╠ Wolf in sheep skin! - Twitter ╣

Now this is something that has been sort of building up since I first heard the word twitter. I honestly don't get it. I don't understand the hype about it. This video sort of shows the kind of feeling I have towards it. However despite all this it is still labeled as some huge marketing thing that everyone is up on. So I got one then after having the first status update I receive being 'having eggs for tea tonight. Yum!' I gave up and never returned. Yet it was still in the background as this big thing. I thought 'You know one day I will get it.' But I don't.

I mean I can see the marketing potential here, it is a very useful marketing tool, but so am I...haha wit! Either way cannot see how it has taken off. I mean yes I do use facebook a lot and find the twitter element of it fun but that is because there is so much else to that site. I really can't see myself being so drawn to something so simple though.

So this is my cry out to any twitter fans out there. What is there that makes it such a must have. I mean there are even books being made about twittering. So please if someone can explain it please go ahead and save me from having to get one of those books in order to see what I'm apparently missing.

╠ The Grim yet sad future for graduates ╣

The more time that I look into the generalizations of generations, the more I think I may fit some of them. Mainly the I want my path laid out in front of me simply for me to take. That being said I don't believe it should be easy, however I would like it to simply be like a quest where you must complete this, then this, then one last thing and then boom success.

However what is looking more and more likely as Uni draws to an end is what appears to be a complete dead end thankyou to Mr. Economic Crisis.

Now the problem that I face is basically I go and ask people who I like 'Do you have any graduate opportunities. Their answer so far without fail has included these two elements, laughter and a mention of the economic crisis as if I as a commerce student had no idea of all that such a thing existed. Overall I'm left not actually with a conclusive answer which is what I was after. I understand the situation, myself and many other people who have put themself through about 16 years of education often inclusive of putting themself into debt now no longer have opportunities to use any knowledge that they tried to specialize in.

Needless to say we understand the gravity of the situation. I think businesses are ignoring the potential opportunities going to waste here. With everyone cutting back there will be above average people who will create great worth for a business out of work so perhaps it is worth offering the odd spot here and there. Also by completely palming off prospective grads you're going to discourage them from turning to you when you do actually open your doors years down the track when they have realized great proportions of their potential.

I think businesses shouldn't just jump straight to cutting programs. They should be trying to find different ways around things. We will understand that you can't afford the spots now and also that we will probably face the issue of being a job not suited to our skills. If they say not now but try to hold onto us for when times are better it could value add to both parties.

Personally I don't know the best way to do this because it's obviously hard to lock someone in without yourself being bound to some requirement but for an example this would be how I would do it for Apple.

Apple have online training modules, I would give grads access to this as well as maintaining a blog for the so that they know whenever even a single spot is coming up. Because of the competition to get into a job you want people would keep up to date on the modules. So basically you have a trained group of university educated graduates knowing what you want them to know and ready to jump into the fray at quick access without actually locking yourself into actually providing them any reimbursement for their dedication to your brand.

Much better than a laugh in the face if you ask me.

╠ 99c is more expensive than $1 ╣

My endeavor to branch out and sample other markting blogs has gone quite well. One of the first posts to really get me thinking was Nathan Bush of Another Advertising Wanker's post on the terminology of the word expensive. In most dictionaries expensive means that an item is basically high monetary cost for a consumer. Nathan's argument was that it should instead be high perceived monetary cost. I personally think it to be quite apt because the original definition wouldn't class a bread loaf that costs $100 as expensive and converesely a house being sold at half price would still be expensive. So I believe this change to be much more acurate.

The second thing I would like to bring up is that there was a study that was referenced in the TV show of the same name as this blog that stated that people did not trust whole value items and perceived that having a non flat value down to the last cent appeared more thought on and therefore was a better price.

Now what I'd like to raise is cobining the two for low value items. Personally I believe the more thought on price would work against the seller for low cost items especially in an environment where there are more expensive items. Personally I think a value such as $1 is not a high value. For me it is impulse. If I have that gold coin in my pocket if there's something I want I'll just get it.

Non-rounded cents to me appears more to be something that requires thought. You have to take it in and then think about it before you come to the conclusion that it does actually cost $1. Now this isn't a long process but it still subtracts time which hurts the chance of impulse buy.

Now this is jsut my view but what would you prefer? a $1 item or $0.99 item?

╠What will you do with your $900?╣

I found this video in a post by Nathan Bush over at Another Advertising Wanker. Despite the name he's actually not a bad guy, this post in particular demonstrated it as this video is a bit of pro bono work that he helped on for the Children's Hospital Foundation Australia. The $900 is in reference to the stimulus package in the process of currently being paid out bit by bit. As a stimulus package the point is to spend it, but why not do some good while you do?

I think this is a great example of what marketers can do for good. A lot of the time we are helping soulless companies so it is really inspiring to see work like this going on.

╠ A new layout on life ╣

As most of you probably can see I've changed the layout for this blog. Since it's beginning my entire view about what this blog is and what I use it for has been an ever changing concept. In a discussion yesterday I realized that what I wanted this blog to be was no longer something that the previous layout helped me obtain.

Yes it was pretty but it didn't do enough to keep interest. It made the posts look not worth reading. So I figured it was finally time to change.

Originally my idea when looking for a new layout is to have something with wider margins to make my posts look less long...although if anything to me they almost look longer now. Either way I still do believe this layout is for the best though...well until I one day get so awesome to make my own. If you any opinions feel free to comment.

I hope you enjoy Gruen's new flavour.

╠ TV's aim is a tad off ╣

Zac Martin made a post a few months back about the classification of generations in Australia as drafted by characteristics based off of the 2006 census. The layout was as follows.

0-19 __iGeneration
20-39 _Generation X and Generation Y
40-59 _Baby Boomers
60-79 _Lucky
80+ __.Oldest

What I find interesting about this is that as time progresses it seems as if consumers are getting harder to reach via conventional means. iGeneration is almost completely dependent on the internet and therefore is hard to reach by means such as Television and as sad as it may seem I wouldn't be surprised if radio was almost a foreign system to them. Thanks to ad blockers even the internet isn't so successful.

The thing I find most intriguing about this is if things continue TV may just end up losing all of its power and beginning to be something of a targeted medium once everyone moves on and only the oldies stick to the aged technology. In may seem like an unbelievable thing nowadays as most people do watch TV. But if you compare average time of the iGen watching TV especially around the late teens I suspect a lot of TV time would have turned to internet time or at the very least to a combination. I know while I'm watching something on TV advertising is usually the time to turn to MSN meaning while it is being broadcast to me it's simply background noise. Most TV ads do not accompany for thi and try to be stimulating by sound alone so I get by pretty well.

Personally I figured out that I am horrible to target with advertising. All the advertising that I fully receive(Ignoring subliminal advertising) is posters on the train ride into the city every day and advertising that I seek out and interract with be it for this blog or simply interractive campaigns relative to my interests. Whilst my age may put me more in the Gen Y I believe I'd be more of an iGen but either way if the way I chose what advertising I am consciously allowing myself to acknowledge, then the future may to some look bleak...however I believe it will be more interesting. Creativity AHOY!

╠ The Viabilities of Insults ╣

Now personally I think the fatal flaw with this ad is the line 'Because if you don't like chicken, there's something very wrong with you.' This is simply my opinion but I don't think you should go around insulting people in your ads. While people who don't like chicken wouldn't be anywhere near the target market for this group some people can be relatively negative when it comes to such things. Personally I think some people woulld take offense even if they did like chicken if they simply liked another meat more. People can also tend to take offense on other peoples behalf and get defensive, so people who know people who aren't obsessed with chicken could also take offense.

So I think this is a mistake that should have never gotten through but that's just me. Do any of you have any thoughts about the use of such a strong line in adverts?

╠ Businesses like good neighbours too ╣

I've started to notice more and more that location is not simply all about people traffic. Whilst traffic is important the quality of the traffic also needs to be considered. Now quality probably isn't the best way to describe your customer base. What I mean is more all of the factors that contribute to a customer being receptive to what you have to offer. A large part of this is mood.

The CBD is a perfect example of this. The xample I have for this is something that happened only a few days ago. I started out in an alright mood, had the onset of a headache coming but with a few panadols that would have been bested. Little did I know of what awaited me.

As what should almost be expected now it started with a delayed Connex train which ended up getting quite loud which did good for the headache issue. Deciding I needed something to up my spirits after this I went to a Bubble Cup where the poor english skills of the worker on the register meant my order got stuffed up. After that I decided I needed a full meal to fill me and went to a KFC where hastines of the worker at the register lead to my order being stuffed up.

As a network the entire CBD needs to support itself for the best outcome for all involved. However errors like these put consumers on edge and unresponsive to whatever brands have to throw at them. Sure I was perhaps just unlucky to have 3 out of 3 on this occasion. But the point is that there shouldn't be aims for not negative. There should be aims for positive experiences which most should agree there are few of in the city.

Now this may just be me mentioning my interests here as a DSE worker but I believe their is a point. Companies who aren't in competition need to be working together when in close quarters. Example wise this would be food vendors giving good service and putting consumers in good moods while they shop for their larger items, and the the larger dealers conversely giving good service and keeping the consumer busy long enough to warrant their own success as well as the need for food since on average the longer you spend somewhere normally the more happy you are(Obviously excluding tedious repair issues).

Who your business is in proximity is incredibly important. To anyone who ever plans to run a business make sure you research this and not just the potential consumer flow counts. Quality over quantity.

╠ Etiwhat Stadium? ╣

On one of my various trips via a delayed Connex train I noticed a new tag on the seemingly confused Telstra Dome which has had so many name changes since its opening it almost seems like an unloved child. I'd like to take some time to go through some of the names. Odds are I've forgotten some it's happened that many times.

First off was Colonial Stadium which started out just plain confusing because I'm not too sure of others but personally I'd never heard of Colonial and therefore took no interest. The other problem with this was the increasing issues that arose. The docklands ground seemed to face issue after issue with no relief in sight which whilst putting Colonial's name in the spotlight, it leads to horrible brand association.

The second name I can remember is the recent one of Telstra Dome. Now this name I believe worked. The brand was already established so it was just every single mention was advertising that you knew...however what I see being the problem with this was that it could only last so long. It went from being TELSTRA Dome to Telstra Dome. When talking about sport Telstra was a ground, not a phone company. So the value detereorated over time until I suspect it was no longer worth it.

Now comes Etihad. Personally I don't understand the value in unknown companies getting into such advertising. I may be wrong and it may be a popuar brand but nobody I know actually knows what Etihad is (They're in the air travel business btw). When you go in like this all you get is a name and sure it gets your name known but if people don't know what you do is it really worth it? I haven't researched enough to know which part of the air travel market they're a part of but apart from that 'Oh that's who they are!' factor I don't see much in it.

Another factor is that it is an international company trying to put the tag name on something that will predominantly be used for events that promote the Australian spirit and again I don't know others but my first thought when seeing the name was of rejecting it for trying to find such an easy way to break into the hearts of patriotic Australians without actually being Australian.

Personally I think the name is a mistake and perhaps even a waste. Personally I'd like to see something that was at least somewhat related to something to do with the actual events held there. Nike Stadium perhaps? Even something loosely related that is sold on the premises? Coke Stadium?

I'm not sure if it is the stadium selling itself short or Etihad paying too much but I certainly feel like there could have been a more overall profitable agreement happen here.

What do you all think? Is Etihad Stadium a mistake?

╠ The Brand Popularity Contest ╣

In 2008 Virtue tracked the social popularity of certain brands and from it created a list of the top 100 for the year. One thing to note though is that they were quite particular with what they tracked. Movie's, video games and other things such as Obama's campaign's that while were probably more successful than some of these names weren't included since most of them simply hype up around a release or event and then die off a bit while the brands here while sometimes with a similar setup still face differences. It's a riviting read to look through so I suggest you check it out. For those of you uneager to steer away from the page though here's the top ten.

1. iPhone
2. CNN
3. Apple
4. Disney
5. Xbox
6. Starbucks
7. iPod
8. MTV
9. Sony
10. Dell

Some of these names may surprise you but you have to remember that being talked about doesn't mean you're being talked about positively which is why I suspect Starbucks is so high. Xbox is probably the biggest surprise for me though. It beat Nintendo and Sony as well as it's encompassing brand of Microsoft which came in number 11. This may be because of the same thing as Starbucks as the Xbox has had a lot of issues with faulty units.

One of the highlights for me though is Apple who came in third but with their products the iPhone and iPod coming in 1st and 7th. It just shows the power of one company when it can have three of ten top brands in one yar over the entire world. Personally I'm starting to think my dream may actually be becoming to be a part of Apple. From all my interractions with their workers they really seem to take care of their own and from a marketing perspective they're brilliant so I think come graduation they'll be my first stop for applying for a job.

╠ DoriTOES ╣

Whilst getting people to make an ad for you has been a so far risky safe way to create in depth interaction with your brand the way you go about getting people to interract is very important. This ad is the perfect example of what not to do.

Saying we need your help can be understandable as a marketing ploy and people don't look into it but this particular ad is one of the most self destructive I could imagine. Creating a memory link to Doritos and 'Toes' is a terrible connotation to create and it's only made worse by the sound of toes being in the name. Personally it's something that's probably burnt itself into my brain.

This is meant to be advertising in order to sell the product and what I suspect it to have done is completely turn people off. I wouldn't be surprised if there as a graph for sales which took a huge dip whenever the ad screened.

Normally I'm willing to give advertising the benefit of the doubt. But this ad really begs the question of 'What were they thinking?'