurant. Yet the underlying message is complex. If Ronald McDonald represents the relationship that children have with the restaurant, why have him as an immobile statue? And why waste brand equity and air time on building an icon that doesn’t necessarily have benefits for children.

McDonalds is right to focus its advertising efforts on the family. When it has pitched its message to adults, it has failed (see our review of a recent campaign along these lines here.) At its core, McDonalds has the simplicity, dependability and repetitiveness that is most attractive to children or young adults who have grown up with McDonalds. So focusing on families is the smartest way to guard this core audience.

It is still possible that McDonalds can so elegantly execute this campaign that it does not smack of stalking or creepy idol worship as in the Burger King or Quaker campaigns. But the line it thin and it is not clear what McDonalds gains from focusing on plastic statues when the family-friendly experience of McDonalds is what needs to be reinforced.

McDonalds in the Bargain Basement

Monday, July 18th, 2005

Brand: McDonalds
Execution: TV

Link: Not Yet
Target: Attention, K-Mart Shoppers
Reviewer: David
Rating: *

Description:
The spot opens with a shot of a shower running in a crowded apartment which has a sink in the same room. Which would be funny if some of us did not live in Manhattan. The voiceover says “A Shower in the Kitchen. That’s one way to save money.” Then we see product shots from McDonalds culminating with a cheeseburger for $1.29.

What Works
:
Everyone loves low prices.

What Doesn’t:
McDonalds, for years the powerhouse of fast food chains is clearly on the ropes. It is reeling from the combined effects of the death of two popular CEOs, a well regarded, critical documentary (Super Size Me), shifting consumer preferences and a newly resurgent Burger King that seems to have found its voice. Nowhere is this more visible than in McDonalds marketing efforts, which seem to have come from the belly of a pinata in random sizes and shapes. It’s sad to say that the highpoint of the year may have been getting Ronald McDonald interviewed by MSNBC, which was accomplished by giving him a makeover as part of the “Go Active Campaign.” Interviewing a fictional corporate mascot dressed as a clown also marks the lowpoint of the year for MSNBC - and we’re counting the Michael Jackson trial here.

The brand positioning for McDonalds this year seems to be ‘all things to all people’ which is no positioning at all.

McDonalds was a genius brand when they created a safe place with no surprises that parents could tolerate and kids would love. Over the years these McDonald’s kids grew up and continued eating there as adults (including a small group of heavy male eaters who account for an astonishing portion of food sales), but McDonalds stuck persistently to the family as the core user for the brand. This paid dividends as adults were drawn back to McDonalds by the connection to childhood experiences and the desire for trusted food. If food was a friend, McDonalds was family.

With the”One Way to Save Money” campaign, McDonalds seems to be trying its hardest to kill this brand equity. And we suspect that this desperation is born from a misconception about why people really come to McDonalds to begin with. Current management seems to think that it’s about the burgers. Since burgers are facing declining popularity, McDonald’s has set off a two-pronged strategy to move aggressively into healthier fare (a Fruit and Walnut Salad was the big introduction this year) and position the classic items as value offerings. Which is where this spot fits in. The problems by the numbers:

  1. Unclear imagery - apart from the unintended insult to urbanites, the basic proposition of this spot - saving money by putting the shower in the kitchen - was not clear. Were there some dishes in the shower? We are not sure, but otherwise it’s not obvious where the money savings comes from.
  2. ‘Cheap’ is not a good brand Positioning - Even Wal-Mart, the Darth Vaders of cheap, know enough to create a value proposition for consumers by talking about consistent low prices for stuff you buy anyway and would pay more for elsewhere. Really cheap burgers are a great way to start a price war in fast food, erode McDonald’s brand image and devalue the company. Or a quick bid to boost sales and allow shareholders to cash out before consumers desert the chain in droves and the share value plummets.
  3. Poor Execution - You get a strong sense that the agency did not have their heart in this spot as the direction, timing and tempo of this spot all seem below the usual standards. Which is just as well. A bad idea executed perfectly would not have been better.

Branding Bottom Line -
Bargain basement branding sells McDonalds short.