Yet Another Example Why Proofreading Is Of Critical Importance: Part III

In a humorous, but astonishing, case of pure coincidence, two high-profile retailers, Old Navy and JCPenney, both committed major faux pas this week with misguided T-shirt offerings...and just in time for back-to-school shopping, the volume of spending for which is predicted to be down this year.

Exhibit A:  Old Navy. As reported in this piece on Ragan.com, the Gap-owned retailer printed sports T-shirts with "Lets go" across the front. Obviously, the phrase is missing an apostrophe, and it should have read, "Let's go," as a contraction for "Let us go." No big deal, right?

Well, in most cases, probably not, except that Old Navy distributed thousands of shirts to college campuses across the country, with each shirt customized according to the colors, logos, and mascots of the individual college. For example, this short to the left is sold at the University of Michigan.

So what message does this send to the students? That correct grammar and punctuation are unimportant? Old Navy earns a fail on this one, particularly since the product had to be approved (and presumably, proofread as well) by multiple layers of management before shipping and hitting store shelves.

Exhibit B:  JCPenney. Our friends at Adweek caught wind yesterday of a social media firestorm created by the retailer when it decided to sell, and then later pull from its shelves, a $9.99 long-sleeved T-shirt that reads, "I'm too pretty to do homework so my brother has to do it for me." The promotional copy accompanying the item on the website only made things worse:  "Who has time for homework when there's a new Justin Bieber album out? She'll love this tee that's just as cute and sassy as she is."

The messages? That girls being intelligent just isn't cool; looks are the most important quality one can possess; and never the twain shall meet. Even though the shirt was intended to be fun and playful, teenagers these days, especially young ladies, are bombarded with inappropriate messages from multiple sources...and that just doesn't cut it with parents and educators.

Now, to be fair, JCPenney immediately responded to an online petition from Change.org requesting the immediate removal of the shirt by pulling the offering from its inventory. The company also individually responded to many negative comments on its Facebook page, although the responses were simply cut and pasted from one person to the next. Finally, JCPenney issued the following statement:

J.C. Penney is committed to being America’s destination for great style and great value for the whole family. We agree that the “Too pretty” t-shirt does not deliver an appropriate message, and we have immediately discontinued its sale. Our merchandise is intended to appeal to a broad customer base, not to offend them. We would like to apologize to our customers and are taking action to ensure that we continue to uphold the integrity of our merchandise that they have come to expect.

While we applaud JCPenney, from a crisis communications perspective, for its quick action to diffuse the controversy, let's face it:  the company shouldn't have been in this position to begin with.

P.S. Check out this story late yesterday from PRNewser on the "stupid shirt" debacle caused by JCPenney.

The Efficacy Of Alcohol Promotions In The Digital Age

Even in the era of successful, attention-seizing digital marketing and social media campaigns, consumer packaged goods (CPG) marketers remain fervent proponents of expensive product sampling programs — by mail, in store, and at special events — because it puts offerings directly in the hands of consumers, increases trial, and creates short-term spikes in sell-through.

Now, we can debate the advantages and disadvantages of product sampling all day long, as I did in my recent blog post concerning WHEATIES® Fuel. However, traditional brand management theory holds that consumers are likely (but not guaranteed) to try a product if given to them at no cost, and almost equally as likely to buy it, particularly if its regular size is offered at a substantial discount (via a coupon). In the end, marketing experts agree, this process usually leads to increased sales of the product, although the size of the increase varies widely. It all makes sense, and it's a tried-and-true technique that's been employed by CPG manufacturers for over 50 years. In fact, sampling programs are practically must-haves for all new consumer product introductions... from peanut butter, to disposable cleaning wipes, to men's deodorant.

But here are two interesting questions: 1.) What if the consumer product is a beer, wine, or spirit, instead of a breakfast cereal or laundry detergent? 2.) Do the same rules, dynamics, and end results apply? Perhaps...but let's explore this further.

I got to thinking about this last night as I attended a monthly mixer, held at a popular local high-end steakhouse, for the Camarillo Chamber of Commerce's Young Professionals Group. Upon entering, I was bombarded by in-restaurant signage, lighted premium items, large table tents, and an attractive bevy of girls wearing solid black, super tight-fitting attire, sporting trays of free shots, and swarming the restaurant's patrons, most of who were over the age of 55 (this restaurant is located adjacent to a retirement community). No, this promotion wasn't for Miller Lite, Jägermeister, Jose Cuervo, Johnnie Walker, or some new trendy, super-premium vodka; it was for Hpnotiq (pronounced "hip-not-ic"), the distinctive blue liqueur which blends vodka, cognac, and fruit juices, and is bottled in the Cognac region of France. It was a successful promotion, at least for me: before I knew it, I had two nice pens that light up (blue, of course), two lighted lapel buttons (also blue), four free shots (valued at $7 each), and two T-shirts. Not a bad haul.

I knew Hpnotiq had been around for some time, but I decided to investigate further. Hpnotiq was the brainchild of Raphael Yakoby, a 26-year-old college dropout from Long Island, New York, who created the spirit in 2001 after seeing a blue perfume bottle at Bloomingdale's. Within one year of its introduction, it became popular in New York's trendsetting nightclub scene. Originally distributed by Great Neck, New York-based Wingard, Inc., Yakoby sold the Hpnotiq trademark and the distribution rights to Heaven Hill Distilleries, Inc. in January of 2003 for a reported $50 million. Heaven Hill also distributes dozens of other alcohol brands, most notably the Christian Brothers line of brandy, cognac, and related products. For the record, Yakoby is still in the liquor business. In 2007, he created NUVO, a pink vodka and sparkling wine liqueur packaged in an elegant, tapered square bottle that looks more appropriate for a high-end perfume than booze.

Obviously, alcohol distributors spend millions of dollars annually on guerrilla marketing and sales promotion programs just like Hpnotiq's to drive sales and brand awareness of specific products. But do they actually generate the desired results? In some cases, absolutely, but much of it has to do with consumer behavior, alcohol consumption patterns, and venue and audience dynamics. Consider the following:

• Cordials and liqueurs do not typically exhibit the same consumption characteristics as beer, wine, and select staple spirits, such as vodka, gin, and rum. Cordials and liqueurs are viewed as more appropriate for special occasions, or for sipping a single glass after dinner -- not consumed in multiple servings or mass quantities. In addition, these spirits are just not as popular as they once were years ago, although one can argue that Hpnotiq's initial success defied this convention.
• Not all bars are created equally, and as with any marketing activity, venues must be carefully selected to match the audience of the alcohol brand. In the case of last night's promotion, the venue and audience were all wrong for Hpnotiq, which claims to "make every girls' night out a little more fabulous," and is obviously targeted at women 21-35. Need evidence? Take a look at the brand's official Website and Facebook page, as well as the image above. Outside of my gathering, the steakhouse patrons skew toward senior citizen age (55+) because of its proximity to the retirement community, and therefore, lie well outside of Hpnotiq's core demographic. Definitely not a good fit.
• There must be an incentive to purchase the product in the future, such as a coupon, or a call to action to register consumers online so they may be targeted in the future. Hpnotiq had none of this.
• Most bar promotions for alcohol brands are all about fun, free/cheap booze, free branded stuff, and interacting with hot babes -- not really about "selling" the product. They're great for sampling and trial. Product information is limited. Most of the women I've talked to who've been hired for these gigs know very little about the products themselves; they simply regurgitate whatever they've been told by the promotions company retained by the distributor, and that's very little. Next time you see a Jägerette, ask her about the product; I bet good money she doesn't know much about it other than what it tastes like.
• Historically, alcohol promotions in bars and nightclubs have proven to be EXCELLENT tactics for increasing brand awareness, but additional marketing is required to convert that awareness into sales. Just the way it is.

When it comes to alcohol sales promotions, it's apparent that the same rules and dynamics that apply to CPG product sampling are not in play here, and as a result, they require additional strategies and tactics to generate sales increases. There's no question that Hpnotiq is a unique, highly-differentiated offering with excellent branding and strong marketing assets. But last night's program was at the wrong venue and with the wrong audience: a recipe for disaster.

And when that occurs, no amount of branding or money can save you. As Hpnotiq says in its tagline, it must "Live Louder," and engage in more appropriate target marketing, if it wants to succeed in the long term.

The Pros And Cons Of Product Sampling

This past Saturday, I walked to the end of the driveway, like I do every morning, to pick up the copies of my two daily newspapers, the Ventura County Star and the Wall Street Journal. On this morning, however, I got something a little extra: the Ventura County Star was enclosed in a special branded poly bag featuring a sample box of General Mills' WHEATIES® Fuel and a large, four-color coupon for the cereal.

It really made me sit up and take notice, not for the obvious reason that a breakfast cereal came with my morning newspapers, but because: 1.) Product samples of this nature are included in my local daily newspaper on a very limited basis...only 2-3 times a year, in fact (actually, this was the first instance of 2010 in the Star); and 2.) This tactic is normally reserved for new product introductions, of which WHEATIES Fuel is not. In fact, according to the following article in the July 22, 2009, edition of the New York Times, WHEATIES Fuel has now been on the market for well over a year. (Editor's Note: In the interest of full disclosure, and in only a very minor coincidence, I do eat WHEATIES Fuel, but I have only been doing so for several months. I regularly eat other brands of healthy breakfast cereal, and I have no official ties to the product or the manufacturer.) In any case, I began to think about the marketing implications associated with this program, and more specifically, about the pros and cons of product sampling:

1. Normally for New, Not Existing, Product Introductions: As already stated, product sampling normally accompanies the introduction of a new product to increase brand awareness and consumer trial. So why is General Mills sending out sample boxes of WHEATIES Fuel now? This tells me that sales must be extremely weak. It also indicates that, given the tremendous marketing investment to date in the brand extension, the company is desperately attempting to boost sales to justify these large expenditures. The New York Times references a multi-million dollar marketing campaign behind the product, not to mention expensive endorsement deals with five prominent athletes, including St. Louis Cardinals first baseman and three-time National League MVP Albert Pujols and Indianapolis Colts quarterback and four-time NFL MVP Peyton Manning.
2. Expensive: Product sampling like this is extremely expensive. However, it does put the product directly in the hands of consumers, but there is no definitive way to ensure consumers actually USE or EAT it once it arrives. A better tactic is to distribute prepared product samples in stores, as is often seen at Costco and Sam's Club, where representatives can physically see shoppers' reactions to a product when it is consumed.
3. Difficult to Track Actual Trial: As alluded to above, another con of product sampling is that it is difficult to track actual consumer consumption. Honestly, most consumers will simply toss the product in the trash can. The best General Mills can hope for is that consumers will redeem the coupon that came with the sample, and this will temporarily boost sales. This is far easier for the company to monitor since the coupon carries a unique bar code associated with the promotion, and that code is scanned when redeemed.
4. Immediate Impact Unknown: Like with many other consumer marketing activities, it will be some time before General Mills sees definitive return on its product sampling investment. To generate immediate impact, consumer brands typically prefer to use coupons, contests, and other in-store vehicles to drive sell-through. Although a coupon was present in this case, it is the sample box of cereal that is most significant, meaning that General Mills wants people to physically try the product before buying.

In the final analysis, WHEATIES Fuel will most likely be successful, particularly since the product is targeted at men, and because of its professional athlete endorsements. And honestly, it's a solid product with an appealing, pleasant taste and excellent nutritional benefits. But General Mills' consumer marketing approach is flawed, as evidenced by this latest sample drop in newspapers. I think the sampling would be much more effective if distributed in stores, at NFL stadiums, and at experiential football fairs and fan fests.