When I was in my teens and early 20’s, going to a Jays game was an entirely acceptable thing to do. Yes, the team was very good. And yes, the new state-of-the-art Skydome played a role in the team’s popularity. But even before the Dome, I remember spending many summer nights sitting in the bleachers of Exhibition Stadium cheering on the Jays. It was a fun night out with a group of friends. It didn’t hurt that the tickets were – and still are – relatively inexpensive. Beyond going to the games, wearing a Jays cap, or even just identifying yourself as a Jays fan was something you were more than happy to do. It was a badge you were happy to wear.

But then something changed. I’m not sure when. Or why. Or how. But it did. And dramatically so. Suddenly following the Jays – or even worse, actually going to a game – was something that old people did. Old people and baseball geeks. It wasn’t a fun night out. It wasn’t something anyone talked about. In fact, it was looked down upon. Baseball and Blue Jays fans suddenly found ourselves in the closet. We’d watch Jays games at home, but never talk about them. We’d never think of inviting a group of friends to a game. And we’d certainly never ask the bar to change the channel from Nascar/Golf/Soccer to put on the Jays game. And as for Blue Jays apparel? It was something you bought at Sears for your uncle’s 70th birthday.  It wasn’t something you’d actually buy yourself and wear. No, to those of us who loved the game and followed the Jays, we’d quietly pretend baseball didn’t matter. Because to the city at large, it didn’t. Sure the Jays were probably thriving in the old age homes across the country, but to those under 40 – and certainly those under 30 – the Jays were not cool. They weren’t even on the radar.

And then as quickly as they disappeared, they suddenly came back. Walk down trendy Queen St. West today and you’ll see a jays cap being worn proudly on every block, and mostly by people who weren’t even born when the likes of George Bell, Garth Iorg and Damaso Garcia were so beloved in this city. Those same people are watching the Jays in bars, going to the games and following young stars like Ricky Romero and JP Arencibia on Twitter. The Jays brand has literally risen from the dead.

As a lifelong fan, I’m thrilled to be able to come back out of the closet and talk Blue Jays baseball again. As a marketer, I’m fascinated. I mean, what the hell happened? Yes, the Jays are becoming competitive again – which helps a lot. But is it purely about wins and losses? Is it that the team is made up of mostly young, attractive guys? Is it that those young, attractive stars are also amazingly active on Twitter? Any way you slice it, it’s a testament to the unforeseen marketing genius of nerdy GM Alex Anthopolous.

Or is something else at play? Are the Jays simply a trend that’ll fade once again? Or have they found a recipe through young stars and social media to keep young people coming back for more? It’s hard to say. Whatever it is, it’s a remarkable recovery for a very recently irrelevant brand.

As for me, I’m just going to hope this enthusiasm for the team and sport last a while. Hopefully by the time it does fall out of favour again I’ll be one of those old guys in the nursing home.

RIM has been in the news a lot lately, and almost entirely for negative reasons. In an attempt to turn around their negative momentum they announced a new (sort-of) CEO. Promoting a current employee was clearly not the  dramatic change analysts were looking for, as the stock continued to get hammered. What I did find interesting was the new CEO’s comment that a top priority was to find a new CMO to help increase their desirability. A CEO’s overt declaration that marketing in itself is an essential piece of the puzzle is music to any marketer’s ears. After years of of being in the shadow of marketing behemoth Apple, I know that marketing alone can’t turn RIM around. I am, however, convinced that it can help create a vision and purpose around which a company can rally.

The more I thought about it, the more I realized that for an advertiser/marketer, this is the challenge of a lifetime. Sure, it’s fun to work on hip, healthy, established brands like Apple or Nike. But I’d argue there’s no greater challenge right now in the marketing world than RIM. To give people a compelling reason to trade in their iPhone for a Blackberry, or their iPad for a Playbook, now there’s a challenge to test your mettle. It’s worth remembering that Apple was on its last legs in recent memory. And for that matter, it was mere years ago that Blackberry’s hold on the phone market seemed unbreakable.

Blackberry already has a truckload of assets, not the least of which is that Blackberry is still the smartphone of choice for most young teens and tweens. Advertisers are all intimately aware of the “get ‘em young, keep ‘em for life” parable. But for some reason, Blackberry’s foothold begins to slip. Most iPhone and Android users over the age of 30 once owned a Blackberry – so the challenge in this case is winning them back, instead of initiating trial.

While some see RIM as a sinking ship, I see it as a diamond in the rough. They fall under a category that has always been earmarked by fickle consumer behaviour and fluctuating trends. Today’s loyal Android user may well be tomorrow’s Apple convert and vice-versa. I’m of the mind that RIM’s reclaimed supremacy is out there waiting to be realized. Of course, the window of opportunity is closing; RIM will need to act quickly and decisively.

As a proud Canadian, I look forward to the day that RIM gets its mojo back.  And if RIM’s future CMO is reading this, I can be reached at: randystein@griplimited.com

It used to be that every politician’s worst nightmare was to be caught in a lie. But now what is perhaps even more devastating is to be caught “faking it.” Nothing brought this to life more for me than Rick Perry’s now infamous debate gaffe where he couldn’t remember a key point in his campaign platform. On national television, and repeated millions of times on YouTube and through social media, Rick Perry was caught faking it. He might as well have said “I don’t really care about any of this stuff,” or “I can’t remember what my handlers told me to say.” It was cringe-worthy. Not because he was caught in a genuinely human moment, but rather because he was caught being disingenuous.

There used to be a time when a politician could get away with a lack of sincerity, but those days are over. We now live in a world of 24 hour news, “hot” microphones, social media, etc. Case in point: JFK’s first debate against Richard Nixon. Those who watched on TV believed JFK had won. Those who listened to the debate on the radio believed Nixon was the winner. It used to be easy to fake sincerity. Now it’s impossible.

So what does all this have to do with the world of advertising and marketing? Everything. As consumers become increasingly sophisticated, and immune to “spin,” brands caught “faking it” will pay a high price. Brands that stand for something and believe it to their core will win the day. And I’m not referring to lofty corporate social responsibility – I think a brand can stand for “value,” or “craftsmanship,” or pretty much anything it wants to – it just better genuinely believe in it. Because as consumers continue to force their way behind the curtain, the posers will be exposed. And it won’t be pretty.

If you don’t believe me, check out Rick Perry’s recent poll numbers.

Is it me, or does Groupon kinda Suck?

I first signed up for Groupon after reading an article about how it was the fastest growing company (in terms of valuation) in history. I may get the specifics wrong, but as I remember it,  Groupon was valued at something like $6 billion  - yes, billion – in just over two years of existence. At the time, the owners of Groupon had suitors toss billions at them for controlling interest in the company. The owners, in turn, spurned all bids.  Presumably $6B was seen as just the tip of the iceberg.

After reading this, I naturally signed up for Groupon’s daily emails – after all, the fastest growing company in the history of the world must be offering some pretty amazing deals, right? And so it began. 50% off a meal at some Italian restaurant 30 km from my house. Twenty dollars off a car wash at some distant location. On and on it went. Nothing compelled me. Not even close.

So what’s all the fuss about Groupon? Am I missing something? My inbox is already full of emails – from stores that I actually do shop at – offering weekly incentives and offers. And the brands that I choose to “like” on Facebook also offer me discounts. It’s not that I’m not open to a new brand, retail store or experience, but the odds of me being enticed by a random deal seem low – at best.

So, again, what am I missing?  All I know is that if I owned Groupon, I would’ve taken the $6B. Now that would have been an awesome deal.

Is Apple on the verge of becoming irrelevant? I know, it’s heresy to even express such a thought. First, let me be clear, this is not an anti-Apple post. I’m actually a huge Apple evangelist. I love my MacBook Pro, iMac, iPad, iPhone, etc. My wife loves her iPhone. My son loves his iPod Touch, which is full of songs downloaded from iTunes and apps bought from the app store. My five year-old daughter even has a hand-me-down iPod loaded up with Miley Cyrus songs. You get the idea.

Actually, this isn’t a blog post about Apple at all, it’s actually more about RIM. More to the point, it’s an article about the speed of change.

Let’s start with RIM. They’ve been in the press a lot lately for a lot of bad reasons – market share deteriorating, share price plummeting, massive layoffs. They’re a company in decline, trying badly to turn things around. They’re even being referred to as the next Palm (you’re excused if you have no idea who “Palm” is.) So while a struggling tech company doesn’t feel like new news, it’s noteworthy to recall that a few short years ago any suggestion that RIM wouldn’t last much longer would have been seen as lunacy. ”Crackberrys” were ubiquitous. Presidential hopeful Barack Obama was photographed with his trusty Blackberry hundreds of times, even stirring controversy with his reluctance to relinquish it upon being elected – national security be damned. RIM was the future. RIM was an unstoppable force and the darling of Wall Street. And now, some short time later, RIM isn’t.

How can this happen? We’re not talking about a slow decline over decades like auto magnate General Motors, but a span of months. It boggles the mind to realize that “the future” can be relegated to “the past” in a heartbeat. I’m sure RIM will make a great business school case study for years to come (whether they turn things around or not), and I’m sure within RIM’s lifespan there are dozens of lessons about rejecting complacency. But for me, RIM is a wake up call about the newly-paced speed of change: exhilarating, frightening and motivating as hell.

Which takes us back to Apple, now the leader and darling of Wall Street. Apple can’t possibly be the next RIM. Apple can’t possibly be the next Palm. Can it?

The Cannes Lions advertising festival is back. And while most people think of the festival as a celebration of world-class creative, schmoozing, and expense accounts, I always associate the festival with my friend James Lee. I would suggest the same of you – especially if you are Canadian.
In 1999, James was the first Canadian to win a Gold Lion in the Film category in twenty years. Twenty years! Think about that for a moment. His TV spot for Finesse shampoo (a packaged good no less) won Gold and ended Canada’s drought. And just to prove it was no fluke, James won another Gold in the film category a couple years later for Bud Light. That is to say, James took home the Gold in the single toughest category against such global beer heavyweights as Guinness and Stella Artois. He was a giant. A pioneer.
It’s no surprise that James went on to win countless more Lions in several different categories. And I’m not using the term “countless” lightly – I lost count.
If not for his untimely death in 2007 at the age of 37, I have no doubt he’d have many more Lions collecting dust in his closet.
So as Cannes continues to roll around from this year to the next, I’d suggest that we in the Canadian advertising industry give James – and his spectacular work – at least a moment of thought. I’m not suggesting that Canada couldn’t have won a Gold Lion following that first one for Finesse. But someone had to be the first. Someone had to raise the bar just a little higher for all of us.  And that person was James Lee.
So this year, as Canadians stand on the podium collecting their Gold Lions, look real close. You may notice that they’re standing on James’ shoulders.

I was in the car the other morning listening to the radio – as I always do on my way into work – when two familiar radio ads ran back-to-back.  One was for a local audio equipment store (Bay Bloor Radio) and the other for a local men’s shop (Korry’s).  Both of these spots were familiar because they’ve used the exact same format for years. Frankly, perhaps even for decades. In both cases, the simple format involves a tried-and-true model: owners of the shop talking passionately about their store’s products and/or service.

I’m not going to argue that these are “creative” ads. Far from it. If, on the supremely unlikely chance the owners had a mind to enter them into an ad awards show, they’d likely not make it past the first round. Assuming they weren’t laughed out of Cannes or Santa Clara first.

But here’s the rub: these spots are effective.  Really, really effective.

Needless to say, this got me questioning why.  What do they accomplish that so few of us have been able to achieve? Why do they stand the test of time, seemingly never get old, and still manage to be mind-bogglingly effective? Is it because they are localized to one location and hence have the ability to talk personally about their product in a way a large advertiser can’t credibly do? Have the rest of us just stuck to the same message for so long that we believe it?  Is it something else?

To be honest, I’m not sure.

What I do know is that it works.  At the end of the day, any good advertiser would rather increase profits than their award show haul. Which also gets me to thinking that if award shows aren’t judging long-term, sustained effectiveness,  what are they judging?

I suspect that’s the subject for another post.

I heard the most depressing radio commercial on my way into work this morning. Perhaps the most depressing commercial I’ve ever heard. And no, it wasn’t a PSA for breast cancer, or animal welfare, or anything of the like. It wasn’t even for a “serious” issue like life insurance. In fact, the product being advertised wasn’t serious at all. It was for a lottery. Yeah, a lottery.

What I found so unsetting was the premise. To be clear, I’m not complaining about the creative (it caught my attention after all), but rather the premise behind the creative. The idea of the spot was that someone had given up on their dreams because they stopped buying lottery tickets. To be more precise, the person’s “dreams” were actually speaking to them, wondering why they’ve given up on them… because, yes, this person had stopped buying lottery tickets.

Really? Lottery tickets? That’s how you achieve your dreams? The thought makes me sick. The fact that it’s a government agency behind the message just adds insult to injury. “Hey Kids, if working hard or getting an education feels like too much work, you can always fall back on THE LOTTERY!”

Ugh.

Now, I have no illusions as to what we do. I don’t personally believe that we as advertisers are here to make the world a better, kinder, more virtuous place. I have no issues with a deodorant suggesting that if you use their brand, you’ll instantly become more attractive – especially to six-foot tall supermodels. They have every right to suggest that, and the consumer has every right to believe it – or not.

I’ve been trying to pinpoint why this radio spot depresses me so. Maybe it’s because I suspect that a core group of the target market actually believes the message. Or maybe I’m just disappointed that they couldn’t find another way (or a less overt way) to remind me to buy lottery tickets. Whatever the reason, it bummed me out.

Of course, it’s nothing that $46,000,000 won’t fix.
Which I believe is the prize in this week’s draw.

You never know when or where you’ll be inspired.

A couple of weeks ago I was in synagogue for the high holidays (and actually paying attention) when a story in the supplemental reading book really struck me.  It made me think about our “consumer” – the mysterious and enigmatic profile of a person we’re always targeting  in our advertising.  The story served as a reminder for me to always be mindful of what’s really important to them, as opposed to what they may say is important or what, heaven forbid, we assume about them. Hint: it’s not the products and services we’re advertising.

The reading was a story/fable about a young girl who spent a great deal of time and effort decorating a box with very expensive wrapping paper.  Upon seeing his daughter using up the expensive wrapping, the father chastised her, as money was tight in the household.  The next morning, the daughter presented the beautifully-wrapped box to her father urging him to open it. The father, somewhat ashamed of having scolded his daughter the day before, excitedly opened the box – only to discover that the box was empty. As the father once again began to angrily chide his daughter for being so wasteful, she began to cry. “But Daddy,” she said “the box isn’t empty, I filled it with my kisses.”

Yeah, it’s a nice story.  But what really hit home for me was how important it is to continually ask ourselves what it is that our consumers really want.  Somehow, I don’t think the story would have been as touching if the daughter had given her father an iPad.  And the truth is, any father (even an “early adopter”) would trade just one kiss from his daughter for a hundred iPads.

We spend so much time trying to sell our clients’ products (granted, that’s what we’re paid to do) that we sometimes forget to dig a little deeper and really understand what our consumer is longing for. What do they really want?  If we can figure that out, and then figure out how the products that we are selling can help the consumer achieve that, we’ll win every time.

At Grip, we believe in “values based” advertising. The essential premise being that by laddering up a product or service to a specific human value, we can make advertising more meaningful, relevant and effective.  After almost 9 years of taking this “values based” approach at Grip, it’s incredibly comforting to be reminded every now and again of its power.

A snapshot from Grip’s IT department – allaying fears that our Mac-based environment may be flirting with the dark side.

So, what are your customers saying about your brand?