It was one of my favorite things to do in high school. My friends and I would get dinner at Portillo’s, then walk next door to Blockbuster and get a movie. While that particular Blockbuster store is still in business, its days are likely numbered.
Blockbuster has lost over $1 billion since 2007, closed 718 stores worldwide (572 in US), and is scrambling to make its last stand. The centerpiece for its last stand is “Blockbuster Express,” an effort based on its competitor’s innovations. Blockbuster’s survival now rests on the shoulders of knockoff kiosks and online rental services. Their complacency over the last decade has come back to haunt them in a big way, and Blockbuster’s only shot is brand loyalists that will choose their kiosk over RedBox.
Nobody would have thought Blockbuster would have found itself in this position, similar to how nobody thought newspapers would get hit the way they did, but there is a dangerous precedent being set. RedBox and Netflix have shown that seemingly impenetrable markets certainly can be, and market leaders must stay on their toes.
I believe e-books provide a similar uncertainty for retail book stores like Borders and Barnes and Noble. If consumers can simply download books onto their Kindle/iPad/nook or the other options that are surely coming, why would they go to the store? One quick response could be create a more service-oriented environment at retail outlets, but how long can that carry an entire chain?
Do you think e-readers will threaten Barnes and Noble, Borders, and other book stores? What do you think bookstores could do if they begin to struggle?
April Fool’s! However, I am anxiously awaiting its release in two days. While I am not a quite sold, I cannot wait to see if the iPad will have the effect Steve Jobs is anticipating. The Question: what will the reaction be when consumers actually get their hands on Apple’s newest toy?
According to a study done by Vocus, the consensus view towards the iPad has been “neutral.” 76.8% of traditional media reviews, and 57.9% of blog posts about the iPad have been measured as neutral, and that likely reflects hesitancy to pass judgment on the product until it is released. This “wait and see” approach is probably justified, given the mixture of positive/negative speculations, but the first few weeks will be telling.
The Apple-addicts and other early adopters that have pre-ordered the gadget will likely drive the app purchasing during this time, but will their positive reviews and word-of-mouth be enough to carry the iPad? With prices starting at $499 and stretching up to $829 plus wireless costs, purchasing an iPad is much different than buying an iPod. The iPad will have to earn its keep at those costs.
My previous post about the iPad questioned how practical it will be, but I cannot question the power it could have. Could this be the beginning of the end for laptops (and iTouches for that matter..)? According to Walter S. Mossberg of the Wall Street Journal, it could be close, but it has its work cut out for it. What do you think is in store for the iPad’s future?
Coming Soon…will Border’s and Barnes and Noble be joining Blockbuster?
It’s been almost two months since Super Bowl XLIV in Miami, and some advertisers are still stuck in “Super Bowl Commercial” mode. Networks typically separate ads that are similar to one another, ex. Coke and Pepsi ads wouldn’t air during the same commercial break, but this was not the case for CareerBuilder.com and Dockers during the Super Bowl. Their ads, with a pants-less approach to generating buzz, were aired back to back.
CareerBuilder.com and Dockers both feel their efforts during the “focal point of commercial advertising” were diluted as a result of CBS’ placement of their ads, and are seeking compensation. It is rumored CBS reached an agreement with Dockers for free ad space during the NCAA tournament, but CareerBuilder has yet to reach a settlement. CBS executives feel CareerBuilder’s message remained clear since its ad aired first, and additional compensation is not warranted.
First, I cannot believe two large brands came up with the same idea for their Super Bowl ad. Second, what was CBS thinking putting them back to back? And finally, I do not believe CBS’ justification for not compensating CareerBuilder is valid.
Dockers’ chant-filled, “men wear Dockers Khakis” ad was weak at best, and was probably a better idea in theory than in practice. I like the “real men, men that are in charge” targeting, shown by the Dodge Ram-like end to the ad, and think it would have been a good idea if that segment was still in 5th grade. CareerBuilder’s ad could at least generate some common ground with people who don’t like their job. And the “Casual Friday” idea also made for a hysterical episode of The Office. Given the fact that the Super Bowl is not only the championship game for the NFL, but the “Super Bowl” for TV advertising as well, I expected more in terms of creativity.
The only explanation for the two ads being placed back to back would be the product category. If CBS looked at the ads and saw Dockers, a clothing brand, and CareerBuilder, a job search website, then I might understand a little bit. However, that’s a pretty large oversight given the fact that a :30 spot during the Super Bowl costs about $2.6mm. I understand there is a large amount of money at stake in terms of making amends, but CBS must do so with both companies. I’m not sure how CBS thinks it can differentiate between the damage made to Dockers vs. CareerBuilder. I believe both of the ads lost their effectiveness equally by being aired back to back, and CareerBuilder is due the same compensation as Dockers.
Who watched the World Cup on their phone? Who tweeted about the Cup? How many people watched in the United States? How many people watched it on TV, read articles online, tweeted about it from their phone, and read about it in magazines?
ESPN will be able to tell you. They’ll be able to answer all of those questions and more about anything related to media at the upcoming 2010 World Cup in South Africa. According to ESPN’s Media Zone, ESPN’s Research+Analytics group is launching ESPN XP, a project that will study consumer behavior and consumption of major sporting events (ex. World Cup, Super Bowl).
ESPN XP’s goal is to measure the effect of advertising and the usage of media related to the World Cup on all media platforms. Knowledge Networks, Media Behavior Institute, Keller Fay Group, Nielsen Co., and the Wharton Interactive Media Initiative from the University of Pennsylvania are all on board to assist ESPN as it tries to measure World Cup consumption across TV, radio, internet, mobile, and print.
This is the first effort of its kind, and the World Cup is its test run. Based of the World Cup results, ESPN XP will measure the NFL and other sports beginning in 2011. The model will be ever-changing for the next two years as ESPN tries to figure out the best methodology to measure media in this manner, with the goal being a plan to measure cross-platform media use by 2012.
If ESPN is able to create this model, I can only imagine how successful everyone involved in ESPN XP will become. How consumers take in content is one of the biggest mysteries currently facing the sports industry, and ESPN will likely be the first to solve it. The information XP is seeking will provide much more accurate information regarding targeting/segmentation and ROI for World Cup sponsors, and create new revenue streams for media outlets and sports franchises. The model will likely be applicable across all sponsorships of all kinds, and become widely used if its successfully created.
Time to follow up with Toyota. The favorite, least favorite, most controversial car company in the United States. It’s been almost three weeks since the previous Toyota post, and there have been several developments in their post-recall efforts.
The first and most obvious effort is Toyota’s new ad campaign. They have come out with several ads, including “Commitment” and “Restore” to try and offset the 12.4% sales decline in February. While their Twitter-based social media strategy is working behind the scenes, these ads are the approach Toyota has taken to be the face of their rebuilding efforts.
Toyota is also running ads focused on satisfied customers. For example, the Murphy family was quite satisfied with their Toyotas (purchased February 20th) and feel “exceptionally safe.” These ads do a good job focusing on their loyal customers, and fit with Toyota’s “Moving Forward” slogan, but they do little to address a critical issue.
Companies make mistakes, recalls have happened countless times, but there is almost always a sincere apology. Toyota’s new campaigns fail to simply say “Sorry.” They talk about “fixing recalls” and stopping production to focus on customers, but they don’t actually say sorry. These mellow and somber ads could easily come off as Toyota trying to smooth talk and sell cars, and ignoring their mistake.
Whether or not the ads will be successful in mending the wrongs has yet to be seen, but Toyota is on a slippery slope. If the ads are perceived as fake or misleading, further damage to the brand and company will likely follow. For example, the “Commitment” ad claims Toyota is customer focused, yet the company internally celebrated saving $100 million at the expense of its consumers.
I hope US consumers focus on the quality of the company, not the quality of the cars, when following the Toyota proceedings. I believe the internal document celebrating their limited recall (only 55,000 of the faulty vehicles were originally recalled in 2007 as opposed to the 8.5 million recalled in January) should be highlighted and used as a true example of Toyota’s priorities. Toyota intentionally negotiated a smaller recall, to make money, and knowingly left faulty cars in circulation. Doesn’t exactly fit into their current campaign.
Toyota’s ads are an attempt to “quick fix” the brand and return to business as usual. While they ads are well done and “touching” I hope consumers are reluctant to do so. Have you been following the Toyota story? Do you feel they owe an explanation for the internal document?
