advertising death imp

8/7/2019 Advertising Death Imp

1/24

THE FUTURE IS BRIGHT .BUT THE PRESENT IS

APOCALYPTIC.Any hopes for a seamless transition or any

transition from mass media and marketing to micro media and

marketing are absurd. (March 23,2009 advertsing age.)

The Last Campaign: How Experiences Are

Becoming the New Advertising

Red Bull, Virgin America, Uniqlo and Guinness Lead the

WayPosted by Garrick Schmitt on 11.10.09 @ 09:50 AM

Garrick

Schmitt

Is advertising dying? It's certainly fashionable to say so. Conventional wisdom holds thattraditional media's grip on consumers continues to slip as they increasingly turn to the internetand their peers for entertainment and purchasing recommendations.

In fact, any planner worth his or her salt can reel off a stream of statistics pointing toadvertising's demise -- or lack of effectiveness, at least: Prime-time continues to erode as all themajor networks saw significant declines for last year's season; 77% of U.S. consumers trust

businesses less than they did a year ago; consumers trust their peers' opinions online more thanany other source and a whopping 83% of Mad Men's supposedly ad-friendly time-shiftedaudience fast forwards through commercials according to Tivo. The list goes on and on.

But perhaps it's not that advertising is failing but that brand experiences (both on and offline) arereally what are capturing the imagination of today's consumer. In FEED, a new report that Iauthored with my colleagues at Razorfish, we found that digital brand experiences are having aninordinate sway on consumer purchasing habits and brand affinity.


2/24

For example, 65% of U.S. consumers report a digital experience changing their perception abouta brand (either positively or negatively) and 97% of that group report that the same experienceultimately influenced whether or not they went on to purchase a product from that brand. In anutshell, experience matters. A lot.

Of course, brands that were "born digital" intuitively know this. Google and Amazon arepioneering experiential brands. That's why Amazon continues to pour money into improving itscustomer service rather than run traditional advertising or marketing campaigns. As AmazonCEO Jeff Bezos has said, "We are not great advertisers. So we start with customers, figure outwhat they want, and figure out how to get it to them." Zappos (which recently hired Mullen) builtits brand the same way, as has Facebook.

But what about more traditionally-minded marketers who weren't born digital? Can they succeedin an experience-driven world? The answer is "yes" and here are some of the best:

Red Bull: Red Bull basically pioneered the experiential category. Not only did the brand rise toprominence by sponsoring alternative athletes and lifestyles, it went further by creating its ownevents, like Red Bull's Flugtag and even its own sports like Red Bull's Crashed Ice, which takesover old Quebec with a mix of hockey and motorcross. Even the brand's website has morphedinto ablog, much like today's most popular publishers.

Camper: Most of us in the U.S. think ofCamperas purely a comfortable yet stylish shoe brand.But the Spanish company is much more and pursues abrand ethos that's both traditional, culturaland fashion forward simultaneously. Proof: Casa Camper, stylish (but laid back) hotels inBarcelona and Berlin that embodies the brand's essence. Ditto forCamper Togetherwhich tapsup and coming artists to create one-of-a-kind boutiques.


3/24

Guinness: Guinness may be 250 years old, but it's acting like a much, much younger marketer.The company has embraced experiential branding both literally and figuratively with its "It'sAlive Inside" positioning. For its anniversary, Guinness offered up Remarkable Experiences,including a trip into space. It also released apub-finder iPhone application with a social mediatwist. More impressively, the brand created the Guinness Storehouse, a seven-story building thatfunctions as both museum and pub, that has now become one of Ireland's top tourist attractions.And, more recently, Guinness even wired up its rugby team with RFID tags (including balls and

players) to capture a whole range of statistics about how fast, powerfully and effectively thegame is played.

UNIQLO: Few companies have so used digital like Uniqlo to both build a brand andbreakthrough to new consumers -- and on a truly global scale.The Japanese retailer surprises anddelights consumers at every turn, whether through innovative iPhone applications, calendars, e-commerce, stylebooks and microsites. Uniqlo's experiential efforts not only express the brand,but reach new consumers who may live thousands of miles away from the nearest retail location.


4/24

Virgin America: Virgin America has gone further than most, ensuring that the experience is themarketing -- and advertising in many cases. The brand targeted tech-savvy consumers early onwith its Red system entertainment console and in-flight WiFi. It showed off its dramatic interiorsinpromotions with Diggnation and YouTube celebrities; became an early adopter ofTwitter for

customer service; and reinforced its brand values through its simple booking engine onVirginAmerica.com. And now, for the holidays, Virgin America is partnering with Google toofferfree WiFi for travelers.

Nike: Nike, of course, has been moving in this experiential direction for a few years. 'We're notin the business of keeping the media companies alive,'' Nike's Trevor Edwards told the NewYork Times in 2007. ''We're in the business of connecting with consumers.'' And so they have.The company continually earns kudos for consumer experience breakthroughs likeNike+, itsonline running community; the Human Race, a global running event; and more recently theLivestrong Chalkbot which enabled users to submit a text message that would be painted(digitally) on the route of the Tour de France.

Experiences, it would seem, are the new advertising. Experiences reach and engage customers innew and more meaningful ways, they promote "trial" over simply messaging and -- quite frankly

-- experiences are much more suited to our digital era when everything is just a click away. Ourchallenge now, as marketers, is to make sure that our products and brands can actually live up tothe experiences that we advertise.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Garrick Schmitt is group VP of experience planning at Razorfish and the agency's global lead for user


5/24

experience. He publishes FEED, Razorfish's annual digital brand experience report and in his spare time

flails about on Twitter@gschmitt.

32 CommentsSort by Date | Popularity

By bchiger | New York, NYNovember 10, 2009 12:04:22 pm:Absolutely. We've paid lip service to the idea of "holistic marketing" but are only now realizingthat "advertising" is becoming much more than just communications strategy.

On our blog I have proposed that advertising has shifted to what I call "engagement design," orthe design of branded experiences that add value through many different touchpoints over time.

If you're so inclined, you can read about it at: http://ANidea.com/go/redefineadvertising

Either way, it is good to see agencies (particularly digital and traditional shops who focus onexperiences and interactions vs. messages) evolving the dialog on what the new face ofadvertising needs to be.

Brian Chiger | AgencyNet

www.ANidea.com

@brianchigerBy rukallstar2 | Minneapolis, MNNovember 10, 2009 02:14:35 pm:

this is a great article. one word of caution to the previous comment. everyone likes to say theyhave a new model, when in fact its merely an evolution. yes advertising needs to become more ofan experience, but that doesn't mean that's all it will be. last time i checked people like sitting onsomething and being engaged with a glowing rectangle. make a great spot, people will watch it,or it will get passed around. technology is forcing mediocrity out, on a large scale. mediocrity is

alive and strong in small form, just look at all those blogs--how many are truly great? or most ofthe stuff on youtube? yeah. an interesting question is no one thinks that movies will go away? buteveryone feels that ads will? it's time to up our game, and clients to get comfortable with creatingcontent, rather than ads. because really who wants to watch ads?

By cjrullman | Birmingham, ALNovember 10, 2009 02:23:21 pm:the experience sounds somewhat PR to me, which is not a bad thing at all. It just upholds theidea of advertising and PR constantly intertwining. I think that's why many advertising agenciesdon't want to be limited to being called an "ADVERTISING Agency," because that connotes


6/24

print ads, billboards, commercialsall the obvious vehicles of getting a message out. We aremore so branding agencies, in that we will do anything it takes for our clients to give them thatidentity they strive for, whether it is subtle PR efforts, interactive websites and social media.

maybe one day we will start calling ourselves 'experience agencies.'

thanks for sharing!

cjr

www.scoutbrand.comBy bchiger | New York, NYNovember 10, 2009 02:37:11 pm:

@rukallstar2 I agree that everyone likes to say they have a new model and I also agree this is justan evolution of branding. I never claimed that this was "a new model" or a "revolution." In fact,my precise words were "it is good to see agencies evolving the dialog..." Also, I do not think adswill go away. If you had read my post, you would have realized that I explicitly stated otherwise.

The fact is, the "content over ads" idea has been circulating for quite awhile and it is quite truethat people still love the movies (and a good story driven TV spot). But it's important toremember that movies don't have ulterior motives -- they're designed to entertain, not to sell. Adsare NOT movies. But the industry will get a lot closer to producing the kind of engaging brandcontent you advocate once they recognize that they are creating an experience around theirbrand, not just designing a "reach vehicle."

By rodgerbanister | Seattle, WANovember 10, 2009 02:38:11 pm:Great article, but is it really so surprising? Every company wants bonded customers, but many ofthem skip critical steps in getting there.

I like what Amazon and Virgin are doing - leading with their customers. By providing them withexperiences that they want and are on brand, they build bonded customers who pass on theirbrand experience (whether digital or real world) by WOM, which reduces the need for pushadvertising.


7/24

But there will always be advertising, because so few companies, in my opinion, do a good job ofcreating bonded customers.

By bighousegraphix | Savannah, GANovember 10, 2009 03:01:09 pm:Great article. This is a good read for many businesses that are still operating under theadvertising as usual model.

Twitter is now replacing the customer service hotline and social media platforms are becomingthe new amazon reviews.

One bad review now travels faster than ever before and overall customer experience speaksvolumes.

By lbernste | Toronto, ONNovember 10, 2009 03:25:36 pm:

Increasingly the idea that the experience is the brand is being understood -- egged on to a greatdegree by the success of digital and real customer engagement opportunities. The articlehighlights a few companies that behave in accordance with the post modern maxim: the brand isthe experience is the business is the brand. These companies did not invent this (okay, maybeNike did), but in some cases have taken it to the extreme (to wit Camper, where the companycannot be in the shoe business, but must be in a more ethereal business of selling a brand essence("We are in the business of selling "laid back comfort" and will wrap it in any physical or digitalembodiment that makes sense.

Experience are described in feeling terms -- ask somebody to describe an experience and theygenerally say something like: "it made me feel..." The "new advertising" is a way of triggeringthe way the product experience makes people feel when not directly consuming the product. Andit works because, as Maya Angelou says: "people will forget what you said, people will forgetwhat you did but people will never forget how you made them feel".

By grahamhumphreys | New York, NYNovember 10, 2009 04:37:38 pm:Garrick,

The article and FEED report both very worthwhile - props for sharing the information.

I feel that the 'experiences, not messages' idea is on course to win through. Which is a goodthing. As a marketer, the opportunity to create experiences with intrinsic value for consumersmakes me feel like I'm on the side of the Angels for a change. And few folks have beenrecommending engagement to clients for a while. There have been famous disasters as'traditionally-minded' brands grapple with the idea of engagement - http://tinyurl.com/phj6h -


8/24

and there will doubtless be many more.

So as we strategy professionals gird ourselves for the onslaught of demands for 'audience

engagement', what's the framework for identifying the nature of the most appropriate vehicle foran engagement? Should it be based on utility, entertainment, information, or some other value-add? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.

Cheers. Graham

grahamhumphreys.blogspot.comBy tobyhorry | London, CANovember 10, 2009 05:09:35 pm:

How about advertising the experience?

By metapede | San Francisco, CANovember 10, 2009 06:18:59 pm:I definitely agree with the premise of the article, and there are some good examples here (some,though, are a bit of a stretch). A few of the best examples have been around for quite a while, soI'm not sure Garrick is telling people anything they don't already know.

It would be interesting to hear Garrick's perspective on what the pitfalls are when brands try tocreate experiences, because there have been some embarrassing failures (BudTV anyone?).

As for the supposedly fashionable belief that advertising is dying (per the first sentence of thearticle), this just seems silly. I haven't heard any murmurings that suggest this is a fashionableline of thinking. Print is dying maybe. Advertising is shifting to new media, new formats, etc.maybe, but dying?

When a company as big and wealthy as Google still gets something like 98% of its revenue fromadvertising and pays $750 million to acquire AdMob (an advertising company), I don't knowhow anyone could say advertising is dying.

By jerryketel | PORTLAND, ORNovember 10, 2009 06:40:27 pm:If you know your history, none of this is news. PT Barnum figured this stuff out over a centuryago. Starbucks codified it just a few years ago. If a brand is an emotional relationship between aconsumer and a product or service then it stands to reason that an experience can become muchmore emotional than passive media like print advertising. But let's be clear: this is just anothertool in the toolbox. Tactics do not replace strategy. Strategy comes first.


9/24

Jerry Ketel

By gschmitt | San Francisco, CANovember 10, 2009 08:15:31 pm:Thanks for all of the very insightful and thoughtful comments.

I particularly like this, from lbernste, "The "new advertising" is a way of triggering the way theproduct experience makes people feel when not directly consuming the product. And it worksbecause, as Maya Angelou says: "people will forget what you said, people will forget what youdid but people will never forget how you made them feel".

Which I promise to steal, completely ;)

As for the advertising is dying line, metapede, I actually should have qualified that as"traditional" advertising (well cataloged by Bob Garfield http://thechaosscenario.net/blog/ andthe like). Not advertising as a whole. My real point is that traditional isn't really dying, but thatexperiences -- whether online or off -- are having inordinate amount of sway with consumersnow. That's the balance that we need to strike (not either/or). And digital is driving a lot of it.

Great thread. Look forward to seeing how the conversation evolves.By brandon101 | Atlanta, GANovember 10, 2009 10:55:18 pm:

Garrick - loving the thinking here. I think perhaps some of this is semantics, but I would submitthat perhaps what's no longer as effective is traditional interruptive, one-way Advertising, whichis what we typically think of when the word Advertising is used. Mass media used to tell us whatthe experience of the brand was and we either believed it or not (to a large degree dependent onhow effective the Creative was and how big the ad budget was), but now we have endlessopportunities to learn about and experience brands outside of the carefully crafted 30 secondspot. To your point, it's the experiences that are winning, not necessarily the advertising that isdying.

Advertising is adapting, and necessarily so. There are plenty of ways to integrate socialcomponents into more traditional ads, and we're sure to see more of that in the near future.Holistic campaigns will take advantage of all available mediums and weave together acompelling story that grabs consumer attention and builds trust. I believe the real issue that liesunderneath all of this is that the brand proposition has to live up to all of the hype or else it's setup to fail. Word travels instantly now, and people smell bullshit a mile away. The brands youreferenced above aren't just saying 'we get it' in commercials - they are living it and their efforts


10/24

are resonating with consumers. This is the model for future success.

Thanks for the discussion, and especially for the outstanding work on the FEED report. Hats off

to you and your team.

- Brandon SuttonBy MATSNL65 | LOS ANGELES, CANovember 11, 2009 03:38:34 am:

A great article Garrick as well as a great insightful study with your latest report in FEED 2009.We (curious creative marketing types) have spoken with various people who are the focus ofmost of our marcom labor (we call them consumers) and found that the best of just in theinteractive/digital space will remember that there isn't any difference between we who enjoyexperiences and we do create experiences. Those of us who can bridge the gap between that

fundamental human magic of today's and future digital experiences and the business realities ofthose who pay us to create them will truly have proved how this era of experiential marketingcan form the foundation of what is to come.

Langston Richardson / LangstonRichardson.com/ twitter: @MATSNL65By ianmcg | Boston, MANovember 11, 2009 08:11:40 am:

Hey Garrick,

Great article. Thanks so much for the great discussion. I'd like to hone in on your engagementpoint. At the end of the day what truly differentiates experiential marketing from traditionaladvertising is brand engagement with audiences. Its about the conversation and the mutualexchange of value. Shared experiences drive emotional and rational affinity, establish trust anddrive long-term relationships. For brands, engagement is not an option, its a must. The mostpotent campaigns are those which employ both online and face-to-face experiences, but it allneeds to start with strategy. The optimum mix is the holy grail for marketers.

To read more, please check out my blog: Experiential Marketing 2.0.

Thanks!

Ian McGonnigal


11/24

Blog: http://www.experientialmarketing20.com

Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/iandavmcgBy Kevin | New York, NYNovember 11, 2009 09:25:09 am:

Garrick:

I was curious as to why this was posted in the "Digital Next" section seeing as so few of yourexamples had anything to do with the interwebs. To wit, most of your examples (and i agree withone poster - many are quite dated: see Nike+) reference offline media. The only thing you citedonline for RedBull was a blog?

You followed it up with a comment response saying "And digital is driving a lot of it." I don't see

it here.

And once again, more unnecessary fuel for the unnecessary online vs. offline tug-of-war,spoiling a rather excellent topic overall.

Kevin Horne - NYCBy kevinlenard | Toronto, ONNovember 11, 2009 09:44:48 am:

Garrick has zeroed in on exactly where marketing, strategically, is in the process of evolving to.All the hoopla about "social" is just a tactical blip on the radar, sucking dollars from digital andone-on-one engaging brand experiences because people have kind of (barely) wrapped theirminds around what it is.

What continually amazes me about human nature is that we are constantly 're-discovering' and're-inventing' the obvious -- things we all know already, then evangelizing like we've discoveredthe Holy Grail. The most powerful selling (marketing) tool humans have had since we firsttraded sea shells for bear claws was what Fast Company's panel of marketing experts have calledthe "new age" of one-on-one marketing, like we've collectively forgotten why we all like goingto the farmers' market every weekend. What all the above speaks to is a combination of real anddigital (and myriad other) experiences between consumers and brands.

What's most ironic is that "social", with no proven ROI of any kind, is now getting millions(billions?) of media mix dollars diverted to it, while live, face-to-face experiential marketing


12/24

efforts continue to be marginalized as too expensive and unproven by any ROI metric, yet we allknow having a chat with a knowledgeable and engaging Brand Ambassador is going to trumpany virtual experience virtually every time.

XM is the new ATL: http://tinyurl.com/yf47efx and "advertising agencies" now have to become"marketing agencies": http://tinyurl.com/yfx3zpm

By tillypick | Manchester, MANovember 11, 2009 10:24:46 am:The marketing business has always been about a dialogue with consumers. It's just that we nowhave exponentially greater opportunities for that dialogue to be more contextual, deeper andcreate more value. The challenge that comes with more options and greater choice is picking thebest path and navigating between hype and paralysis to do the right thing for your consumer,because if you don't add value to their experience, you're toast.

I also feel that our world today is much more about hybrids than the extremes. (Remember thatword from the 90's -- mass customization?) I'd say that anyone that is on the ends of thespectrum and pushing one model versus another is either not brave enough or smart enough towork with the complete truth.

By djpitzner | HARRISBURG, PANovember 11, 2009 10:40:14 am:The last sentence was a hard stop for me: "Our challenge now, as marketers, is to make sure thatour products and brands can actually live up to the experiences that we advertise."

This tidbit is really the crux of the equation, don't you think? Agencies only have so much swayover this critical point. It's the client-side marketers and executives who need to grasp itsimportance. Some do, as you noted -- Amazon, Zappos, Virgin. And that's why their marketingand advertising efforts are paying back. They understand "alignment, relevancy and authenticity"and (with their agencies) find creative ways to deliver on their brand promise all day long, everyday.

Great experiential marketing can affect trial for any product. It can improve the connection forbrands that do deliver. But it cannot guarantee loyalty. Only the product itself can pullconsumers through for the long run.

So, as agencies, we have to choose our clients wisely or go through the difficult and painfulprocess of educating their entire organization, from top to bottom, to deliver products & servicethat live up to the hype they want to project.


13/24

--Dori Pitzner

http://www.andculture.com

@doriorioBy KIRK | NEW YORK, NYNovember 11, 2009 11:42:45 am:

Somewhere up there, someone said people love movies but "movies don't sell anything." That, ofcourse, is wrong and misses the point. Movies sell themselves, primarily. That's what they're allabout. And the most effective way of getting people to buy a movie ticket is to tell them a littlestory that embodies the bigger story they'll get to see if they pay.

Brands and their content need to bear the same relationship to one another. Brands need to tell

stories online or anywhere else that embody the promises, attributes and attitudes of the brands.That's EMBODY. Not describe or hawk or merely reflect. I come from an agency called Story,so you might expect this philosophy from me. But it's true. Digital is all-important because allcontent is migrating to digital platforms. But the really critical word there is content, not digital,because digital can be just as irrelevant as a TV spot if it's not conveying a valuable story.

The real task now is to turn brands into great media across all channels. Great media generatesgreat experiences. And the magic that's driving accelerated changes in advertising is the simplefact that great content, amplified through what we currently call social media, can command abigger, more responsive audience for FREE than a spot on all the traditional TV networkscombined. So even ignoring the fact far fewer people watch TV ads anymore, the economics ofold-fashioned advertising just don't work.

Kirk Cheyfitz

http://postadvertising.com/default.aspxBy imagreatcopywriter | Bronxville, NYNovember 11, 2009 01:34:28 pm:

This is spot on! I was working on a campaign at my internship last summer and it required a lotof consumer reaction and behavior analysis. What I found is that people are more willing tospend money on an experience than on a product. For example, a family may not spend themoney on a new kitchen, but that same year, they will go sky diving or head off to an exoticvacation for five days. The public's values are shifting, probably because our economy's are aswell. People are uneasy about the price of goods, not knowing if their values will shift up ordown in the future, but an experience is something that can't deteriorate in value, and this iswhat's, I think, the real reason for this "Experience over Product" trend.


14/24

Other great things for a company to do is throw events (just make sure the guests have a greattime!)Not only does this get free marketing buzz, before and after the event, but it ties yourcompany name in with an experience the consumer went through. And, with the consumer beingmore and more savvy today, this is good, because it allows THEM to think they are deciding tolike and enjoy your company or the event now connected to it.We can't tell the consumer what to

think anymore, we just need to show them why our products or services benefit their lifestyle.By foggedout | Jersey City, NJNovember 11, 2009 02:43:55 pm:A lot of the articles and blogs I've read regarding this shift away from traditional advertising andbranding have spoken about it in a 'doom and gloom', 'end of an era', hell, industry tone. The firstand last paragraph of this article are the focus of my thoughts and the reason I think it's a greattime to be a creative individual. Clients are now being forced to be more open to that BIG IDEAmantra our community has been touting since the dawn of the biz. No more 2D concepts that getforced into a rollout of the common media tactics. The last sentence says NOW our challengewill be to make sure our brands live up to the experience we advertise. That was ALWAYS thechallenge. Your brand won't live if it can't do what it claims it can do. A strategy to engage iskey, but then you still have to communicate once you've got their attention. That's why I think

our careers are headed towards enhancement, not endangerment.

Jason Carapellotti

http://www.absurdcreative.com

jasoncarapellotti.com (coming soon)By seanclark | Los Angeles, CANovember 11, 2009 08:47:06 pm:

It indeed isn't anything truly new, but is worth repeating. Very good article and packaging of theconcept.

I think fundamentally though, that at the core of the experiential framework that triggerseffectiveness, in fact all communication platforms, is the existence of an idea. I come acrossdozens of experience based environments that simply have no meaning, depth or purpose. I callit clutter.

We seem to be getting lost in running after emerging channels, art form, production techniquesand other tactical plays, rather than focus on the generation of an organizing idea that fits. And itdoesn't have to be big or small to qualify either. Any size will do, just as long as it is relevant andmeaningful to the intended.

www.sagebranddirections.comBy david | Boston, MANovember 12, 2009 12:11:17 am:

Great article and I agree that it's not as much about traditional advertising losing steam (althoughit's happening in certain contexts) it's about more brands realizing the efficacy of experiencemarketing.


15/24

In fact, to that point, the one minor disagreement I have with the article is the notion thatexperience marketing is new. It's been around for decades... I'm nearly 30 years into it

personally, and when I got in, I sat at the feet of those then more senior in order to learn whatthey knew from doing it for decades before me. One such person had created an experientialmarketing campaign for Ford that toured the country in the 1970's. And there are examples thatpre-date that campaign to be sure.

What's new is the degree to which it is being embraced now, the number of agencies specializing(or trying to specialize) in it, and the expanded definition of what it is, especially now with theintegration of digital tactics that enrich the interaction so valuably in both face-to-face and onlineexperiences. It feels like the time has finally arrived for experience in a really big way, and that

is a new and welcome sensation.By david | Boston, MANovember 12, 2009 12:14:16 am:Great article and I agree that it's not as much about traditional advertising losing steam (althoughit's happening in certain contexts) it's about more brands realizing the efficacy of experiencemarketing.

In fact, to that point, the one minor disagreement I have with the article is the notion thatexperience marketing is new. It's been around for decades... I'm nearly 30 years into itpersonally, and when I got in, I sat at the feet of those then more senior in order to learn whatthey knew from doing it for decades before me. One such person had created an experientialmarketing campaign for Ford that toured the country in the 1970's. And there are examples thatpre-date that campaign to be sure.

What's new is the degree to which it is being embraced now, the number of agencies specializing(or trying to specialize) in it, and the expanded definition of what it is, especially now with theintegration of digital tactics that enrich the interaction so valuably in both face-to-face and onlineexperiences. It feels like the time has finally arrived for experience in a really big way, and thatis a new and welcome sensation.

David M. Rich

SVP, Program Strategy/Worldwide

George P. Johnson Experience Marketing


16/24

[email protected]

www.gpj.comBy rsegelbaum | Toronto, ONNovember 12, 2009 09:08:02 am:

A great article. And yes, I entirely agree that the online world has been a bit of a must to theexperience level...after all, they are an online entity, but we have been seeing more and morebricks and mortar shift to a bricks and clicks mentality for the last seven years or so. Be it anonline experience in store (think kiosk doing e-comm within a store location) to sponsorship ofevents pushing registrants to the web to engage. And now, more than ever, with more and moresocial media being a mobile reality, the real time engagement of online and offline is constant.The question lends to the aftermarket launch measurement and valuation post the experience haspassed. Like ads, are people still talking about it, without being prodded to do so?

By 1day1brand | Toronto, ONNovember 12, 2009 01:48:43 pm:Top notch post.

Couldn't agree more. This is why I've always loved digital. It was about the experience. Not justpushing product. It is the reason I've always felt like an outsider in the world of advertising. Nowthe world of advertising finally gets to die or change to our way of thinking.

BTW, the Red Bull "Crashed Ice" poster is one of the best ever. I'm not even into Hockey (don'ttell any of my friends here in the Great White North) but it just drew me in the first time I saw it.Made me want to be see more of the crazy - death defying experience t promised.

-- Axle

Axle Davids | www.twitter.com/1day1brand | www.distility.comBy Jocelyn | Austin, TXNovember 12, 2009 05:55:55 pm:

For those who are wondering what the next step is in creating a "brand experience," I *highly*recommend BRAND sense by Martin Lindstrom. Building powerful brands through taste, touch,smell, sight, sound.

By belovedxp | Orlando, FLNovember 12, 2009 10:53:48 pm:Garrick, thanks for providing such a great article which has sparked some equally greatcommentary. I especially liked the one from David Rich, although one may say I am biased dueto the fact that George P. Johnson is a fellow experiential marketing agency. As he stated, themethodology of experience based marketing is nothing new. When I am invited to speak on thesubject of experiential marketing, I often say that building relationships with people throughmemorable experiences is simply part of human nature. Once brands display human personality


17/24

traits, they are able to develop personal and meaningful connections with consumers.

Traditional advertising will not die but it will evolve, like all other forms of marketing, in order

to remain relevant. I have seen numerous television spots which creatively evoke emotion andcause consumers to share the spots via YouTube. And with experiential marketing being part ofthe overall marketing strategy, traditional advertising gains greater relevance and attention fromits intended audience.

Lastly, while your article focuses on the digital side of experience marketing, it's important tonote that one on one experiential marketing is very powerful and delivers a personal humanexperience which a digital format cannot. However, the increased interest in SMM and newmedia has helped to further the case for engagement and experience marketing.

By belovedxp | Orlando, FLNovember 12, 2009 10:57:27 pm:Garrick, thanks for providing such a great article which has sparked some equally greatcommentary. I especially liked the one from David Rich, although one may say I am biased dueto the fact that George P. Johnson is a fellow experiential marketing agency. As he stated, themethodology of experience based marketing is nothing new. When I am invited to speak on thesubject of experiential marketing, I often say that building relationships with people throughmemorable experiences is simply part of human nature. Once brands display human personalitytraits, they are able to develop personal and meaningful connections with consumers.

Traditional advertising will not die but it will evolve, like all other forms of marketing, in orderto remain relevant. I have seen numerous television spots which creatively evoke emotion andcause consumers to share the spots via YouTube. And with experiential marketing being part ofthe overall marketing strategy, traditional advertising gains greater relevance and attention fromits intended audience.

Lastly, while your article focuses on the digital side of experience marketing, it's important tonote that one on one experiential marketing is very powerful and delivers a personal humanexperience which a digital format cannot. However, the increased interest in SMM and newmedia has helped to further the case for engagement and experience marketing.

Wagner

President/CEO


18/24

Beloved Experiential

[email protected]

blog.belovedxp.com

By Linas | LondonNovember 13, 2009 10:34:35 am:Some very interesting comments on "experience and engagement" marketing. However, I feelthis is all coming very late to the party. All these mainstream brands are jubilant to the fact thatthey have now embraced experience!

I totally agree with David M. Rich, this is nothing new, what many people are embracing now iswhat has already been done. It is just a truck load easier going digital.

Let us go back to the year 2000 in Central and Eastern Europe. A time when a majority of thesecountries aspiring to join the European Union, placed an entire ban on tobacco advertising, thisof course included all electronic media and communication. All that we had left as RestrictedMarket, advertising practitioners was experiential, engagement and very limited direct. Certainlyno digital.

Many brands and their agencies have sat around and have waited for "experiential andengagement" to evolve around them, whereas, tobacco category communication craftspeople hadto be the explorers of new communication with consumers. Especially in Europe and about 10years ago, that is all that we spoke about, "BRAND EXPERIENCE" and delivering like no otherbrand could.

I still strongly believe that in restricted markets, the agencies and client brand people involved,have been at the forging point of "experiential and engagement" marketing and continue to be atthe fore of consumer dialogue.

Going all "tech" just makes it a walk in the park!

Linas Valaitis

Director


19/24

Baltix Limited

[email protected] jkrawl | Chicago, IL January 19, 2010 11:13:59 am:

The key to any successful marketing campaign is to provide as great of an experience to theconsumer/customer as you can. The reason why is because that individual will become your bestevangelist for your brand or product. Since conventional advertising is failing these days, weneed to return to traditional grassroots marketing.

Frank

http://www.gettingbackyourex.com

Advertising Will Change Forever

Digital Spending Will Nearly Double in 5 Years, But Ad

Budgets Won't

Posted by Josh Bernoffon 07.20.09 @ 02:30 PM

Josh Bernoff

Here's one of the things we do at Forrester Research: we interview as many marketers as we canabout their plans, identify trends and project future likely conditions, and then we put togethersome numbers to make a projection. If you've ever seen a Forrester projection, it comes from a

process like this.

This means that inside every projection is an idea or ten about the future. Those ideas can bepowerful, and they come from research with marketers and consumers.

My colleague at Forrester, Shar Van Boskirk, just published ourfive-year interactive marketingforecast. The idea inside it is the real kicker.


20/24

In this recession, marketers have learned that interactive marketing is more effective, andadvertising less effective, per dollar spent. While budgets for online have decreased, theydecreased less than other budgets. Six out of ten marketers we surveyed agreed with thestatement "we will increase budget for interactive by shifting money away from traditionalmarketing." Only 7% said "we have no plans to increase our marketing budget."

Unlike the last recession, digital marketing is no longer experimental. Now it looks more likeadvertising is inefficient, relative to digital. More than half of the marketers we surveyed saidthat effectiveness of direct mail, TV, magazines, outdoor, newspapers, and radio would stay thesame or decrease within three years. In contrast, well over 70% expected the effectiveness ofchannels like created social media, online video, and mobile marketing to increase.

The result is that digital, which will be about 12% of overall advertising spend in 2009, is likelyto grow to about 21% in five years. Along the way overall advertising budgets won't grow much.

This is huge.

It means we are all digital marketers now, since digital is at the center of many campaignsanyway.

It means media is in trouble, or at least in the middle of a transformation. For example, onlinevideo ads, which will be about $870 million this year, will grow to over $3 billion in 2014. Whatwill this do to networks plans to put more of their shows online in places like Hulu. How will itaccelerate some newspapers plans to become more and more centered around online?

And it means that social "media," which will account for $716 million this year between socialnetwork campaigns and agency fees, will generate $3 billion in five years. And this doesn't even

count displays ads on social networks (which are in the display ads category.) Of all the parts ofdigital marketing, social network marketing one is poised for the most explosive growth.

Pundits have been declaring the end of mass media and advertising for years now. From my 14years of experience analyzing this stuff, I've learned that things die very slowly, but there are realtrends you can see. If you're in advertising, you'd better learn to speak digital, because that's theway the world is going.


21/24

~ ~ ~Josh Bernoff is the co-author of "Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by SocialTechnologies," a comprehensive analysis of corporate strategy for dealing with socialtechnologies such as blogs, social networks and wikis, and is a VP-principal analyst at ForresterResearch. He blogs atblogs.forrester.com/groundswell.

60 CommentsSort by Date | Popularity

By srpatterson | Columbus, OH July 20, 2009 04:00:09 pm:I would expect online marketing to continue to grow as the newspaper and magazine industriescontinue to struggle to get new readers. Affiliate marketing is even better as companies do notneed to pay for ads unless their is a return.

Steve

http://DietCleanse.orgBy brianvandeputte | Macomb, MI July 20, 2009 04:16:44 pm:I completely agree. Instead of the traditional mass marketing approach, messages will be tailoredto the "mass of niches".

And it's exciting! It's amazing to see ads on Facebook that are tailored to what I'm interested


22/24

based off what I've listed under my Interest, Activities, and so on.

Passionate about the change.

http://twitter.com/brianvandeputteBy TheWealthSquad | Riceville, TN July 20, 2009 04:20:32 pm:

It is more than the medium that changes. It is not just a decision of analog vs digital. It is wherethe control is. In advertising of the past the medium controlled the message. A newspaper ad, aTV spot, a radio commercial are all examples of the medium controlling the message. Word ofMouth was a small part of the total picture.

Now with social media, the people can take control of the message. Twitter, blogs, Facebook,even MySpace give individuals the ability to control the message. Their passion and effort canoverrun any paid advertising budget.

It is also why connecting with your customer to create raving fans can grow your business fasterthan large ad budgets.

The problem is it takes much more effort to create something that is remarkable, to create amovement, to create passion.

You can buy your way to mediocrity but your create your way to greatness.By TheWealthSquad | Riceville, TN July 20, 2009 04:27:13 pm:

Oh almost forgot. I talk about standing out from the crowd by making a conscious decision to doit.

http://www.askthewealthsquad.com/blog/tradition-or-innovation-stand-out-from-the-crowd/By mhsherman | MONTREAL, PQ July 20, 2009 05:08:08 pm:

Untill i read this article I believed that digtal spending would double in the next 5 years. But nowthat I've seen Josh predict it I have little confidence in my assumption!

By element-hu | GREENSBORO, NC July 20, 2009 06:32:26 pm:


23/24

This is great information. I'm sure it isn't too surprising to anyone however the analysis from anumbers stand point are fascinating.

This won't make things easier though and I see a huge pitfall waiting for thousands of marketersand agencies everywhere. @TheWealthSquad touched on it. It's the fact that in the pastadvertising was forced to consumers who had absolutely no control. Now the message can andwill be controlled by these very same consumers. Consumers now have the ability to call"bullcrap" on an ad.

Agencies that are used to being creative for the sake of it will mean nothing.

Being a "digital" agency will mean nothing as well as it will be the norm for every agency; nolonger a "selling point".

This shift in the industry will continue to remove the blindfolds off of everyday consumers and Ihope that marketers and agencies alike realize they will have to dig deeper in their efforts toreach them. Once the technology hype has settled down and the dust has cleared, the scene that isleft will be telling.

-Terrence

Element-Hu

http://www.element-hu.comBy property | Boca Raton, FL July 20, 2009 07:11:41 pm:

It has always been and always will be about ROI! However, Adverting methods, means andneeds have changed! These new channels offer the advertiser control on so many more levelsparticularly in being able to interactively self engage a targeted audience, accurately measureperformance and respond accordingly! The user is now able to directly influence its own successor failure far more efficiently and effectively!

Josh you absolutely spot on...this change is so powerful and so huge it certainly is going to levelthe playing field!!! I feel now this is only the beginning...

http://www.propertysyndication.comBy dholt777 | Phoenix, AZ July 20, 2009 08:20:40 pm:


24/24

When companies stop worrying about their ROI and worry more about creating an onlineculture, they may succeed. You now have as many agencies promising change as companieslooking for it.

The problem is, as Seth Godin puts it; "Your all trying to put a meatball on a sundae". I recentlyworked with two very large, billion dollar, international companies and they are LOST.Everyone can knock on their door and offer help for a nice profit but it won't work for either ofthem.

Dave Holt

http://holtinteractive.com

advertising death imp

Documents