It’s a whatever all around, and rather than sit here and discuss aesthetics, I’m going to question why they redesigned them at all. What was the reason behind it? I have a feeling it’s not a good one.

I’m not going to buy more Pepsi (quite frankly — and mathematically speaking — I can’t buy any less) just because the logo is more simple or more colorful. Neither fact changes the more important fact that the Pepsi brand hasn’t reached me as a consumer, and it’s safe to say I’m not alone.

When you consider the teams of designers, account people, internal and external accountants, focus groups, and of course, lawyers, who always touch a job of this magnitude, it’s an effort that costs millions. And an effort that will fail to turn me into a Pepsi drinker. Well done?

If something isn’t working, you don’t spend your money on a new logo. You spend it examining your message, your tactics, your language, your tone, your execution. Examine those and I can guarantee the answer to generating more market share won’t be “folks, we have it — new logo.”

Thanks for stopping in. Questions? Comments? Have at it.

Hope you’re well.

Every few months I have a look at my email signature to see if it’s still the best it can be. I’m pretty happy about my most recent. Pretty geeky yes, but it’s important, since you probably use email more than, say, letters to communicate with clients, colleagues, and prospects.

What does your email signature say about you? Is it tight? Easy to follow? Is it long enough to separate into chapters? Does it link to the things you do? The sites where you and your profiles live online? Does it say you’re connected? Current? Does it have your address? Why? Expecting someone you email to visit? Really? When was the last time that happened? Why not a link to a Google Map instead so recipients don’t have to look it up? Is your email address in your signature? Umm, why? Can’t someone just hit respond and it magically appears in the “TO” field?

There’s really no right or wrong answer, but it should reflect you, what you stand for, and communicate your business’ personality. Think about it.

Be brief. Be actionable. Be good.

Thanks for stopping in.

Thoughts? Comments? Always welcome.

michael calienes
transplant
————————
read: www.transplant-1.com/blogorama/
follow: www.twitter.com/michaelcalienes
connect: www.linkedin.com/in/transplant
visit: www.transplant-1.com
talk: 850.459.8192

The AT&T television campaign touting wireless connections virtually anywhere finally hit a more realistic cord with their most recent installment featuring Olympic gold-medal winner, Michael Phelps. The commercial felt more relevant because it was about speed rather than about the card’s ability to locate a wireless connection in places you’ll never be — like Amelia Aerheart’s crash site, the North Pole, the fountain of youth, and the end of the rainbow. Although those commercials were somewhat interesting conceptually, they fell flat in execution. The promise was “locate a signal anywhere,” and really, how many times have you pulled out your laptop on while scaling to the summit of Kilimanjaro?

The new spot actually promised a more important benefit. Speed. And it did so in a more relevant fashion than the others. Even though the spot strayed slightly from the initial creative direction, they kept its tone and delivery consistent — minimal interaction between announcer and the location while the deadpan delivery touted the product’s benefits. The final shot shows the announcer emblazoned with Phelps’ eight gold medals and donning the little black swimming cap, in which he looks absolutely ridiculous.

Final note: I applaud the production team for avoiding the temptation to have Michael Phelps talk. Good decision.

So you’ve got this great email thingy that sends out email blasts whenever you want. You can keep customers and prospects informed about your business, your ideas, and your promotions. Before you hit send, put yourself in the recipients’ inbox in order to prevent stabbing your reputation in the back.

Who’s the message from? It’s better when the message is from a person in the company rather than the company. Companies and departments don’t write emails or build relationships. People do. Receiving emails from marketing@domainname or sales@domainname is cold. Customize your email service to warm the relationship, not stiff-arm the customer.

How often is too often? Today I received an email message and a mobile message from the gym where I’m already a member. The messages arrived minutes apart. They didn’t respect my space by not offering an iota of breathing room between touches. My immediate reflex: unsubscribe (I did).

Oh come on, it’s me. Cut it out. This company sent me a promotion to become a gym member when I’ve been one for a year. Know who these people are and what their level of interaction with you is. Remember: you’re writing to people, not just email addresses.

One generic email sent to one generic list is not enough. Don’t have one list. Have a few. Don’t have one stock paragraph of content. Have a few. There are current members, non-members, people who have inquired but not joined, people who have let their membership expire, etc. All these people need to be written to a little differently based on their level of interaction with you. The more meticulous you get with your lists and messaging, the better your response will be.

Email services are powerful tools that have to be used with care, but most importantly, with the utmost respect to your recipients.

Thanks for stopping in. Questions? Comments? Bring ‘em on.

I hope you’re well.

We label emails as normal low, normal, and high priority. Physicians deem patients in stable or critical condition. So why can’t we have the same labels on the economy that trigger certain actions in order to protect something so elemental to us as a lifetime of savings?

We all know the STOP LOSS option triggers a share sell-off once they dip below a certain level. Considering, however, that the term “loss” has been newly defined by the current crisis, why not safeguard the common non-investor type who doesn’t stop-loss his or her investments by automatically selling a percentage of shares of stock after the economy has been deemed “in crisis?” The sell-off would then occur once said investor’s losses reach 10, 15, 25%  — or whatever the investor is comfortable with — from the point at which the economy was deemed to be “in crisis.” Make it a mandatory part of the investment agreement. The toughest part, I imagine, would be trusting the team of mathematicians who develop the equations necessary to flag the economy as “in crisis” and trigger the sell-off.

Whatever the case, what’s happening right now can never happen again. Not only has this debacle obliterated retirements, they’ve erased inheritances. Now we’ve all got to start over, so that by the time our children or grandchildren retire, things may be back to “normal” — whatever its new definition may be.

Thoughts? Opinions? Gripes? Tirades? Bring ‘em on.

Thanks for stopping in, and I hope you’re doing well.

It’s always both inspiring and humbling to see what advertising students can do before they get all jaded by clients and their lawyers.

Kudos to these students for pushing their thinking, and the teachers who guided the work. My favorite is the piece for Doritos. Creative placement is tough to do well without the work appearing forced. This piece, and a few others, take great advantage of the medium, while delivering a simple, and more importantly, singular message.