As we know, Apple has established itself as the preeminent purveyors of great technology design. They have that strong history of not only making great hardware and operating systems, they make them actually look great. It’s no coincidence that their competitors have borrowed from some of those designs. While some have gotten close on product design, none have really matched the beauty of their actual packaging. Half the fun of opening a new apple product is the unraveling of the packaging as if it were a beautifully intricate flower. The design always served the product, until now. With the opening of the Apple Store in Santa Monica, CA, they might have tipped their hat and gone too far in packaging their product to be beautiful at first sight – but it fails to place the product in the best light.
When the store opened in December, you could already get a glimpse of the inherent issues. In a video capture of the opening by YouTube personality, iJustine, they mention the heat and the noise near the end of the video.
Apple places a strong emphasis on marketing and innovation in everything they do, but this direction in store design did too much innovation while adversely affecting the product. When you enter the store, it is especially beautiful at night, but still loud due to the flat walls and glass ceilings – it is a veritable noise chamber. When you visit during the day, it has that same loudness but the glare and heat are almost unbearable.
Now, months in, the issues are very clear. If you are trying to check out the products, you can’t see a lot because of that glare, and if you are waiting for the Genius Bar or getting individual instruction, the loudness and heat make you not want to stick around. One woman even brought a box for her one-on-one to place around her product as she was well aware of the issues.
While this is not the first Apple store with a glass ceiling – there has been one in the Upper West Side of Manhattan for a number of years – it seems they did not really take everything into consideration and aimed for looks more than substance. Perhaps the bigger Santa Monica store concerns were never an issue in Manhattan due to more limited direct sunlight and extended cooler weather. It’s a shame that they didn’t take into consideration that there is more heat and sunlight in the beach city of Santa Monica.
I hate seeing Apple miss and I hope this is just a hiccup and not more indicative of what’s to come. If they continue to make decision based more on looks than substance, we will all lose out.
Posted in Ruminations
Tagged Marketing, Apple, Research, Innovation, Design, Planning, Packaging, Apple Stores, Product Design, Santa Monica, iJustine, Consumer
UK grocery company, Tesco, has decided to pull out of their American Invasion and take a $1.8 Billion write-off (with the favorable UK exchange rate – only 1.2 Billion Pounds – it still doesn’t soften the blow of the astounding loss.) Tiffany Hsu’s LA Times article points to Tesco’s misunderstanding of what the public wants and the dire consequences of trying to compete with the Wal-Marts, Costcos, Trader Joes and the like. If Tesco believed those were their competition, their analysis was very off – regardless of recession or not. Tesco saw themselves as something they were not – and in America, it’s foolish to think that customers will save bad branding by finding the hidden gems behind whatever facade is presented. Any way you slice it, its unfortunate that Tesco’s invasion of the American market was dead on arrival.
It had a lot more to do with branding, design and store locations than what Americans do or do not want. Admittedly, my exposure is limited to their locations in the Los Angeles market, but it quickly became very clear how Fresh & Easy was positioned counter-intuitively and ineffectively.
The first store I visited was a huge space on heavily trafficked tourist destination Hollywood Boulevard. It was large, dark and depressing. Another location was also in midtown on a heavily trafficked car artery with no abundance of parking spaces. And the last one I was in a week ago was probably the best model of what they should have been doing all along – a small, bright and colorful store in a heavy pedestrian area near USC.
Beyond their questionable locations and early dreary decor, they should have positioned themselves as the perfect last minute spot to pick up quality prepared meals and sundry items on the way to work or on the way home for dinner. They couldn’t/shouldn’t have felt they could compete with the established big markets.
The article compares them to a Wal-Mart, but Tesco should have positioned Fresh & Healthy as more akin to a refined and healthier 7-11 – like their own Tesco Metros back in the UK. That healthy option would have been the right aspirational touch – especially in Southern California.
Fresh & Easy might have worked if they had stronger positioning. It seems they were even unclear on who they were meant to be. Because of that, their marketing never worked. It’s a shame, because if you look at their location near USC, they could have focused on smaller spaces in higher foot-traffic (or more easily accessible) areas to create something akin to the Marks & Spencer Simply Food product in the UK. Another similarity to M&S in the USC location was the automated tellers that allowed staff to be focused around the store to help out in ways you certainly don’t see in a 7-11.
The promise of getting in and out of a market in five minutes with inexpensive essentials and healthy prepared meals would have been something that might have made it a success.
Short of that, its another example of a move that a company should have never ventured in the first place. Or, its an example of a good thing that never had the required clarity and forethought to drive success. Fresh & Easy is Dead. Long Live Fresh & Easy.
Posted in Ruminations
Tagged Marketing, Communication, Identity, Strategy, Consumers, Branding, LA Times, Research, Tiffany Hsu, Wal-Mart, Competition, Grocery Stores, UK, Tesco, Fresh & Easy, USC, Marks & Spencer's Simply Food, Markets, Location, Trader Joe's, Costco, M&S
USA Today filed a report on hotels and their “new” quest to engage teens and pre-teens with programming and other benefits to build early hotel loyalty. The quest is all fine and good, but USAT assumes that the marketing is specific to the teens, when the real recipient is the parent. When you look at the samples of activities, they didn’t really make sense as marketing tools to kids – but they might make sense to draw their parents to their properties. The biggest issue is that it seems the hotel operators might not have their finger on the pulse of what their teen and pre-teen prospective consumers would even be drawn to. It’s good to look for ways to build brand loyalty – especially with young consumers – but you can’t build that loyalty with confusion about who you need to connect with.
The article recounts a few of the offerings that have recently been launched by some hotel chains. What the article doesn’t do is cover how these features are marketed. If there is no specific marketing strategy for these offerings, then too much is left to chance – making the offerings less effective. But, let’s just say that the offerings were marketed through specific media or even as part of their CRM or email communications. You still have to question who (and when) the target is for some of these offerings:
- At select Omni Hotel locations, a “Teen Connection” program has been launched where the teen-aged guests can communicate with a Teen Concierge through Twitter, Facebook, e-mail, or text. Besides the obvious question of “why don’t you just go downstairs and speak face-to-face with someone?”, I question how much business (or loyalty) will be generated for something so specific. If, as a teen, I had connectivity – which should be paramount – I would be communicating with friends not rushing to communicate with a stranger about things I would need permission from parents in order to actually do it. Since the marketing would be toward parents, would parents want their kids to be asking for reccos through social? Maybe they would feel more comfortable that it is from a more substantial (i.e. hotel) source, but again, why not go down to the lobby to ask someone? Which leads to the bigger concern about the Teen Concierge idea. As a parent, do I want an 18 year-old to be a concierge telling my son or daughter to go see a rock show at the Beacon or skateboard through Central Park when I am visiting New York City? David Strebel, the teen concierge at Omni Berkshire in Manhattan gave those examples of what he would offer. While those suggestions are borderline fine options for teens who know the city well, as a parent, I’m not so happy about the argument that is probably going to happen when I tell my kid they can’t do what the cool guy at Teen Concierge got them to set their mind on.
- Hyatt has rolled out their “For Kids by Kids” menu and it seems like it makes the parents happy due to its healthier options. But, the concept of “by” is an interesting one as it seems the menu was only “approved by a group of young taste-testers.” To be upset about the lack of offerings like “curried shrimp lettuce wraps” on a kids menu could just as easily be appeased by hotels in offering child-sized portions (and costs) of the regular menu items. But, again, there is confusion as teens are not the sweet spot for children’s menus. Most children’s menus are targeted at 12 (at the high-end) and under with many targeting even younger. Maybe another solution is to rethink some menu options entirely to more strongly relate to their target audience. Maybe the rethinking leads to a couple of items on the menu that are healthy, but are more of a “grazing” type of offering – where young adults can lay around and idly eat healthy foods like crudite, crackers and tuna or chicken salad, etc.
- Some real head scratchers are Sofitel’s French Language TV station, Tivi5MONDE, for children under 13 and the Ritz-Carlton Orlando Grande Lakes teen massage and facials. What’s the audience size for kids under 13 who want to watch something in French and are teens really that interested in spa treatments as a progenitor or loyalty? The Ritz offering might make perfect sense due to its overall demographic, but the loyalty they have going has very little to do with how kids are treated. In fact, there are many who stay at such hotels that would prefer there were not pre-teens or teens running around…
We’re not even dealing with Tyson’s Corner Marriott’s belief that American Girl packages with free viewings of American Girl’s McKenna Shoots for the Stars are perfect for pre-teens and teens. American Girls’ target is considerably younger than that demo.
It could all come down to how the writer, Nancy Trejos, framed the story as attempts to target and draw in those demos. It seems that the examples either over think the target or don’t really address them. One commenter on the article succinctly stated that “the best way to keep teen guests content – offer free wi-fi.”
Obviously, the best way to provide loyalty is to offer great experiences without being too gimmicky. As the adults are usually (hopefully) the ones making the decisions, the effect the offspring have is based on their content and how much they enjoyed things. So, there are probably inexpensive ways to convey to parents that there are great offerings for the kids to allow for sampling and, based on good experiences, many happy returns.
The low-hanging fruit is for hotels that are heavily used for business travelers. By way of CRM programs and booking confirmation emails, they can easily include a little blurb inviting those business travellers to bring their families along. They can work on programs that make travel for children, pre-teens and teens more comfortable. And, there are things that can provide a sense of security and comfort for the parents. Maybe its just having a late-afternoon kids and teens “only” reception in a part of the hotel restaurant where healthy choice foods and fun activities are provided at no extra charge. Maybe its in the form of borrowable MP3 players that have music that conveys the spirit of the city they are visiting. Obviously, there are so many more options – all with different degrees of difficulty.
The thing is, a lot of what was listed seemed like it was from some ideal story of teens who visit the Waldorf-Astoria and take it over. While it might seem exciting to talk about QR codes and healthy choice education in order to get press coverage, the results are what matter and the ones shown just don’t seem to do the trick.
If you want to target a certain demo, you’ve got to know who they are, what they want and then deliver on that. But that’s not all… You’ve also got to be clear in how you’re going to communicate it. You’ve got to make sure you’re communicating clearly to the people who really matter. In this case, is the kids that the initial communication needs to happen with? No. It’s the decision makers – who happen to be the parents. And ultimately, it doesn’t matter how much the parent’s love an idea of something, f the child doesn’t like it, there will be problems. The challenge is in connecting the dots – or at least leaving the right breadcrumbs to draw target demos to your product and generate loyalty.
Posted in Core
Tagged Marketing, Communication, Strategy, Loyalty, Targeting, Research, CRM, USA Today, Programming, Demographics, Hotels, Messaging, Hyatt, Omni, Teen, Pre-Teen, David Strebel, Sofitel, Tivi5MONDE, American Girl, Marriott, Nancy Trejos
Launching product campaigns and watching trends, it is easy to see marketers shift quickly from one new technology or platform to the other without really gleaning all that they can from what they have already done. Perhaps this is a … Continue reading
In the latest study, it has been found that the benchmark has been surpassed and there now seem to be a higher frequency in studies than there are new Apps added to App stores and new technologies combined. 100% of our broad sampling of one person confirms this belief. The amount of studies that are being released by companies are barely able to cover the fact that they are being used as marketing tools for the companies who are publishing them. They are clearly not scientific, but many of them get picked up and reported on or posted and those numbers become the fodder for some other person to make a point with supposed figures behind it. Clearly, not all studies fall under this marketing format, but some are just plain silly. The funny thing is that it is not clear whether it is more important to have numbers support something in the market or something that does not even exist.
In the latest case of absurdity, the mobile ad network, InMobi, released a study on Friday that measured people’s interest in the new iPad3. Remember that, as of this writing, Apple has not officially announced anything about the product. They won’t even admit that it is coming to market. Everything about it has been conjecture and rumor. The only technical advances anyone can be “sure” of is a higher processor speed and a sharper screen, but its all conjecture. Both of these are wonky specs because our relationship to them is abstract. We don’t know exactly how they will make things better, we just believe they will. It’s not like when the tablets added a camera – where we knew precisely what that meant. We can’t really tell what a faster processor will mean – and most people may never appreciate what the faster processing means even when they have it.
So, back to the InMobi study, where they sampled 689 US mobile users across both Android and iOS. From this sampling, they derived the model that nearly 1/3 of all mobile users intend to buy the iPad3. But, if the price of the previous iPad models are cheaper, 65% would buy those. And, 57% of the respondents would buy an older version if the iPad costs more than $599.
There were a lot of other intent to purchase and choice numbers that were all over the place with less and less meaning. The one that made me really laugh is the fact that, when asked what feature they most looked forward to in the newest model, faster processor, stronger battery, higher-quality screen and 4G connectivity. The laugh came from the fact that processor and screen advances are the largest rumors about the new iPad, and the fact that there could be so many features that we don’t yet know about. One of Apple’s strengths is in their keen ability to present features most people have not even known they wanted. In fact, the very idea of an iPad was considered to be a toy – but it is now the device that most people want as more than a toy (even shown in this study where only 51% of respondents saw it as more for entertainment than education and business.
With al of the studies that come out and the relative loss of meaning that each iteration may bring, is it time for us to cut down on them? Possibly. But, we’re probably best served for understanding them and treating them for what they are – snapshots into sentiment. In much the same way as polling is taken with a grain of salt in politics or purchasing, these surveys need to be taken with the same grain of salt.
With that being said, hopefully the pendulum will swing back to samples being a significant size and the findings being more scientific. Until then, the noise from those surveys will become more of a dull droning noise that cause nobody to look inside and see what’s real and what just marketing.
Posted in Ruminations
Tagged Apple, Technology, iPad, Tablets, Research, Studies, Intent, Communications, Sentiment, Surveys, InMobi, iPad 3, Figures, Trending