Monday, August 27, 2007

Wal-Mart's New Gas Price Campaign

I was watching some network television last night and saw a Wal-Mart commercial in which actors talk about the price of gasoline but then say how they won't let it dictate their lives - and, presumably, going to Wal-Mart is one of those life choices.

The commercial seems quite peculiar to me, and I wonder if this isn't a sign that something is seriously wrong with Wal-Mart's marketing and business strategy. First, gas prices have come down, oh, a good 30 to 40 cents a gallon here from the spike earlier this year. I suspect they're down around the country as well - and I also think that consumers have made their peace with prices. Certianly they're not giving up shopping for what they need. (In fact, last night I heard a number on NPR that pegged it at 40 cents overall since spring.)

So you'd think that the commercials are runnning at least a month late, and are really negatively-based. They argue not to give up life style choices - no matter what the price, which, I guess, is easy enough to do if your annual business equals many national GNPs. But there is no reason to go to Wal-Mart. If gas was such a problem, why not roll out Wal-Mart gas stations with subsidized prices to get people to the stores? And other stores, like Target, seem to be weathering the economic issues, which hit most equally.

But Wal-Mart has been blaming gas prices for recent poor performance. Maybe the problem is not gas prices, but strategic decisions. Perhaps they've gained too much bad will through their own actions in dealing with labor issues. Perhaps people are angry about outsourcing and see Wal-Mart as selling out to China. Maybe the idea of having superstores apart from malls, where people can more efficiently shop, is the real problem. (I wonder what the company's same store sales are in mall locations versus standalone.)

Whatever the issue is, I don't believe it's largely driven by petroleum. Yet the commercial, along with Wal-Mart's remarks to Wall Street, show this as an officially adopted excuse. Maybe it's time for upper management to look and see whether there might not be more serious issues - for example, the well-publicized internal company report on mistakes in moving outside the existing brand. There is something more going on inside the company. Trying to find the logical explanation for investors won't solve anything and will only get management more determined to keep the blinders on.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Wal-Mart Shows Problem of Moving Outside of Brand

The New York Times has a fabulous piece on Wal-Mart's attempts to expand its brand outside the strictly discount realm and even posts a report done for the company by its former advertising agency last October.

It's interesting to get an inside lok at the troubles Wal-Mart is having in expanding its market. I find myself almost feeling sorry for management there because of the relentless drive of financial markets to keep seeing growth. The company has 138 million shoppers a week, for gosh sakes. Just how are they supposed to grow a number like that?

Yet that is the expectation, and so Wal-Mart is trying for more affluent shoppers. But that goes smack up against its brand identity as a discounter, which is a bad idea. No company can be all things to all people, no matter how large it is. As the story and report say:
But now, as Wal-Mart experiments with contemporary clothing, flat-screen televisions and nine-layer lasagna, that format has become a hindrance. To a shopper who wants to purchase a single dress for an evening out or a DVD player to watch a movie, "Wal-Mart’s one-stop shopping format becomes a time-consuming irrelevant obstacle," the report says.

That environment is conducive to "zero-time" shopping, in which a customer spends just a few seconds thinking about a product, like a new bottle of dishwashing soap. "But people don’t buy electronics, home décor and apparel in zero time," the report says.
The inevitable result is a loss of focus that will eventually cause financial problems. You'd think there could be other options for the company. For example, let it ship orders of commodities to more affluent customers - products they're associated with but at higher margins for the convenience factor. Maybe there are services they could provide as shoppers spend time in the store - dry cleaning, oil changes, photocopying - that don't require the sense of expertise and trust. Some of these it could provide through partnerships with companies that are already in the business. But going upscale? Time to send management out into the stores to work for a week and see what their business is really all about.

Labels: , , ,

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Slippery Slope of User-Generated Content

There's an amusing piece in the New York Times about companies looking to customers to create ads and the pain of the experience.

This is a concept that I think is flawed because the companies generally aren't approaching it the right way. You aren't going to get a professional spot from the vast majority of consumers. The writing, production qualities, and acting are more likely than not going to be bad. There's a reason people make their livings doing this sort of thing. If everyone could do it, you'd see much better marketing on television.

You also aren't going to get a whole bunch of spots that sees your product the way you'd like to see it:
One of the most viewed Heinz videos — seen, at last count, more than 12,800 times — ends with a close-up of a mouth with crooked, yellowed teeth. When Ms. Kaplan Thaler [an advertising executive not involved in the Heinz consumer commercial competition] saw it, she wondered, “Were his teeth the result of, maybe, too much Heinz?”
Yup, often people will mock your brand, your product, what part your product plays in life, and your reasons for looking to consumers for your advertising content.

But companies like Heinz could learn something by removing the ketchup-tinted glasses. Forget for a second that you would hope to get a useful commercial out of this. Why not use it as a window into what consumers are thinking. How do they react to your product? What associations do they make subconsciously that come out through the work? You've essentially asked for an admittedly self-selecting set of customers to hold forth on what you do. For a company, this is the value that the Internet really provides - not using the web to promote your own view, but seeing how you are perceived and how people perceive themselves. Look for archetypes, themes, and associations that might help you talk the customer's language. That makes a whole lot more sense than hoping to find the advertising needle in the haystack of would-be funniest home videos.

Labels: , , , ,