Avid readers will know that I drive a VW Passat. The identity crisis associated with this is proportional to the difference in price between my erstwhile chariot and other cars to which I aspire.
Nevertheless, its maker insists that I will only get optimal performance from it by filling it with 98 RON unleaded fuel. If I want to suffer poorer performance (responsiveness and fuel economy), I am permitted to use 95 RON. Below that and... well suffer the consequences. Engine seizure, heart seizure at the repair bill and so on.
And as for ethanol, even mixed in over-the-counter medication proportions, forget it. The VeeDub would most likely just lie dormant and wheezing in the drive way, as it slid through the gears into malnutrition.
The killer for ethanol is the suspicion that performance suffers. In the dark recesses of the male mind, this has sexual overtones. Like substituting your Viagra with pink icing sugar. In Australia, the V8 Supercars even use ethanol but, to my mind, it hasn't registered with the hoards on the hill at the Bathurst circuit.
No. To testosterone charged males, taking the lead out of petrol in the 1980s was the thin end of the wedge. I worked for Ford at the time and we dropped the V8! with calamitous consequences for top-end Falcon sales (now there's a contradiction in terms). Now, we're just diluting our potency further by adding plant extracts. My God, the cars will be vegetarian next and we know how thin and pasty looking vegetarians are!
Clearly ethanol is too much like estrogen. It even begins with 'e'. Nothing like the 'T' for testosterone or Tyrannosaurus Rex, or T-bar shift. Ethanol has as big an image problem as a Formula 1 or NASCAR driver called Ethyl. How's 'ethyl-benzene' sound? Just doesn't work like methyl-benzene.
Let's rename it Tethanol for a start. This close cousin of testosterone would have us queuing at the pumps for our weekly top-up of automotive viagra. And we'd be all the better for it - environment included. Who wants to do the global repositioning job for ethanol?
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Do we go to conferences for comfort or to learn?
Tossing up going to an annual conference for financial services marketers, particularly those involved in superannuation. This deliberation is taking place after spending some of yesterday afternoon with a PR consultant.
I always come away from these meetings with a warm fuzzy feeling. In the case of the conferences, it could be a mild temperature accompanied by giddiness and loss of orientation which seems to follow the regular awards night. But nonetheless, buried under the after-effects of the leisure hours, I think there's more to it.
I never learn a lot at these things, so it's not that. Most of the time, I just sit in the audience spying on what others have achieved or are thinking of achieving - undeterred by the fact that this professional voyeurism could morph into some type of intellectual and/or creative plagiarism.
No. I think the warm fuzziness comes from being surrounded by others who think like me or, in that unlikely event, at least pretend to comprehend what I'm on about - brand at the apex of strategic planning, communicating in plain language, the list goes on.
These events are an escape from the blank stares of lawyers, technocrats, auditors, actuaries and others who just don't get this idea about brands defining businesses. This gaggle of overseers who dissect then reassemble communications so the arse is often where the head should be.
Yes, I think putting this in writing has confirmed for me that these talkfests are not about learning, but about comfort. They're about reaffirmation that the loonies really are in charge of the nuthouse everywhere except in the marketing and communications space.
Where's that registration form? I'm on my way to therapy...
I always come away from these meetings with a warm fuzzy feeling. In the case of the conferences, it could be a mild temperature accompanied by giddiness and loss of orientation which seems to follow the regular awards night. But nonetheless, buried under the after-effects of the leisure hours, I think there's more to it.
I never learn a lot at these things, so it's not that. Most of the time, I just sit in the audience spying on what others have achieved or are thinking of achieving - undeterred by the fact that this professional voyeurism could morph into some type of intellectual and/or creative plagiarism.
No. I think the warm fuzziness comes from being surrounded by others who think like me or, in that unlikely event, at least pretend to comprehend what I'm on about - brand at the apex of strategic planning, communicating in plain language, the list goes on.
These events are an escape from the blank stares of lawyers, technocrats, auditors, actuaries and others who just don't get this idea about brands defining businesses. This gaggle of overseers who dissect then reassemble communications so the arse is often where the head should be.
Yes, I think putting this in writing has confirmed for me that these talkfests are not about learning, but about comfort. They're about reaffirmation that the loonies really are in charge of the nuthouse everywhere except in the marketing and communications space.
Where's that registration form? I'm on my way to therapy...
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Delivering money to the people
I think I've noted before that communicating financial stuff in layman's terms is real tough - especially with the generous layering of compliance reviews and approvals that go with the territory. So obscure has the message become that I recently decided to put some gloss on the message to remove glaze from the eyeballs.
Yep. I went for celebrity, but credible celebrity. It's that old trick of making sure your high-profile person aligns with the eyes that behold your message. I hired TV presenter and journalist, Kim Watkins, to front our new website channel, Outperform.TV.
Now before you equate Kim solely with her recent morning talk show gig, 9 a.m. with David and Kim on Network 10 (I use 'Network' because my dear American readers only equate 'Network' with 'national'). NBC is not a 'Channel', but a 'Network' if you get my drift. Don't say I don't appreciate the nuances of entertaining an international audience!
Back to the point though. Kim has finance journalism cred - especially at the popular TV level where I am trying to pitch the message. She was Paul Clitheroe's main sidekick on the high-rating Network 9 Money show in the 1990s and the thing that works for her is an ability to engage with straight-laced finance boffins at the popular level.
Will it work? Hey, it can't be any worse than sending out newsletters! The thing is that you have to try something and, after all, I've always fancied myself as a mini-Murdoch. If I eventually do a computer-generated Kim, I might even become a mini-George Lucas.
Take a look at our website http://www.equipsuper.com.au/ and let me know if you think Kim works.
Yep. I went for celebrity, but credible celebrity. It's that old trick of making sure your high-profile person aligns with the eyes that behold your message. I hired TV presenter and journalist, Kim Watkins, to front our new website channel, Outperform.TV.
Now before you equate Kim solely with her recent morning talk show gig, 9 a.m. with David and Kim on Network 10 (I use 'Network' because my dear American readers only equate 'Network' with 'national'). NBC is not a 'Channel', but a 'Network' if you get my drift. Don't say I don't appreciate the nuances of entertaining an international audience!
Back to the point though. Kim has finance journalism cred - especially at the popular TV level where I am trying to pitch the message. She was Paul Clitheroe's main sidekick on the high-rating Network 9 Money show in the 1990s and the thing that works for her is an ability to engage with straight-laced finance boffins at the popular level.
Will it work? Hey, it can't be any worse than sending out newsletters! The thing is that you have to try something and, after all, I've always fancied myself as a mini-Murdoch. If I eventually do a computer-generated Kim, I might even become a mini-George Lucas.
Take a look at our website http://www.equipsuper.com.au/ and let me know if you think Kim works.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Celebrity signing for an unsung brand - will it work?
I've given up hope of ever engaging Australians in the subject of retirement funding - almost! Obviously, the younger you are, the less relevant it is - at least conceptually. It's even tougher when you're an unsung brand, unknown beyond your own customer base and unwilling and/or incapable of finding the big bucks necessary to turn a backwater brand into Niagara Falls.
Not that our brand has too many fundamental problems. The fund is generally well regarded by those who are engaged with, or aware of, it. It's just that we don't register on the wider consumer awareness meter.
But back to the subject. No one will ever be able to accuse me of not trying to improve engagement with our business. Along with the launch of a new website from 1 April (yes, it is April Fool's day, but the launch will happen!), I have decided to embed a 'TV' channel. That's not a channel for transvestites, but an online television 'experience' that includes interviews with various industry bods conducted for us by a reasonably high-profile Aussie TV presenter and journalist.
The best endorsement I have for the idea so far is a remark from one of the production crew that, having watched the inaugural interview series, he had learned a lot about superannuation. If that is a universal response we get from visitors to our website in the months ahead then - Eureka! - we may have hit a pot of gold. Hopefully, consumers will recall where they learned all that stuff and turn to us when they next decide to seek advice or invest their savings.
It's going to be an interesting experiment, supported by a bit of upfront PR about the involvement of our celebrity. I'll let you know in a few months how it all goes - initial response from the PR and any follow-up research outcomes. Let's hope Google Analytics is up to the task!
If you're web surfing any time after 1 April, take time to visit our website http://www.equipsuper.com.au/ and let me know your thoughts.
Cheers
Not that our brand has too many fundamental problems. The fund is generally well regarded by those who are engaged with, or aware of, it. It's just that we don't register on the wider consumer awareness meter.
But back to the subject. No one will ever be able to accuse me of not trying to improve engagement with our business. Along with the launch of a new website from 1 April (yes, it is April Fool's day, but the launch will happen!), I have decided to embed a 'TV' channel. That's not a channel for transvestites, but an online television 'experience' that includes interviews with various industry bods conducted for us by a reasonably high-profile Aussie TV presenter and journalist.
The best endorsement I have for the idea so far is a remark from one of the production crew that, having watched the inaugural interview series, he had learned a lot about superannuation. If that is a universal response we get from visitors to our website in the months ahead then - Eureka! - we may have hit a pot of gold. Hopefully, consumers will recall where they learned all that stuff and turn to us when they next decide to seek advice or invest their savings.
It's going to be an interesting experiment, supported by a bit of upfront PR about the involvement of our celebrity. I'll let you know in a few months how it all goes - initial response from the PR and any follow-up research outcomes. Let's hope Google Analytics is up to the task!
If you're web surfing any time after 1 April, take time to visit our website http://www.equipsuper.com.au/ and let me know your thoughts.
Cheers
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Can you shift buying decisions for $8 a week?
I heard the results of a survey into home brand product prices versus those of well-known brands the other day. The upshot of it was that if you bought the home brand products, you could end up about $8 a week better off. Big deal!
If you're familiar and pleased by a certain company's product, are you seriously going to opt for the home brand item to save this much money? Ok, if times are tough and you're battling to save anywhere you can, you might have to but, generally speaking, my guess is you won't. It's not because home brand products are demonstrably inferior, it's just that some home brand products are equal to or better than the branded products, but not universally.
A 2007 survey by Aussie consumer organisation, Choice, examined this subject by reviewing the home brand products offered by three of the nation's supermarket chains, Woolworths, Coles and Aldi. The results showed that you would be unable to go to a single store and buy home brand products consistently comparable with the branded products.
The bottom line is that you can buy comparable quality home brand products, but could only consistently do so if you bought selected products from all three of the supermarket groups.
So it's obvious what I'm going to do. I'm your typical, time poor, middle class shopper who likes his favourite brands for their taste and consistency. I can save about $8 a week, essentially by shopping at three different supermarkets armed with my Choice survey which will tell me what products to buy where in order to match the quality of my favourites.
Sorry, it ain't going to happen. I'll shop under one roof and buy the brands I know I like. Quality, maybe even indulgence, for about $8 a week? You bet! And you know what, it would cost me at least $8 a week in fuel to drive to each of the three supermarkets required to buy home brand products to match my taste and quality expectations.
On the other hand, my wife would traverse the world to save a buck and regards me as something of a spendthrift. So there you go...
If you're familiar and pleased by a certain company's product, are you seriously going to opt for the home brand item to save this much money? Ok, if times are tough and you're battling to save anywhere you can, you might have to but, generally speaking, my guess is you won't. It's not because home brand products are demonstrably inferior, it's just that some home brand products are equal to or better than the branded products, but not universally.
A 2007 survey by Aussie consumer organisation, Choice, examined this subject by reviewing the home brand products offered by three of the nation's supermarket chains, Woolworths, Coles and Aldi. The results showed that you would be unable to go to a single store and buy home brand products consistently comparable with the branded products.
The bottom line is that you can buy comparable quality home brand products, but could only consistently do so if you bought selected products from all three of the supermarket groups.
So it's obvious what I'm going to do. I'm your typical, time poor, middle class shopper who likes his favourite brands for their taste and consistency. I can save about $8 a week, essentially by shopping at three different supermarkets armed with my Choice survey which will tell me what products to buy where in order to match the quality of my favourites.
Sorry, it ain't going to happen. I'll shop under one roof and buy the brands I know I like. Quality, maybe even indulgence, for about $8 a week? You bet! And you know what, it would cost me at least $8 a week in fuel to drive to each of the three supermarkets required to buy home brand products to match my taste and quality expectations.
On the other hand, my wife would traverse the world to save a buck and regards me as something of a spendthrift. So there you go...
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Australia's turbo-charged weather the true test for insurance brands
I survived a shellacking on Saturday. Stuck on Racecourse Road, Flemington, on Melbourne's fringe and just in time to catch the cutting edge of the worst storm in 40 years. To be absolutely correct, I didn't cop the hammering, my trustee VeeDub Passat did. Hail stones the size of golf balls thundered down like buck shot on the rear of my car.
While the heavens created a new-look, 'hammered' finish on the duco, you couldn't blame those whose cars clustered under a nearby railway bridge sheltering from the hail for holding the traffic up. However, they failed to count on the storm's second wave, which literally surged down the street and flooded the dip into which they had crammed. Was that a vengeful smirk on my face when I saw their exhaust pipes bubbling through the water as they made their escapes to higher ground and... into the hail? (How many 'Hail' Marys for that smirk?)
It showed there was literally nowhere to hide from that 20-minute attack and plenty of time to think about where you had filed the insurance policy against which you would surely claim in the days ahead.
I made my call today - to AAMI. Yes, that's right the company that realised a couple of years ago that the call centre 'Amy' had finally outlived public credulity by not ageing for a decade or more. Now we have a new Amy and today's task was to evaluate whether she'd still smile and 'keep our promises' when I lodged my claim.
I was pleased that, not only was the 'Amy' who answered very pleasant but, through lively and fresh engagement, gave the impression that I had been her first call for the day. Perhaps I caught the change of shift, but I think not. That would be an uncharacteristially ungenerous thought on my part...LOL.
The ultimate test for insurance companies is claims procedure and, as always after these major events, the tabloid TV current affairs shows will be looking for opportunities to feature rain-soaked, dispossessed families dudded by heartless insurance companies. It will be interesting to see how the insurance industry performs under the weight of an estimated $200 million (and rising) of claims.
I have no doubt most valid claims will be duly processed. I have even less doubt that the letters informing us of our premium increases next year will also be duly processed - aka the cost-recovery process. But let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Just get the cars and houses repaired, we'll argue about repaying the money to our insurers later.
While the heavens created a new-look, 'hammered' finish on the duco, you couldn't blame those whose cars clustered under a nearby railway bridge sheltering from the hail for holding the traffic up. However, they failed to count on the storm's second wave, which literally surged down the street and flooded the dip into which they had crammed. Was that a vengeful smirk on my face when I saw their exhaust pipes bubbling through the water as they made their escapes to higher ground and... into the hail? (How many 'Hail' Marys for that smirk?)
It showed there was literally nowhere to hide from that 20-minute attack and plenty of time to think about where you had filed the insurance policy against which you would surely claim in the days ahead.
I made my call today - to AAMI. Yes, that's right the company that realised a couple of years ago that the call centre 'Amy' had finally outlived public credulity by not ageing for a decade or more. Now we have a new Amy and today's task was to evaluate whether she'd still smile and 'keep our promises' when I lodged my claim.
I was pleased that, not only was the 'Amy' who answered very pleasant but, through lively and fresh engagement, gave the impression that I had been her first call for the day. Perhaps I caught the change of shift, but I think not. That would be an uncharacteristially ungenerous thought on my part...LOL.
The ultimate test for insurance companies is claims procedure and, as always after these major events, the tabloid TV current affairs shows will be looking for opportunities to feature rain-soaked, dispossessed families dudded by heartless insurance companies. It will be interesting to see how the insurance industry performs under the weight of an estimated $200 million (and rising) of claims.
I have no doubt most valid claims will be duly processed. I have even less doubt that the letters informing us of our premium increases next year will also be duly processed - aka the cost-recovery process. But let's not get ahead of ourselves here. Just get the cars and houses repaired, we'll argue about repaying the money to our insurers later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)