Have you met Skip?  You know, Skip Intro, the guy who develops all those overdone flash intro’s for ad agency web sites?

Awhile back I answered the following very astute question on LinkedIn from Andrew Miller, who, according to his LinkedIn profile is now Founder and Managing Director at Capitalist, Inc.

“Why do most creative agencies’ web sites look eerily like? Should a creative shop treat itself like a client?”

My Answer:

“This is a great question. The answers are that (a) agencies are following each other instead of the market; and (b) agencies need to do a better job of looking at their businesses through the clients’ (and prospective clients’) eyes instead of indulging their creative/artistic fantasies. Ever notice how so many agencies’ sites start with a long/pointless flash intro? That is a good example of not recognizing that site visitors want to locate info not be shown a short film.”

Why am I posting this now?  Because, while the problem has gotten a bit better, I notice that all to often it still exists.  So next time you see a useless flash intro that is preventing you from getting to the content you want, contact the site’s owner, publisher, webmaster (whatever happened to that title anyway?) and make your feelings known!

From Potomac Techwire’s “Future of Software” event on Friday, September 5, 2008

http://www.bisnow.com/washington_dc_tech_news_story.php?p=1492

Photo credit: Tech Bisnow

Yes, it’s getting noticed and maybe people are clicking on it, but Microsoft’s expensive new powered-by-Seinfeld campaign is looking like the dud that many–including me–predicted it would be, both in strategy and execution.

http://blogs.wsj.com/biztech/2008/09/05/microsofts-seinfeld-campaign-random-h umor-no-vista/trackback/

We suppose the ad makes Microsoft seem less stodgy and uptight, which is the image Apple’s Mac vs. PC ads paint of the company. But we can’t see this going a long way towards reversing the popular impression that Vista is buggy and unnecessary. The ads would probably have to, you know, mention Vista to do that.

Presumed Microsoft Business Goals: Grow revenue, protect margins by increasing acceptance/take rate of Vista.

Presumed Marketing/Comm Goals: Fend off criticism and negative perception of Vista.  Counter the effects of PC vs. Mac campaign which have eroded/pigeonholed image of PC/Windows while boosting that of Mac.

Assessment: How does this execution accomplish the above?  It doesn’t.  Autopsy: First, who should use celebrities? Brands that want more name recognition or those that want to draw attention to a new product.  One could infer that Microsoft gave Seinfeld a bunch of money without fleshing out the actual marketing goals and getting him and everyone else on the same page.  In fact one of the key deal points was probably “free reign” and “creative control.”  After all, Jerry doesn’t need the money. So everyone probably assumed the ads would be clever and memorable.

In addition the spot doesn’t even stand on its own as an interesting piece of entertainment.  It is, in a word, inane.  It’s tone is dated.  So there won’t be much of a viral (pass along) halo except for forwarded links accompanied by nasty criticisms of the ad.

Which brings us to the next point below.  The WSJ quotes two branding executives (”those who can’t sell, market; those who can’t market, brand.”) asserting that the ad has done its job by generating chatter.

This point is supported by the following quote: “Most companies would have to spend a billion dollars on advertising to get this kind of attention.”  First, I think he means most unknown companies would even want this level of attention.  Second, Microsoft has already spent billions of dollars over the last 30 years to get “attention.”

Dear branding experts: “Attention” is not the goal.  “Attention” is not, in and of itself, a positive thing.  Microsoft is globally known and doesn’t need more “attention.”  Microsoft needs (a) great products that (b) create a better customer experience, which in turn (c) results in a better perception.  This campaign does nothing to advance those priorities.

Microsoft is breaking the basic premise of Inside-Out Branding by trying to solve a product problem with an advertising solution.  Unfortunately they can’t just paper over the negative perceptions with a big media spend featuring a waning celebrity.

Critics Say Gates-Seinfeld Duo No Laughing Matter

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122082676065908265.html?mod=2_1567_leftbox

Despite the negative online chatter about the ad, Microsoft has succeeded in getting people talking about the commercial, ad experts say.

“The initial reaction might be on the fence or leaning negative but the ad did its job,” says Dean Crutchfield, a brand consultant. “Most companies would have to spend a billion dollars on advertising to get this kind of attention.”

I guess some companies have so much at stake that they are forced to pull out every stop and encourage suspension of disbelief when they develop ad campaigns.  Or they are so large they forget to run an ad through the approval process.

Microsoft’s recent Vista for Small Business campaign tries to counter the notions that (a) Vista isn’t worth upgrading to; (b) it causes problems with other software; and (c) sometimes it hurts your business.

Their print campaign tries to accomplish the above goals by comparing the risk of installing Vista to some really, really risky behavior that makes the Vista risk pale in comparison.

In addition to the ad below there’s one about a woman who borrowed money from her family to start her business.  Now that’s risk.

But Vista?  Risk, schmisk.

The Viva Viagra campaign has already taken beating from critics and the general public. There’s something counter-intuitive about the premise: A bunch of guys together in a recording studio with nary a woman in sight–or to be more inclusive, there doesn’t seem to be an inkling of romance in the air.  Not to mention the two board engineers leering through the studio glass.

But the one thing no one seems to mention is the Chyron at the upper right of the screen during the ad’s first few seconds: “Nashville 1:22am.”

So let me get this straight: Not only is this bunch of guys singing together (by the way, how did they all just join in seamlessly without ever having heard the song before) about E.D., and doing so mano a mano a mano a mano…but they’re doing this at an hour when they should be home in bed!  In bed where the product being marketed is supposed to be used.

To me, the whole thing screams “loser”–not how a marketer usually wants to portray its customers.

Ads go by in a blur, particularly with viewers’ attention spans shrinking so much that the average garden variety gnat can now pay attention for twice as long as a human.  But buried in so many ads, such as this television spot for a Sealy mattress, are claims, phrases or implications that just don’t make sense.  In fact they seem to work against the pitch.

In this commercial, the v/o says this mattress was designed with the help of orthopedic surgeons.  Presumably this is supposed to make the viewer feel better since orthopedic surgeons should know what is good/not for your back.   

But unless I am missing something orthopedic surgeons make their money by performing orthopedic surgery.  And orthopedic surgery is what you need when your back hurts.  And a bad mattress is one of those things that can give you a sore back or at least exacerbate a bad one.

So why is it such a great claim that orthopedic surgeons helped design this mattress?  As far as I can tell the surgeons can make a lot more money by helping design a bad mattress.